MythTV Compared with Windows Media Center

legoburner writes "Tom's Hardware has a nice comparison of MythTV and Windows Media Center Edition, and it seems that they preferred MythTV by quite a margin: 'Enter MythTV, a grand unification of personal digital video recording and home theatre technology, and a magnum opus of modular design, freedom of expression and personal entertainment.'"

Comments

what would be really nice

[yagu]

Good news Tom's Hardware picks MythTV over Windows MCE (Media Center Edition), but maybe not so much a surprise. Tom's Hardware's preference isn't going to mean a lick to the general consumers. I can't tell my neighbors MythTV is bitchin' because they're not going to have a clue how do it themselves, and I'm running out of support hours and don't have time to set up everyone with MythTV, let alone support it afterwards.

What would be really cool is if some company pulled a Red Hat, or Suse, etc., with MythTV whereby they offer their "version" of a MythTV distribution bundled with hardware and all. With minor standardization, it's a product that could spark consumer interest. This would offer an alternative to the always present MS MCE, and an interesting competition (potentially) with TiVo.

Re:what would be really nice

[smittyoneeach]

"Some company" would become shark bait the minute that there was deemed sufficient revenue for the shark school to mount a campaign of intellectual property conquest.

Rich media experiences are a Faustian bargain. The EULA is an abstract goatskin, and that's your blood you're click/signing.

The reality is that the bulk of people are perfectly content to sign over to a proprietary vendor.

Paraphrasing Mellencamp: "Free Software goes on, long after the thrill of getting mugged by the proprietary vendor is gone".

Re:what would be really nice

[Jinjuku]

Free software goes on out the window, when some figures out that they actually get what they pay for. You can either have it done cheap, right, or fast. Pick two. I gave up on getting my Myth TV system at 100% a while ago...

Re:what would be really nice

[York the Mysterious]

It's called KnoppMyth

http://www.mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html

Re:what would be really nice

[RonnyJ]

They didn't even choose which is better. The only mention in the article of MCE 2004 is on the last page, where they list a few differences, but there's nothing there to say that they prefer MythTV, let alone by "quite a margin".

http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/09/08/the_mythtv_co nvergence_uk/page4.html

It's a horrendously misleading article summary, and it shouldn't have been posted. I can only surmise that the editor didn't look at the submission, either that or they don't care that it's so misleading.

Re:what would be really nice

[rlbond86]

Bah. I tried for a week to get mythTV to work with my hauppauge PVR-500, a card which mythTV said WAS COMPATIBLE, but I got nada -- even after changing tuner types manually channels above 50 would not work. The response from the mailing list? "Oh that's a new revision, those don't work." I switched to windows and installed GB-PVR and I couldn't be happier.

Re:what would be really nice

[gregorio]

It's called KnoppMyth

http://www.mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html

It would be much better if the original package was well developed, without the need of hand-made configuration and detection scripts inside some custom-made boot cd. KnnopMyth (and all other specific bootable CDs) is just a lame fix for a bigger problem: lack of application quality.

It's time to put the computer to work for us, instead of the opposite. We need programs with better configuration handling and detection. A lot of Linux apps need the user to insert of lot of data that the application could simply obtain automatically.

Why it doesn't? Because there is not a planned structure to accomodate this kind of automation. Those softwares grow by being appended with more and more code, wih no global planning at all.

Need a XYZ functionality? Ok, I'll just append it to the codebase. Why bother planning a good structure to provide abstraction to accomodate these kind of features in an organized way? It's Linux, right?

If the kernel can't even manage to have a HAL, why the hell would the applications bother to organize and plan the code?

Re:what would be really nice

[hondamankev]

I believe mythtv needs to rip a page from gentoo. Gentoo now has a GTK gui installer which makes Gentoo pretty painless to install. Instead of having 34021 new "proprietary" mythtv distros, why not build a GUI package, like gentoo does, and walk you through every aspect of the install, downloading and compiling the sources based on your needs?

Re:what would be really nice

[stefanlasiewski]

What would be really cool is if some company pulled a Red Hat, or Suse, etc., with MythTV whereby they offer their "version" of a MythTV distribution bundled with hardware and all

There are a couple of small vendors who do this already. The systems all seem to be priced to compete with the various Commercial PVR-type systems -- $600-1200.

While searching for Ubuntu & MythTV, I ran into https://monolithmc.com/, who I ships a computer preloaded with MythTV & Ubuntu.

Re:what would be really nice

[repruhsent]

Most Linux users say that this allows the system to be more customizable, but I call that a bunch of crap. All of these apps could detect reasonable defaults (like you suggest) and then allow the same configuration that they do now, to customize to the advanced user's tastes.

The entire Linux mentality, that is, that the user knows what they're doing, is a good thing - forcing people to become more educated never hurt anyone, and helps to keep the idiots out. However, it shouldn't come at the price of convenience - because, like you said, the computer should work for you, not against you.

Re:what would be really nice

[smittyoneeach]

Free software goes on out the window, when some figures out that they actually get what they pay for.

Beyond that realization is another one. Consider http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/. You're not getting a mole of water; you're getting a mole of oxygen and two of hydrogen. If you've the fortitude to work through it, you'll know how to manage your thirst yourself.
Free software isn't about paying, it's about investing. While we need not condescend to those who can't/won't see this, we can note that they will indeed become skilled at paying.

Re:what would be really nice

[York the Mysterious]

A) It's really not based on Knoppix. Cecil (the maintainer) uses the Knoppix scripts a bit for hardware detection, but the whole thing is custom. It's Knoppix in name only as he says. It's really just a custom Debian Sid distro. B)The next major stable release of Knoppmyth is going to be based on Ubuntu so that it will have better hardware support and be easier to maintain.

Re:what would be really nice

[GooberToo]

Both you and the grandparent posts are wrong. The applications have simply not been polished because they don't have to be. There is a world of difference between an application developed for resale and an application developed for ones own use. The first is polished while the second is rough around the edges. This has zero to do with "Linux mentality". It has everything to do with the fact that these people are not paid to develop an application for end users; let alone get paid.

If it's difficult to use, don't use it. If, on the other hand, you insist on using it, all the while crying like a baby, get off your lazy ass and polish it your self. There really is no in between here. Either stop complaining and fix it, or don't use it. Which solution will you pick?

Since you're already complaining and ignorantly calling this "Linux mentality", I can only assume you have no intension of fixing the issue. Tell me something, do you flip people off and call them names when you get a birdthday card with less than $100 cash in it too? ;) Obviously, that's a joke, but it's the same mentality that you're presenting here. Notice how someone that would do such a thing comes off looking like a real jack ass? It applies here too.

If you want to talk about someone's mentality, perhaps you should start a little closer to home first.

Re:what would be really nice

[Clete2]

Wow, thanks a lot for that link! I have been re-compiling my Gentoo installation and I am having a bit of trouble with a certain package right now, so I haven't been able to try MythTV. Thanks a lot for pointing that out. :D

Re:what would be really nice

[russ1337]

I did my myth install on Ubuntu, and I love it. I've tried it with KNoppmyth, and while its super easy there are some features within ubuntu that the knopmyth doesnt offer. You can see my hardware here. You'll see I followed Daniel Hyams how-to for Ubuntu. I like my ubuntu based version, and if what you say is correct, will certainly switch to the Knoppmyth Ubuntu version as soon as its released. I've thought about trying to write an installer for Ubuntu, based on the knoppmyth scripts, but i'd need to get my script skillz up to speed first.

Re:what would be really nice

[jascat]

You realize that MythTV is a software package and Gentoo is an entire distribution. You would need a distribution to run MythTV on. So...MythTV distributes a custom distribution with MythTV included, adding yet another distribution to the list of hundreds? Knoppmyth already takes care of this.

Re:what would be really nice

[hondamankev]

No, I guess I didnt make my idea very clear. An ideal way to install mythtv would be for the user to install his distro of choice, then download the mythtv _gui_ installer which walks the user through every aspect of the install. This mythtv installer then downloads and compiles, and makes work, everything necessary. From remote, to tv guide, to sound card checks. The whole nine yards. This way, the user gets to use the distro of his choice, instead of being stuck with a proprietary distro. Knoppmyth is nice, however trying to make it do anything but mythtv is completley unsupported, and in not so many words, I was told I was stupid for even trying to use it for anything but mythtv.

Re:what would be really nice

[Anonymous Coward]

"I gave up on getting my Myth TV system at 100% a while ago..."

My girlfriend likes using my Myth TV system at 120% or higher. Mythtv's timestretch is a great feature.

Re:what would be really nice

[Pieroxy]

There is one more thing to this review. The first three pages talk exclusively about MythTV. Why is that? I don't know.

Then there is a summary table in which every single item described about Windows MCE is just a plain lie / mistake (but for the first one). It seriously looks like these guys didn't even take the time to read anything about MCE, or else they just plain lied.

Of course, they chose MythTV in the end. This is just a big false advertisement, nothing else.

And don't get me wrong, I think MythTV is a great choice. But the article is just trash.

Re:what would be really nice

[Plaid Phantom]

Hi! Welcome to Slashdot!

Re:what would be really nice

[SanityInAnarchy]

Yeah, notice how on that comparison table, they only list one advantage of MCE -- it is simple to setup, whereas MythTV requires moderate Linux know-how. Also, MythTV does not run on Windows, as far as I know, while MCE does. Absolutely everything else in that table is in favor of MythTV. Pay nothing, get more features and flexibility.

So yes, I'd say the reviewer prefers MythTV. The only reason MCE was mentioned at all is to have something to compare to, and as a reference point for people who may know nothing about MythTV or PVRs, but have a fuzzy idea of what MCE is.

While the summary is a little over eager, it's not actually wrong, just not as reasonably verified as we're used to from Slashdot.

Re:what would be really nice

[joshetc]

Yes but THIS is THE reason linux is not ready for the desktop. Either one distro will have to rule them all with software developed specifically for that distro or applications are going to have to start compiling themselves more easily and snagging any information they need from the system on their own, without user input. Its amazing how much simpler it is to install an application when you don't have to look up all this obscure variables about your system.

Re:what would be really nice

[Anonymous Coward]

MythTV is a lost cause, especially with Hauppauge cards. The ivtv driver for YEARS does nothing but spew "DMA Error 0x0000000b" errors, and you get a nicely corrupted and unwatchable recording that requires you to *reboot linux* to just to reset it. What a waste of time!

Re:what would be really nice

[Ryan Amos]

Sorry, KnoppMyth is nice, but it still doesn't fix the "support" problem. Will your neighbor know how to open an X terminal / SSH session and repair a MySQL database when it is corrupted (this happens a lot with Myth)? Will he know how to properly partition a hard drive? Will he know how to get LibDVDCSS to play commercial DVDs? What about when his Zap2It listing subscription runs out?

As nice as KnoppMyth is for a sysadmin type (I use it and love it) it is still decidedly not for the general public. Some knowledge of linux administration is still required to maintain the damn thing, whereas most end users have a rudimentary knowledge of Windows and can fix small things when they break.

Re:what would be really nice

[westlake]

What would be really cool is if some company pulled a Red Hat, or Suse, etc., with MythTV whereby they offer their "version" of a MythTV distribution bundled with hardware and all. With minor standardization, it's a product that could spark consumer interest. This would offer an alternative to the always present MS MCE, and an interesting competition (potentially) with TiVo.

Remember Walmart's big push to mainstream OEM Linux in the states?

The systems and distros that came and went through the revolving door at Walmart.com? Sun JDS et al. Nothing remains of that but two mediocre Microtel boxes. Nothing to justify a separate Linux page,

No one but a Geek gives a damn about the embedded OS in an appliance like TivO. But the MSDOS and Windows platform has dominated the general purpose home pc market for twenty-five years.

Re:what would be really nice

[dthree]

There is even a pre-built KnoppMyth system you can buy.

Re:what would be really nice

[GooberToo]

Yes but THIS is THE reason linux is not ready for the desktop.

Wrong. Linux is ready for the desktop for many, many people. It's used daily by many, including my self. It's perfectly able to run a desktop. Desktop use and the specifics given above have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Let me be clear, MythTV != Desktop.

Now then, the biggest reason Linux isn't ready for the masses' desktop is simple. People know what they know and Linux isn't what they know. Simple fact is, companies like IBM, Redhat, SuSU, Novel, Oracle, and many others have made sure Linux has been polished. It's ready for the desktop, by in large. This is not to say every element of Linux is polished, but even Windows has many, many, areas which just plain suck. These days, the only reason Linux isn't "ready for the desktop" is because it's not Windows; and of course, the ignorance, like yours, which goes with that mentality.

Its amazing how much simpler it is to install an application when you don't have to look up all this obscure variables about your system.

I agree...which makes me wonder what Windows application you're thinking about. Simple fact is, Linux has been easier to install than Windws for years now. Simple fact is, Linux applications, those supported commercially, have been equally easy to install as Windows applications. It's fairly obvious, either your Linux knowledge is 5-years stale, or you've failed to re-evaluate to see if your opinion should be changed. Hell, most Linux distributions allow for remote repositories of the entire distribution allowing for easy installation, from a friggen GUI, without the use of a CD. That's more than Windows offers. I mean, come on...you're an anachronism of Linux knowledge.

The long of the short, you are wrong.

Re:what would be really nice

[Xabraxas]

whereas most end users have a rudimentary knowledge of Windows and can fix small things when they break.

I really wonder where people get this impression. Most people can't even change their resolution in Windows, although that seems to be something people bitch about with Linux. Most people don't even realize they are missing drivers when (if) they take the plunge and decide to reinstall windows because "it is slow". A lot of users cannot even install applications in Windows, even if it is the "next, next, finish" type.

Re:what would be really nice

[redcane]

I've been using mythtv since I think version 0.17 on a multi frontend and multi backend set up, with a mix of DVB and analogue capture cards, and I haven't once seen a mysql database corrupted with mythtv.... Your comments about libdvdcss are probably something to forward to the creators of knoppmyth, it could include libdvdcss, or if the legal cloudiness is a problem, pop up a dialog on first boot asking if the user would like to play commercial DVDs. As far as listings running out, I think it's fairly clear that if your subscribing to a listings service, and the data stops coming, they want more money. In the same way as when you don't pay your electricity, and the electricity stops coming. I haven't used knoppmyth myself, but I believe if you don't think it's easy enough to use, and you want to be able to point people to it, you can either help make it easier to use, or choose to support those people you recommend it to. Personally I've always found it easiest to apt-get mythtv, and spend 20-30 mins setting it up for someone. On debian stable, I've only had a couple of people come back asking questions (The channels they could receive changed when they moved house), because it tends to just stay running.

Re:what would be really nice

[redcane]

To me that does seem a bit pointless: getting a distro customised to run Myth, and Myth *only* then complaining it can't do anything else.... Of course it can't do anything else, it was designed not to..... Most distros already do sound card checks etc themselves, myth should really only handle any extra requirements it has. It's not like myth can fix a problem with any given distro it is running on anyway. If you want to use a pc for myth and other things, just install from apt-get or install from RPMS. It's quite quick and easy to turn a currently useful box into a mythbox without losing the existing functionality. /me awaits the 0.20 packages being built...

Re:what would be really nice

[Deadguy2322]

It's a mol, you stupid stallmanite fuck.

Re:what would be really nice

[smittyoneeach]

Hey, I won't charge you for the extra 'e'. And I'm no stallmanite, either!

Re:what would be really nice

[Deadguy2322]

Of course you are the kind of elitist asshole who doesn't want anybody to be able to learn without it being made as difficult as possible to do so, which is a common trait among linux users. Claiming that the software is as good as it needs to be, and that people should be forced to choose between a pointlessly long learning curve that exists solely as an initiation to the Loyal Order of Basement Dwellers, or not using a piece of software at all, is idiotic. A properly-constructed interface makes EVERYBODY more productive, but it makes pseudo-intellectual pricks like you disposible. By the way, it's spelled friggIn' and jackass and yourself are not seperate words. Being a jackass yourself is no excuse. I, and doubtless many others, take great comfort in the fact that you will likely never reproduce.

Re:what would be really nice

[Bobsledboy]

Actually it is mole, "mol" is the standard abbreviation. BIPM - mole

Re:what would be really nice

[GooberToo]

Of course you are the kind of elitist asshole who doesn't want anybody to be able to learn without it being made as difficult as possible to do so,

Neurotic much? What crack are you on? Do you have any concept of reality? What did I say that made me elitist; facts of the reality we live in? Are you that removed from reality? Learning should not be hard. Most things Linux these days, is not hard to learn. Furthermore, what did I say that indicated even one iota that I believe things should be hard?

Claiming that the software is as good as it needs to be, and that people should be forced to choose between a pointlessly long learning curve that exists solely as an initiation to the Loyal Order of Basement Dwellers, or not using a piece of software at all, is idiotic.

According to your stupidity, all hobbiest, which make their works available for other hobbiests, are assholes. In the real world, well, the world where idiots and dolts DO NOT live, either say thank you and take the contirbution, or pass because it's beyond them. What an idiot you are.

Do you understand at all that these are NOT paid employees? Do you understand that you're an idiot? Do you understand that you're a greedy, selfish, idiot? Do you understand that you're a greedy, selfish, ungrateful, idiot? According to your retarded logic, hobbiests, which kindly allow other hobbiests to benefit from their time and energy, are assholes because you're too lazy and/or too stupid to understand their contribution? What a self righteous, egocentric, moron you are. Wow, I didn't realize you were so important. Seems, in your little world, everyone's free time is yours to dictate! What a prick!

A properly-constructed interface makes EVERYBODY more productive, but it makes pseudo-intellectual pricks like you disposible.

NO, it doesn't! The fact that you said that idicates you're a clueless, idiot. The fact that you're obviously much dumber than I 1, indicates you're not in a position to rank my intellectual capacity, and 2, as "pseudo-intelligent" as I am, you're still many, many rungs below me. Either way, it doesn't look good for you.

The FACT of the matter is, writing a slick interface takes a fair bit of time. Time which can be otherwise spent satisfying the intellectual needs which spawned the creation of the software in the first place. Let's see, which would anyone with half a brain do: 1, code because they want to, exploring and extending the features that are important to them, or 2, write lots of code to make an interface to satisfy some prick that thinks everyone works for him. Obviously, you think the answer is 2, which proves you're a greedy, selfish, ungrateful, egotistical, idiot.

Being a jackass yourself is no excuse. I, and doubtless many others, take great comfort in the fact that you will likely never reproduce.

I may be a jackass, but at least I'm not you. I can safely say, anyone with an IQ higher than 60 can easily see you're talking about your self. At the end of the day, I can decide not to be a jackass; yet you'll always be you, which is a greedy, selfish, ungrateful, egotistical, idiot.

Re:what would be really nice

[dclatfel]

You know ... speaking of girlfriends and wives, MythTV must be the Linux project that has the highest wife acceptance factor (WAF) ever. We have two mythboxen in the house with a total of five tuners and 2 TB of disk space. We don't watch everything we record, but it gives us plenty of options. There's always a Mythbusters or a Most Dangerous Job sitting on the machine waiting for us.

Finally - that we can use it to play ripped movies and to feed MP3s into the stereo ... she totally digs it.

A few of the coolest things, IMHO, about MythTV:
1) Scheduling in a web browser and ... wait for it ... watching my programs remotely in a web browser.
2) Free listing updates.
3) Automatic commercial skipping works awesome these days.

Re:what would be really nice

[cowbutt]

MythTV is a lost cause, especially with Hauppauge cards.

Not all Hauppauge cards; my MythTV box works flawlessly with a pair of Hauppauge Nova-T DVB-T cards and a FC4 base OS.

Re:what would be really nice

[gregorio]

A) It's really not based on Knoppix. Cecil (the maintainer) uses the Knoppix scripts a bit for hardware detection, but the whole thing is custom. It's Knoppix in name only as he says. It's really just a custom Debian Sid distro. B)The next major stable release of Knoppmyth is going to be based on Ubuntu so that it will have better hardware support and be easier to maintain.

Wouldn't it be better if MythTV was just easier to configure, without needing boring sessions of configuring the obvious?

My notebook is a MCE machine with a TV tuner. Only one TV tuner. Not two, not three, one. Guess what happened? Automatic detection, and MCE did not bother me with nonsense debug messages and acknowledgements. It did not made me think about a database server (all I want is to watch TV, damn it), or call command-line utilities.

It just worked, executed the job it was created for: entertaining me. I said entertain, not bore the hell out of me and waste my time.

Re:what would be really nice

[gregorio]

Wrong. Linux is ready for the desktop for many, many people. It's used daily by many, including my self. It's perfectly able to run a desktop. Desktop use and the specifics given above have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Let me be clear, MythTV != Desktop.

The world of technology is not about anecdotal evidence. Who cares if you or anybody else uses it as their desktop of choice? Technology is not about possibilities, it's about convenience. It works that way inside a user's desktop, and works that way inside a NASA facility. It's all about convenience.

Linux might be "able to run a desktop", but it's still not a convenient choice. It DOES lack a lot of things for it to become convenient.

Now then, the biggest reason Linux isn't ready for the masses' desktop is simple. People know what they know and Linux isn't what they know.

Yeah, sure. It will never be the developer's fault, right? The OSS applications are always perfect. What the hell: if people like you talked that SAME crap at the kernel 2.2 times, where everything desktop-related really sucked (A LOT), what stops you from doing it today, when things got real better?

Face it: the problem will always be the user for you people.

What's really the user's fault is not wanting time sacrifice to use the software with the best (and the first perfect one in history) ideology of mankind. =]

Re:what would be really nice

[makomk]

Then there is a summary table in which every single item described about Windows MCE is just a plain lie / mistake (but for the first one). Let me see... the comparison is with Windows MCE 2004 when the latest version released is 2005 (and has been for quite some time), they've mixed up encoding and decoding (MCE supports software decoding but not software encoding), I'd hardly call MCE's setup easy (though it's easier than MythTV's), MCE does actually use MPEG2 (though it's in an obscure proprietary wrapper, and you have to obtain the required codecs to play it separately), they got the information on network support slightly wrong, etc. Yep, they messed up the comparison.

Having used both, I have to say I still prefer MythTV. It doesn't have the visual style and shiny GUI effects that MCE 2005 has, but it comes with much better hardware support, an interface that you can actually use from the keyboard without going insane (unlike MCE, which seems designed to work with the special remote and is quite unfriendly without it), all sorts of interesting ways of scheduling recordings, and various features I couldn't live without (the "New Titles" and "Movies" lists, MythWeb, etc...). Also, it ignores the "don't record this show" flag and other similar potential problems, which is always reassuring.

Re:what would be really nice

[makomk]

One of MythTV's Summer of Code projects was more automated configuration of MythTV - I'm not sure how successful it was, though. (The branch used for development looks a bit sparse in terms of changes...)

Re:what would be really nice

[GooberToo]

Your quoting is confusing. I never said that so I'm assuming you did.

Face it: the problem will always be the user for you people.

If by "you people", you mean Linux users, you would be 100% wrong. In fact, such a statement only shows contempt and ignorance. If by "you people", you mean people that actually perform usability studies as a living, then you would be right. The common theme that keeps coming up is that 1, windows is far from intuitive (it's a learned skill), and 2, if an OS is not like Windows, people desperately resist it; assuming they are already Windows users. People that have not been previously biased by Windows, seem to pick up Linux equally fast as Windows. Hmmm...what does that tell you. These FACTS can be summerized by saying, "People know what they know and Linux isn't what they know." In other words, you LEARNED windows....so why is it unreasonable to expect someone to LEARN Linux? It's odd how everyone has to point that a problem is over there and ...oh...over there too...and oh...there too...when in reality, one need only look in the mirror to find the real problem. Get off your lazy, worthless, butt and stop expected the world to bend to your whim. The world doesn't work like that...why would you expect Linux to be any different. It's childish and dumb to believe otherwise.

In other words, it's obvious you're rather ignorant on the topic which begs the question...why are you commenting on a topic where it should be very obvious to even your self, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Simple fact is, for people that stop crying like little spoiled children and get off their lazy ass to learn a new OS, using Linux is trivial. For idiots and lazy dolts that expect the world to bend over and hand it to them, everything is difficult...except complaining and crying. Hell, my wife (who is far, far, far from technical) picked up Linux in less than an hour as a user. I'm sorry, but if you can't pick up Linux in less than 1-days effort (as a user), you're dumb as a door knob. And no amount of tweaking to Linux is going to change that. Dumb is dumb, regardless of which OS you run.

Re:what would be really nice

[ultranova]

It's time to put the computer to work for us, instead of the opposite. We need programs with better configuration handling and detection. A lot of Linux apps need the user to insert of lot of data that the application could simply obtain automatically.

And propably get it wrong. After which you have the oh-so-fun time of figuring out where the problem is and how to force the application to trust you.

There's nothing quite as fun as an application that refuses to install because it thinks you don't have enough disk space (since its makers didn't realize that hard disk space would one day be measured in gigabytes), except perhaps a monitor that claims that it can't do over 75 Hz refresh rates (it can), which in turn forces a Windows-user to use the unofficial refresh frequency override in NVidia's drivers, but that won't work unless you have administrator privileges - nice !

Now, admittedly, writing in modelines for XFree is not fun either, but once written, they stay there. The darn thing won't lose its settings or misbehave otherwise. So the difference between an automated system and a manual one is that manual one is hard to use, while an automated one is impossible to fix if it breaks.

Re:what would be really nice

[gregorio]

I'm sorry, but if you can't pick up Linux in less than 1-days effort (as a user), you're dumb as a door knob. And no amount of tweaking to Linux is going to change that. Dumb is dumb, regardless of which OS you run.

"I'm sorry, but" I'm a mechatronics enginneer. I would have no problem learning anything related to car mechanics. Any kind of mechanics-related technical knowledge would be a really simple task to an enginner of my area. Yet, I wouldn't buy a car that needs me to obtain extra technical knowledge about mechanics and grease-filled parts, just so I can operate it. Even if I wanted to pursue occasional car-fixing/tweaking as a hobby (a nice one, btw), I would not choose a car that needs technical babysitting to be operated.

If you think the issue is about the ability to learning something, you're out of your mind. The whole issue is about the need to learn something. We can extend this kind of "don't wait the world to bend over, learn it" nonsense to most areas of human activity. So "picking up Linux" in less than one day is not important at all if that other O.S. from that other company will give the user a better experience.

My work is primarily related to embedded electronics, wich includes running a lot of Linux and vxWorks kernels inside US$ 10 ARM processors. I really enjoy dealing with theses machines and coding from them. Yet, I don't give a RAT'S ASS about what kind of twisted and stupid syntax (and even worse: inter-software configuration relationships) I'll need to learn "in less than 5 minutes of effort" to properly configure my monitor/wifi/mythTV/sound/whatever in a workstation/desktop. I'll just stick to my always-working Win MCE laptop, thank you.

Learning this kind of cheap encyclopedical knowledge about computers is not about "not being dumb", but about losing your time. I don't give a crap about "the beauty" of "getting in touch with the inner workings of an OS" or any other kind of dumb-tech nonsense. All I want is a machine to run CodeWarrior without having to bother about how will my sound deamon interact with manual configurations of a stupid media player or something like that.

In fact, I'll give a comment back to you: If you can't manage to use Windows without all these imaginary problems that Linux fanatics make jokes about, sorry, but you're dumb as a door knob.

Re:what would be really nice

[gregorio]

And propably get it wrong. After which you have the oh-so-fun time of figuring out where the problem is and how to force the application to trust you.

There's nothing quite as fun as an application that refuses to install because it thinks you don't have enough disk space (since its makers didn't realize that hard disk space would one day be measured in gigabytes), except perhaps a monitor that claims that it can't do over 75 Hz refresh rates (it can), which in turn forces a Windows-user to use the unofficial refresh frequency override in NVidia's drivers, but that won't work unless you have administrator privileges - nice !

Now, admittedly, writing in modelines for XFree is not fun either, but once written, they stay there. The darn thing won't lose its settings or misbehave otherwise. So the difference between an automated system and a manual one is that manual one is hard to use, while an automated one is impossible to fix if it breaks.

Do you walk to work everyday because your car might have an unexpected problem? Do you ride a bike from California to New York, because airplanes sometimes get late at the boarding gate and busses might break in the middle of the trip?

Technological convenience is not about perfection. It's about saving time and/or confort and giving you possibilities. Automated softwares give me the possibility of enjoying life without having to lose time learning (even if it takes two minutes to do it) configuration syntaxes and dealing with software interaction problems. Yes, sometimes these things break. Then I just reinstall them. In the end, I spent less time bothering about my computer than I would have spent if I manually configured everything.

As I said to another guy in the thread: I CAN open my car and fix it. But I WON'T. If my cars starts giving me problems all the time, I'll just replace it. You don't need to prove all the time that you're knowledgeable. Sometimes things need to be objective and dumbed-down. Whoever rejects that needs to spend less time on the computer and worry more about family, work and a career. People need to stop giving computers too much importance, as innovative knowledge is more important than technical encyclopedic knowledge.

Re:what would be really nice

[GooberToo]

You analogy is fairly broken. You 100% made exactly my point. You are incorrectly assuming that all the worlds vehicles function like a car. Surprise! They don't. Perhaps you've heard of tractors? Piston airplanes? Jet airplanes? Boats? Semi-trucks? Tanks? Ships? They are all vehicles (an OS) but each is operated slightly differently. Thusly, if you jump into a plane and expect to operate it as a car, you're going to crash and burn. So yes, if you stop unreasonbly assuming the world must bend to your whim, you'll be a lot happier in life. Guess what, people are not going to redesign airplanes so you can drive it like a car. And their refusal to not engage such stupidity does not make them egotistical, stupid, or difficult. Guess what, people are not going to redesign their OS so that it works like Windows. Get over it. Get over your ego. Guess what, Windows' interface really isn't that great...which is why people are trying different things.

The fact that you proved exactly my point and yet it went WAY over your heard, pretty well proves the problem is 100% between the computer and chair. In the end, you need to realize the world is not going to implement a lessor system, for the sake of bending to your whim. Get over your self and stop complaining about how lazy you are. Surprise, no one wants to hear it.

Lastly, given the above analogy, you didn't spring from your mother knowing how to operate a car anymore than you knew how to operate Microsoft's Windows. You needed to learn to operate Windows just as you need to learn to operate Linux. Tihs is not the least bit unreasonable. The sooner you cope with reality, the happier you'll be.

Re:what would be really nice

[gregorio]

You analogy is fairly broken. You 100% made exactly my point. You are incorrectly assuming that all the worlds vehicles function like a car. Surprise! They don't. Perhaps you've heard of tractors? Piston airplanes? Jet airplanes? Boats? Semi-trucks? Tanks? Ships? They are all vehicles (an OS) but each is operated slightly differently.

Whatever. The public wants a car. Not a truck, not a jet, not a boat. They want a car. If you're telling that users are "dumb" because they won't learn to operate an airplane, you're out of your mind. They don't need to operate an airplane in their daily routine. They use a car for it.

If the alternative O.S. of the market is like a ship instead of being like a nice confortable and easy to use car, it's time to acklowledge that the proposed alternative isn't a alternative at all.

Re:what would be really nice

[ultranova]

Do you walk to work everyday because your car might have an unexpected problem? Do you ride a bike from California to New York, because airplanes sometimes get late at the boarding gate and busses might break in the middle of the trip?

All of these are exceptions to the rule that everything works fine. With computer, everything working fine is the exception and automation screwing up is the rule.

Technological convenience is not about perfection. It's about saving time and/or confort and giving you possibilities. Automated softwares give me the possibility of enjoying life without having to lose time learning (even if it takes two minutes to do it) configuration syntaxes and dealing with software interaction problems. Yes, sometimes these things break. Then I just reinstall them.

And, since software is deterministic, it goes through the same auto-configure steps and arrives at the same wrong conclusion. Assuming, of course, that you can reinstall - I've seen quite a few situations where the software refused to reinstall since automation told it that if any piece (such as a registry setting left behind by the uninstaller) of previous install still remained in the system, the program was already installed and could not be reinstalled.

In the end, I spent less time bothering about my computer than I would have spent if I manually configured everything.

Yeah; I suppose the average user would give up after only a few futile reinstall attempts.

As I said to another guy in the thread: I CAN open my car and fix it. But I WON'T. If my cars starts giving me problems all the time, I'll just replace it.

It must be fun to be rich enough to have the option of being ignorant. Guess what ? I don't have that option. I have to keep the damn rustbucket going for one more mile - and another one and another one - since the alternative is walking. And that means being able to access every last configuration detail and fine-tune everything.

You don't need to prove all the time that you're knowledgeable. Sometimes things need to be objective and dumbed-down.

Dunno what objectivity or proving anything has to do with this. But trying to hide complexity is not going to work, it simply leads to users who have no idea of causal relationships in their computer and thus have trouble getting it to do what they want.

Whoever rejects that needs to spend less time on the computer and worry more about family, work and a career. People need to stop giving computers too much importance, as innovative knowledge is more important than technical encyclopedic knowledge.

Nice finish. You actually managed to imply "think of the children" in a thread about computer auto vs. manual configuration. That's no mean feat; perhaps you should consider a career in politics ?-)

I also like the part of "innovative knowledge" vs. "encyclopedic knowledge"; it means nothing (perhaps you meant creativity vs. knowledge ?) but sure sounds good.

Re:what would be really nice

[GooberToo]

So you won't even be upgrading your OS to MS' next and greatest? If not, I tip my hat. If you will or ever have upgraded, then you're a lying hypocrite. Smple fact is, you learn new ways to do the same old stuff with just about every release of Windows. This is one of many reasons why companies are often slow to adopt; training. Gasp! Yet according to you, common sense is all everyone needs and no one had to learn windows in the first place because it's all intuitive; which is 100% contrary to what useability studies say.

I'm sorry, but you're completely unrealistic and way out in left field. In other words, it's okay if you have to learn what MS does, but if it's a non-Windows platform then you'll cry and run to mommy about how the big, bad alternate desktop made you learn something again. Get real.

Nuff said. If you don't get it as this point...you never will.

Re:what would be really nice

[GooberToo]

Clueless!

Windows and *nix have completely different philosophies of design, and generally the changes between releases of Windows are fairly small.

This has nothing to do with Unix vs Windows philosophies. If it did, OS/X would be included in that comment. Don't forget, OS/X is Unix made perty. Proof that you're an idiot and have no idea what you're talking about.

Regardless of what you consider "fairly small", the reality is pretty far from your delusional world. Having said that, most of the training goes for others like admins. Your typical user mostly, won't notice...which is true for Linux users too. Which is to say, your typical desktop user, will have zero trouble adapting to use Linux. Having said that, admin certainly differs and this is where training typically requires the most effort; Windows, Unix or Linux. Frankly, your typical user won't notice any functional difference in the desktop but will in the applications.

On a side note, assholes like you are the reason why Linux will never make it on the desktop; Apple and Microsoft will dominate desktops for the immediate future. Perhaps one day when your kind have all went to their graves, Linux will have a chance (but I doubt it).

Yet more proof you're a moron. Linux is already making it as a desktop. Apple is already making it as a desktop. Between the two, we have yet more proof that you're an absolute idiot. Oddly enough, you seem to be hanging everything on my shoulders. When in reality, people like me (realist) telling people like you (morons) how the world works, is not helping or hurting Linux one way or the other. Frankly, the fact that Linux works differently, and you're angry about it, is yet more proof that you're an idiot.

There's an article somewhere out there that basically says Windows != Linux; go read that,

Yet more proof, that you're an idiot. Linux != Windows, which was my whole fucking point you retard! Now, if you want to argue Linux will be slow to adopt because it's not Windows, that's fine... After all, that was my whole fucking point.

Re:what would be really nice

[GooberToo]

With your crack pipe in hand...I'm amazed you can find your keyboard...let alone actually hit keys....

Moron.

Re:what would be really nice

[gregorio]

With computer, everything working fine is the exception and automation screwing up is the rule.

No. And No. And No again. My computer works fine, thank you. I want to care about ARM registers and electronic circuits as that's my job. I'll leave the desktop Operating System to someone who has it as a job. I don't care about the latest choice of manual configuration syntax of some stupid software.

And that's what happens with my Win MCE laptop with good, automated tools: working is the rule, not the exception. I don't have to care about software specifics. It's a no-nonsense work enviroment.

And, since software is deterministic, it goes through the same auto-configure steps and arrives at the same wrong conclusion.

But the environment is not fixed. Most of the times a simple app/OS reload will solve the issue. If not, an 1-hour automated recovery disk will also do the trick. In the meantime, I'll just do something else.

It must be fun to be rich enough to have the option of being ignorant. Guess what ? I don't have that option.

Then you should stop wasting your time configuring X.org and MythTV and using it to make more money and increase your possibilities. That will help you a lot in life. Being ignorant about someting where I'm just a consumer allows me to save time and have money to obtain (time, tuition, etc.) more knowledge related to the things I really care about. You don't need to be knowledgeable about everything to be a smart person.

In fact, if you keep doing someone else's job in everything you do, you won't have time to become smart, you'll die as a bitter person with superficial knowledge about a lot of things but no real knowledge about important stuff.

But trying to hide complexity is not going to work, it simply leads to users who have no idea of causal relationships in their computer and thus have trouble getting it to do what they want.

It works for me and for millions of Windows computers across the globe.

I also like the part of "innovative knowledge" vs. "encyclopedic knowledge"; it means nothing (perhaps you meant creativity vs. knowledge ?) but sure sounds good.

Innovative knowledge: It's like going to college and using the obtained knowledge to invent things. Having good math skills is one good example.
Encyclopedic knowledge: It's like reading specific technical gibberish that anyone learn. Knowing how to configure X.org is a nice example.

Re:what would be really nice

[gregorio]

So you won't even be upgrading your OS to MS' next and greatest? If not, I tip my hat. If you will or ever have upgraded, then you're a lying hypocrite. Smple fact is, you learn new ways to do the same old stuff with just about every release of Windows. This is one of many reasons why companies are often slow to adopt; training. Gasp!

Our thread is about ease of use. Not about upgrades. Most changes on different versions of Windows are small and doesn't change the "car ship boat" classification of the OS. You said that there are a lot of types of transport. I said that the public wants a car to go to work, not a fishing boat. An OS upgrade will not change the context of this kind of analogy.

Yet according to you, common sense is all everyone needs and no one had to learn windows in the first place because it's all intuitive; which is 100% contrary to what useability studies say.

Nice strawman, zealot kiddie.

As you changed the subject, I NEED to add this then: whenever I want to solve anything at Windows, it's just a matter of looking around and in five minutes worth of app/menu searching, I found what I wanted. Whenever I want to solve anything at Linux, the sky turns red and the devil starts laughing at my face saying: HA HA HA, WANTED TO GO TO THE PARK TODAY, HUH? NICE TRY, BITCH!.

That's the difference between both OSes: One of them is intuitive, the other is not. One of them is an automated piece of software with a lot of problems, but a lot of planning and standardisation. The other one is a babysitting-needing piece of hardcoded software with no standards.

I'm sorry, but you're completely unrealistic and way out in left field. In other words, it's okay if you have to learn what MS does, but if it's a non-Windows platform then you'll cry and run to mommy about how the big, bad alternate desktop made you learn something again. Get real.

It's not about Microsoft, kiddie bitch. It's about well-made software. It's not about learning. It's about learning something that is WORTH LEARNING. I'll learn about Eclipse, but not about Emacs.

As I said in another part of this thread: I will only learn about important things. I don't give a RATS ASS about X.org configuration file syntax.

Nuff said. If you don't get it as this point...you never will.

No problem, I got it: you're stupid zealot kiddie bitch. Not worth the time.

Hmm...

[Mr EdgEy]

So their favorite color isn't blue?

Tivo still wins on user interface

[queenb**ch]

I've used just about everything on the planet and the one thing I keep going back to is my Tivo. The user interface on it is simple, intuitive and it just plain works. The add ons like photos, music, and even movies from other PC's in the house is super simple to work out.

My only complaint is that because of the way the remote is shaped, it's easy to pick up backward in the dark. That's really saying something when that's the only bad thing I can come up with. Their support has always been awesome and the devices have gotten so darn cheap, there's no reason not to have a real Tivo. I've seen them on sale here for $49.99.

2 cents,

QueenB

PS: No, I don't work for Tivo. I just really like mine.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[Nirvelli]

When will they be in HD? That's when I'll be interested. But yes, they are hella easy to use.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[Zzootnik]

Whoa there Buddy---
I DO have a tivo, and Yes, its Pretty damn great... The Photos and Music addons are pretty simple to set up, sure... That's actually the only reason I have a dinky little box in the corner running win2k... But Movies from other PCs? I don't think so. That's the ONE thing that I really wish tivo WOULD do-- allow the upload /stream/playing of My movie content... but that just doesn't work (okay--- it WILL providing I'm willing to crack the case and start modding my tivo, but its far from simple. I just haven't had the guts to take it out of service for who knows how long...)

A lot of the other "neat" things tivo will do--- like local weather, web pics, etc--- are all branded through Yahoo where you need an account. Yes, I know its a free account, but Dammit, we have little enough privacy left in this world, and I'll be dammed if I'm going to give out any more of my personally identifiable information than I absolutely have to. (And I'm not too fond of Yahoo and their crappy software anyway...)

Paranoid Curmedgeon? Perhaps... but I'm only paranoid if they're NOT out to get me.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you've obviously never shopped around. I'm a huge DVR fan. I have a Dish DVR, Directv Tivo DVR and Directv's BAND SPAKIN new R15 DVR. Guess who wins. Not Tivo there user interface takes to long to get any where in the interface. yeah thats good for 70yr old gma and gpa, but I know what I want, I want it fast.

DTV's new R15 DVR's and there R15 HD-DVR's are kick ASS. No buddy not even Dish Networks HD-DVR compares with DTV's new DVR's in terms of features.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[mkraft]

Actually the grandparent is correct. The TiVo can transfer any MPEG2 encoded video file from a PC running the TiVo Desktop software (or Galleon). The video file can be viewed while it is transferring. It works very well. The downside is that since TiVo only supports MPEG2, the file sizes are quite large and the transfer time can take a while. The TiVo S3, which is supposed to be released in about a week can play MPG4 formatted videos, but it hasn't been confirmed whether it will support the PC to TiVo video transfer feature.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[Zzootnik]

Wow-- Okay, Call that Detracted then--Sorry! Time to Update my Software, I guess-

So... Does it re-encode the vid into the encrypted format of something dumb like that? As I understand it, the big bottleneck in downloading vid from the unit is the decruption prior to sending. (And I suppose the cruddy usb 1.1 transfer rate-)

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[Roland]

The series 3 remote is textured and weighted to avoid the backwards thing.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[Ryan Amos]

I love MythTV, but I have to agree with you to a point. The main reason I love MythTV is for the streaming and web interface, meaning I can watch any of my recorded shows from work. The normal interface is not so hot though, and if all I used it for were time shifting, I would probably have a Tivo instead of Myth.

MythTV is also considerably more expensive than a Tivo. You can't just build a good MythTV box out of spare parts; the tuner cards alone are often more expensive than a Tivo. If you want HD quality video... it's doable, but you're going to end up spending $2000-3000 on a workable system (you need a monster CPU, lots of RAM and some HD tuner cards, not to mention the HD space.)

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[japhering]

MythTV is also considerably more expensive than a Tivo. You can't just build a good MythTV box out of spare parts; the tuner cards alone are often more expensive than a Tivo. If you want HD quality video... it's doable, but you're going to end up spending $2000-3000 on a workable system (you need a monster CPU, lots of RAM and some HD tuner cards, not to mention the HD space.)

Whoa there, there have been atleast 4 articles on the net in the last year building out supurb MythTV boxes for less than $700 for standard tuner and for less than $1000 with an HD Tuner.

So you have $100 tivo that if it lasts 5 years costs you $369 for the first 3years and another $369 for years 4 & 5 for a total of $838. So you can spend $100 on hardware that you can't work on and $738 in prepaid service plans. Or you can build a resaonable system for $800, where you can work on the system adding replacing hardware and have no
cost for services.

For me, I can't see adding another $15-$20 per month to my cable bill just to use a tivo, I'd rather pay for the hardware and get the service for free...

To each, their own...

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[Ryan Amos]

I don't really want to work on my PVR. I have enough servers at work I have to work on. I have built a MythTV box and it is most certainly not cheaper than a Tivo. Yes, the service is 'free' (more like annoy-ware, you have to fill out a survey online once every 3 months) but it is just listings.

So in the end, you're just paying up front for hardware, and it ends up costing more in the end anyway. With the number of cable companies who are giving away PVR service with digital cable, MythTV doesn't make a lot of sense if you're just wanting it for the PVR functions. If you use the other pieces of the puzzle, you end up with a pretty featureful PVR in exchange for babysitting the databases and hard drives (over 5 years, you're going to have some software failures and want to upgrade, and the KnoppMyth "Upgrade" feature doesn't work well with SATA drives.)

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[llefler]

Their support has always been awesome and the devices have gotten so darn cheap, there's no reason not to have a real Tivo. I've seen them on sale here for $49.99.

Having recently purchased a Tivo, a little clarification on the $49.99. That is the price after rebate. To get the rebate you have to sign up for their service for 1 year ($13/mo). The rebate is $150 and you have to wait 6-8 weeks AFTER you have been activated for 30 days. So plan on 3 months before you see that money back.

I also have a MythTV box, and while Tivo is considerably more polished than MythTV, it still has some issues. Even though it runs Linux, it does support (unhacked) FTP, Telnet, or SMB. If you want to play MP3s from your PC, you have to run Tivo Desktop. My AudioTron, OTOH, can play from any SMB share on my network. I'm not sure if Tivo supports play lists. And it can only do one of these add-on tasks at a time. You can't start it playing MP3s and then load a JPG slideshow. Also, don't bother using Tivo Desktop to download your shows. It takes forever to transfer anything. Use the web interface instead.

Oh, and if you're looking to buy one, check to see if it has a NIC included. That is apparently a recent change, and will save you the hassle of returning a USB NIC. Knowing that, since the saleman at CompUSA was clueless, would have saved me a 60 mile trip.

It sure is nice setting up subscriptions for shows and timeshifing everything to suit my schedule. Before long, I won't care when networks schedule shows. As long as they don't put more than two that I want at the same time.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[dwandy]

I'm sure it's a fine product ... just like Windows is.
But I just couldn't bring myself to use it (even if it was available in Canada) for a number of reasons:

• the term 'tivoisation' is of course ...about the tivo. Companies doing an end-run on the letter of the GPL is unacceptable. The GPL is about freedom, and Tivo doesn't play nice.
• Tivo includes DRM. That's reason on it's own...
• ...but the DRM will be misused; even if by 'mistake'.
• ...and the DRM is forced on you in mandatory software updates
• The mandatory updates change the product after you buy it. How this is acceptable to anyone is beyond me. Like anyone would accept their 300hp car suddenly being downgraded to a 150hp car because GM was pressured by another industry....say the insurance industry.
• And of course anything else that they might want to do with their hardware (it's clearly not yours!).

Basically in short, it's not your hardware, even though you've paid for it. You pay them, and they change the deal after they get your money.

On my to-do list is to build a myth box.
And I'm going to build it with open-source, because I'm going to install it on hardware that I own and therefore should control.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[dfghjk]

"Companies doing an end-run on the letter of the GPL is unacceptable. The GPL is about freedom, and Tivo doesn't play nice."

Maybe unacceptable to you, but in Tivo's case the GPL is respected entirely. The GPL covers the software, not the hardware. The GPL is about freedom, and Tivo software provides all the freedom the GPL is "about". You are free to use the Tivo source code all you like; the hardware, on the other hand, is under their control.

"Tivo includes DRM. That's reason on it's own"

Then iTunes and all Intel Macs deserve a similar boycott.

"...and the DRM is forced on you in mandatory software updates"

as it is in Windows and OS X.

"The mandatory updates change the product after you buy it. How this is acceptable to anyone is beyond me."

That's true of other products as well. Windows does it. OS X mostly likely does it.

"Basically in short, it's not your hardware, even though you've paid for it. You pay them, and they change the deal after they get your money."

A lot of software is this way too.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[llefler]

So you have $100 tivo that if it lasts 5 years costs you $369 for the first 3years and another $369 for years 4 & 5 for a total of $838. So you can spend $100 on hardware that you can't work on and $738 in prepaid service plans. Or you can build a resaonable system for $800, where you can work on the system adding replacing hardware and have no cost for services.

I have both a series II dual tuner Tivo and a MythTV box, and I'm curious where you got your Tivo numbers because they're considerably different than what I've spent.

Here is how mine broke down: $250 for the Tivo, minus a $150 rebate I'll get soon. (also included a $50 CompUSA rebate, but I'm not convinced that's a benefit). So we'll say $100 for the hardware. $13 a month, so $156 a year. Over 5 years, $880 hardware and services. Although I'm not sure why 5 years is significant.

MythTV - $350 for a 2g Celeron, 256m, 40g machine that I bought to use as a PVR 18 months ago. $40 for additional RAM, and $100 for a PVR-150 capture card. So ~$500 up front. Of course, this machine needs a larger HD, and it spent a lot of time gathering dust waiting for me to have time to work with it. First it was problems with the onboard audio. Then it had trouble detecting the PVR-150 that is a recommended card by MythTV. Finally, just recently I tried KnoppMyth again and after some tweaking (things that didn't work because the install has poor instructions), it's finally working. As a backup, in 2 short months I've learned the value of Tivo's season pass feature.

Cost wise, MythTV is cheaper once you get past 3 years of Tivo subscriptions. Usability and polish, Tivo is way ahead.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[XchristX]

Mythtv can do all of those things. My Mythtv box:

1. Can view photos (Mythphoto)

2. Can play just about any video format (Mythvideo menu+xine+codecs) from anywhere

3. Can play video and audio remotely (NFS/SAMBA)

4. I can watch my tv from any room with a networked computer (on account of mythtv's client-server architecture).

5. Can get RSS feeds

6. Can check my email (thru plugin)

7. Can download torrents directly into my dvr (through plugin)

8. Cool weather monitor thingie

9. With my Hauppauge PVR350+150 (both of which work beautifully using the linux ovtv drivers) and their hardware based MPEG-2 decoding/encoding, I can build my DVR using a throwaway P-III and still get flawless performance. Plus, with 2 framegrabbers I get picture-in picture, watch one show while recording another, and all that cool stuff that commercial DVR's advertise about on tv.

10. Can rip dvd's and encode/burn recodrings to dvd through the interface itself

11. No silly proprietary video formats or vendor lock-ins.

12. I can expand storage whenever I want however I want (add hard drives locally or use remote file server)

13. I have read about people with more versatile configs, like a cheap machine as frontend to the tv but the backend running on a more powerful workhorse networked smoothly with the frontend etc.

14. Mythweb. Nuff said. Can config and even stream my tv/recordings over the internet.

15. Mythtv interface is completely customizable and themable and you can tweak it (xml files mostly, fairly straightforward and doesn;t require much geekiness) and make it as friendly as you want. Actually, the OSD is pretty good and well-designed. Once you get everything to work it run smooth as silk. I haven't had to fiddle with my box in months.

The one thing that mythtv can't do at present (at least, as of version 0.18.2) is connect to somewhere and use programs to extrapolate my viewing habits (which i believe TiVo does do), but that will change as developers are working on possible solutions (mythrecommend, cheap services like TiVo that are mythtv compatible etc)

That, and the fact that it took me a week to get everything to work right (this was last october, Knoppmyth was still R5A16, may have improved since then:main problem was that my hauppauge pvr350 remote would't work unless I compiled latest lirc from scratch for infrared, then had to config keybindings manually:Cecil the Knoppmyth devel guy may have fixed those issues by now), even with KnoppMyth it wasn't easy

If you're willing to hash out the $$$, you can buy prebilt mythtv boxen:

http://mythic.tv/

To see some really cool mythtv boxen (high-def mythtv boxen etc.) check this out:
http://www.mythtvtalk.com/forum/album_cat.php?cat_ id=1

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[dwandy]

an end-run on the letter of the GPL is unacceptable

but in Tivo's case the GPL is respected entirely.

Not the spirit and intent of the GPL ... they just respect the letter. (hence GPLv3)

Then iTunes and all Intel Macs deserve a similar boycott.

Yup. Done and done.

as it is in Windows and OS X

Also removed from my household.

That's true of other products as well. Windows does it. OS X mostly likely does it.

Multiple companies doing something doesn't make it any more acceptable.
This just hasn't hit something that the average consumer can understand and get inflamed about. And the problem is that as people become more accepting of something, the companies push a little further to see what else they can get. It's time to start pushing back.

A lot of software is this way too.

Nothing I'll use.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[dfghjk]

"Not the spirit and intent of the GPL ... they just respect the letter. (hence GPLv3)"

No, that's just RMS sour grapes. The spirit and intent of the GPL was written into the GPL.

Tivo sells you a fixed function device; not a general purpose computing device that it intends that you modify at your leisure. Because Tivo uses and respects GPL software, it offers the software to you in source form along with all the modifications it makes in the true spirit of the GPL. You are free to do with the software as you wish, and that includes integrating their work into future GPL'ed works and even competitors to the Tivo product itself. What you are not allowed to do is change the function of the original device which was always fixed function and not covered by the GPL. Any other interpretation of the GPL, its letter or its "spirit", is a foolish attempt to extend the GPL to the hardware.

When the GPL was written, it was only considered to be applicable to software products. Once GPLed software started being bundled with hardware, GPL fanatics proclaimed that the hardware was subject to the whims of RMS's warped views on freedom as well. Ain't so. GPL authors licensed their code then got pissed when their code got used in a matter that respected the license. Nothing Tivo has done has limited in any way the freedoms of the GPL code it uses. Nowhere in the GPL does it say that Tivo is obligated to offer you source, the rights to modify it, AND provide you a computing platform in which to run it. That's what GPLv3 does and that's why Linus rightly objects to it.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[Mateo_LeFou]

"Because Tivo uses and respects GPL software, it offers the software to you in source form along with all the modifications it makes in the true spirit of the GPL. You are free to do with the software as you wish"

This may surprise you, but what most of us wish is to study/tinker with/improve/customize the source code. Not -- for example -- to set it to music and record a hit single

So the comment about the spirit of the GPL really addresses the fact that TiVO makes it impossible to do what everyone who wants the source code wants to do. The tradeoff is supposed to be:

-TiVO gets a boatload of free software and utilities to make their hardware work, saving prolly millions in development costs

-In exchange, TiVO is supposed to pass on their changes for others to expand upon.

-If they pass on their changes and make it so that others have to manufacture their own specialized hardware in order to study/customize/etc the source code, they violate the spirit of the GPL quite clearly.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[dwandy]

No, that's just RMS sour grapes. The spirit and intent of the GPL was written into the GPL.

I don't think so. The spirit of law is never written -- the letter is written. Let's start with GPL version #1.
> By contrast, our General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software
Changing the software isn't relevent if you can't apply those changes. RMS has always maintained his three fundamental freedoms, and Freedom Number 1 is the freedom to change the program and make it do what you want. Tivo doesn't respect this freedom.

When the GPL was written, it was only considered to be applicable to software products. Once GPLed software started being bundled with hardware, GPL fanatics proclaimed that the hardware was subject to the whims of RMS's warped views on freedom as well.

Well, it's still only applicable to software: it still doesn't cover the hardware in any way. It just says that if a key is needed to run the software that the key needs to be made available. If someone puts the key into hardware that's their problem - not the GPL's problem.

Ain't so. GPL authors licensed their code then got pissed when their code got used in a matter that respected the license.

And since the purpose of the GPL is to ensure that "If I share my code with you you must share your revisions back", shouldn't that suggest to you that GPL developers feel that the Tivo did an end-run on them?

That's what GPLv3 does and that's why Linus rightly objects to it.

Hmmm ... imho, Linus signed up with a guy who was interested in promoting software freedom and didn't really read the writings of the guy. That's just my opinion, maybe Linus will show up here and correct me. But it seems to me that RMS has always been about ensuring software freedoms. The GPL was created as a tool to further that, and imho RMS never hid his intention.
GPLv3 just clarrifies and further codifies what Stallman always had in mind. If Linus just wanted to share his code with others he could have picked BSD, which is more of a "here's my code, do what you want with it" kind of license.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[dfghjk]

"This may surprise you, but what most of us wish is to study/tinker with/improve/customize the source code. Not -- for example -- to set it to music and record a hit single"

I don't think you speak for "most of us", but those who do should not buy a Tivo Tivo doesn't advertise that they support customizing of their products.

"So the comment about the spirit of the GPL really addresses the fact that TiVO makes it impossible to do what everyone who wants the source code wants to do."

They do not. You are free to do whatever you want with the source code. You aren't free to do that with their hardware (which is not covered by the GPL and contains no GPL content).

"-TiVO gets a boatload of free software and utilities to make their hardware work, saving prolly millions in development costs"

Nope. Tivo gets free software in exchange for freeing theirs (which they do). The software is not licensed to "make their hardware work".

"In exchange, TiVO is supposed to pass on their changes for others to expand upon."

Which they do.

"If they pass on their changes and make it so that others have to manufacture their own specialized hardware in order to study/customize/etc the source code, they violate the spirit of the GPL quite clearly."

Not only do they not, but no GPL software includes hardware that's enabled to run modified versions of it. GPL software doesn't include hardware AT ALL, it is only software. The hardware is not covered by the license.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[dfghjk]

"The spirit of law is never written -- the letter is written."

Then it doesn't exist.

"Changing the software isn't relevent if you can't apply those changes."

You CAN apply those changes to any software effort you wish. It's up to you to provide hardware to run it on. Tivo is not obligated to do that.

"RMS has always maintained his three fundamental freedoms, and Freedom Number 1 is the freedom to change the program and make it do what you want. Tivo doesn't respect this freedom."

It absolutely does. You have complete software sources licensed to you under the GPL. Just as the authors licensed their software to Tivo. Those authors didn't give Tivo hardware to run their work on either.

"Well, it's still only applicable to software: it still doesn't cover the hardware in any way. It just says that if a key is needed to run the software that the key needs to be made available. If someone puts the key into hardware that's their problem - not the GPL's problem."

I suppose you're speaking of GPLv3, and yes, that is specifically extending GPL onto the hardware that runs it.

"And since the purpose of the GPL is to ensure that "If I share my code with you you must share your revisions back", shouldn't that suggest to you that GPL developers feel that the Tivo did an end-run on them?"

Yes, it does and that's how some feel. They are mistaken, however. Tivo has totally respected the GPL license by sharing their revisions back.

"But it seems to me that RMS has always been about ensuring software freedoms."

Yes, in fact RMS is about more than that. The BSD license ensures software freedoms. The GPL goes beyond that.

"GPLv3 just clarrifies and further codifies what Stallman always had in mind."

Perhaps, but it is a different license with additional restrictions compared to the GPLv2. There is a reason for that.

"If Linus just wanted to share his code with others he could have picked BSD..."

Yes, he could have, but there's no reason to speculate on Linus's position on GPLv3. He is clearly against it, he feels that applications such as Tivo are appropriate and respect the GPLv2, and he feels that further such uses should be encouraged. He has also stated that the GPLv3 can never be applied to the Linux kernel regardless.

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface

[BigZee]

I thought my hacked uk tivo was great. It had a network card and I regularly archived programs from my tivo to DVD. The problem was, put simply, I was abandoned by tivo. No new models with new features. No skytivo (tivo with built in satelite) or freeviewtivo (tivo with built in DVB tuners) to speak of. Not only that, no one else manages to build a device for the uk or europe with DVB plus a DVD writer and hard disk recording so I built my own. It's exactly what I want. A good amount of storage (a shade below 1TB in RAID5), 2 DVB tuners, AMD64 processor with 1GB RAM and a dual layer writer. All I can say about Myth is that it's great. I though I might leave my tivo running in parallel or even just to take advantage of it's suggestions. Nope, it's been turned off now for months and I doubt I'll use it again. Myth doesn't have all the features of tivo but given that it doesn't have a dedicated service for the program schedule it does very well. The interface could be a little better but the truth is that it is really rather good. Suggesting that tivo is comparable is really a US centric point and doesn't make sense to the majority of /. readers who aren't in the US and don't have tivo as an option.

Simple but functional

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there any free, simple, but functional TV viewing program for Windows out there? I just bought a card with a Rage Theater 550 Pro and it came with this Cyberlink Powercinema which leaves like 4 processes running 24/7 and comminicating between themselves with literally hundreds or more of UDP connections. Eventually it seems to eat up so many UDP connections between itself that I can't use any other Internet application because Windows has no more free handles for something.

I've tried things like MediaPortal which is free. It works better but it still requires a lot of clicking on menus or icons after the 10+ second startup time before you can actually watch TV. Isn't there a free program which just views the TV fullscreen, instantly, with no time-delay, and no recording options? Sheesh

Re:Simple but functional

[Doomstalk]

Beyond TV does a pretty good job, though it doesn't instantly jump to TV.

Re:Simple but functional

[Dead_Smiley]

Try dscaler.

http://deinterlace.sourceforge.net/

Re:Simple but functional

[Solosoft]

ATI released there encoder and remote drivers for XP Media Center Edition. A quick trip to your favorite torrent site should get you a copy of MCE (Windows XP with a second disk with the Media Center Files on it). Actvation and WGA cracking is simple as pie and boom you got a media center. You can use your PC as a PC and when you feel like it use your ATI remote for media center. My Red ATI logo on my ATI remote now opens media center and all the buttons corrospond to media center. So far ive been MORE then impressed by Windows XP MCE. Lets say I set an app to record right ... well I forget and shut my computer off or it goes on standby ... it turns on and records the show. I was pretty amazed when I got awaken one night by my PC turning on and recording a show in the middle of the night. Media Center is completely multithreaded (ie a backend and a frontend etc etc). Although it can be a little resource intensive it's very nice including all the things that "MythTV" includes (weather and all that fun stuff). I managed to turn my system (a Athlon64 3800x2 with a ATI 9600XT AIW) into a media station overnight. I hardly watch TV but im very very impressed with the quality of media center and how it simply just works.

Sure you have to pay "licensing costs" and shit but I don't care about intelectual property ... the company goes outa busniess cause I choose to steal it ... meh ... not my problem someone else will make somthing. I honestly don't care ... but if you want to try somthing which simply works and you can convienently use as a media center solution Windows XP MCE is somthing to check out. Plus it comes with a pretty new theme.

Re:TV

[MindStalker]

You're saying this on slashdot? The ultimate waste of time ever invented. (well aside from fark and the other waste of time).

MythTV could be great.

[Jedi1USA]

....but it is not because it is too difficult to install and set up. I am not trying to start a flame war, but I have been using Linux for years (so I am not a total noob) and decided to Give MythTV a try. After months of work and changing TV tuner cards 3 times I gave up. MythTV will never be any competition to Windows MCE until you can just put in a disk, answer a few yes or no questions and then start using it.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[Anonymous Coward]

until you can just put in a disk, answer a few yes or no questions and then start using it.

Something like Knoppmyth? http://www.mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html

Re:MythTV could be great.

[rjdegraaf]

Simply do not try cheap unknown chipset TV tuner cards.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[DevStar]

I have to agree that it is too hard to install. I've run multiple Linux desktops and setup a couple of servers, but setting up MythTV was too much for me. Admittedly, this was about 4 years ago, but I check the webpage to see if the description is easier, and it doesn't appear to be much easier. The feature set for MythTV is incredible. If they could make it a simply "click and install" process, it would own the media center market in a way that other open source products would envy.

If I was running the project I'd make this next year all about ease of install.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[York the Mysterious]

ivtv is evil to get working on your box. As is lirc and the other 7000 packages you need for a good MythTV box. I tried building a box based on Ubuntu and gave up a few days later. Get KnoppMyth. It automates the entire process. http://www.mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html

Re:MythTV could be great.

[femtoguy]

Let me speak on both sides. I have been running Linux since 1994, and am not a noob by any stretch of the imagination. I just built a mythtv box, and things are bother better and worse that you might expect. First I chose to buy a PVR-150 card, and to use ubuntu as a base. Both decisions made the process much easier than it would have been otherwise. Most of the set-up was just adding the correct repositories and typing apt-get install. EXCEPT for getting the ivtv drivers running. I have no idea why there is no pre-compiled driver for ivtv for ubuntu. The instructions on the howto pages are detailed about which version of the ivtv driver to use, and how to compile it, so why not just have it available as a pre-compiled module. (I know why don't I pre-compile them and make them available) If the compiled ivtv module was available it would have taken less than 30 minutes to have everything up and running.

Overall I think that the thing that will hold Linux back from becoming really widely deployed is the lack of automation for simple tasks. I wanted to burn a DVD from a show that I recorded in mythtv. I can find several good recipes, including in the mythtv documentation, about how to do it. If it is so easy to write a detailed list of how to do something, then why not automate it.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[DevStar]

KnoppMyth sounds good, but things like "Note: You'll still need to edit /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 to change the refresh rate or you CAN destroy your TV." just aren't things I really feel like experimenting with. Can't someone get this type of stuff to just work?! This stupid config has been a pain for the past decade for me (outside of MythTV). Why is it in Windows I've never had to deal with anything like this?

Re:MythTV could be great.

[rlbond86]

Knoppmyth is nowhere NEAR easy to set up. I say from experience that it is not "pop in the disc and run." I never got it to work.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[AusIV]

Interesting. I was pretty much a Linux noob going into the setup of my PVR, and I had no trouble setting up MythTV, with the exception of LIRC, and then only because I thought it would be fun to build my own IR receiver. I made sure I was buying a compatible tuner, and with Ubuntu setup was a breeze. After a while I decided to upgrade to a version not supported by Ubuntu, and it only took about 30 minutes, most of which was compile time. The instructions were simple and easy to follow.

It may be more trouble than most non-technical users want to go through, but I'm suprised to hear an experienced Linux user had trouble installing MythTV.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[Phaid]

Knoppmyth gathers most of the software pieces for you, but it hardly qualifies as "put in a disk, answer a few yes or no questions and then start using it". I used Knoppmyth to set up my HTPC based on an Asus Pundit-R with a Hauppauge PVR350, and a friend's machine which used a WinTV Go in a regular PC with a VIA-based Athlon XP motherboard and a Geforce ti4600 with TV-out. Getting Knoppmyth basically up and running so that you could just watch TV in X11 was pretty quick with my Pundit, but required adding module parameters to the bttv driver for the WinTV Go since it is a newer revision of that card. Getting either machine fully functional, with TV-out rather than VGA and with remotes using Lirc and ivtv, took quite a bit more work. I did get my Pundit machine working fine as a DVR, to the point where it was easy and intuitive to operate via the remote, but it has occasionally hung during playback and the USB wifi dongle I use for its connection craps out about half the time when I try to access MythWeb, requiring a reboot. Things like watching DVDs more or less work, but again require a lot of configuration to get the buttons mapped properly on the Hauppauge remotes. So yeah, using Knoppmyth helps in that it saves some of the initial steps of gathering and compiling the software, but you still have to do a lot of legwork to get it really working properly.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[jjustus]

Yeah, it's too complicated. I've used Debian exclusively for almost 10 years at home and at work, and I have some experience with installing and configuring software. I tried to install MythTV two times and ran out of patience on both occasions. Last time, I was getting some weird errors from MySQL and the thing wouldn't run. I may be getting too old for this or something, but debugging a database server to watch TV is too much for me.

(I recently started using Klear because Kaffeine SIGSEGVs all the time. A GNOME app for DVB with tuning, deinterlacing and timed recording would be very nice.)

Re:MythTV could be great.

[russ1337]

You have had a rather unique experience then. I've switched back and forth between the knopmyth and ubuntu-mythtv... each and every time I've installed knoppmyth it has been a piece of cake.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[timeOday]

The lack of good DVD authoring software for linux is bizarre. Every 6 months I look into it and am surprised it's still not there.

By "good", I mean something which approximates "cp myshow.avi /dev/dvd" and have it compatible with a normal player doing all conversions automatically.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[Progman3K]

I know this is not a binary package like you asked but if you are running Gentoo, to download, compile and install the ivtv drivers you type
emerge ivtv

See
http://packages.gentoo.org/packages/?category=medi a-tv;name=ivtv
For available versions.

So I imagine this approch would be portable to other distros.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because you paid for it.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[megalomaniacs4u]

I have no idea why there is no pre-compiled driver for ivtv for ubuntu

That could be because the ivtv drivers require (at least for hauppauge cards) firmware extracted from the card's Windows drivers. FWIW The ivtv site does contain a download of pre-extracted firmware which is where I got my copy from not being bothered to download the hauppauge drivers or use the CD.

Personally I went from a pile of bits to a working mythtv box in 10 hours using Slackware 10.2 and 2.6.17.4 kernel and the latest subversion myth-fixes code. I used a VGA cable between my Radeon 9600 and my Samsung LCD TV (no messing with TV OUT) I'd have used a DVI-HDMI cable but I had my DVD player hooked up to that at the time. Of the 10 hours I spent about 3 tweaking settings.

The biggest annoyance is the lack of on screen fine-tune for analogue channels - randomly entering numbers is a bind.

Unless you use a pre-packaged mythtv I recommend you get the latest "fixes" version out of the subversion repository as it has a number of useful fixes including handling the mysql 5 timeout misfeature (delibrate & idiotic change to mysql 5.05 & above by mysql)

Also use myth-web (requires apache & php) as it has better UI to the recording options & for seeing upcoming recordings & conflicts.

My biggest regret is not buy a dual tuner card straight off. I only jumped for mythtv when my DVD recorder started freezing and I had enough bits (bar TV card) to build a system.

Total outlay £60 (Hauppauge PVR-150MCE - came with MCE remote) and later an £80 Silverstone LC-20 case (I bought this when I wanted move the system into the TV rack)

Re:MythTV could be great.

[smchris]

I felt the same as you do for several weeks and I also consider myself pretty well acquainted with linux. And, contrary to some of the testimonials I'm reading, KnoppMyth did not do it for me and my pcHDTV 3000 card.

Now I'm in pretty good shape with a simple, single broadcast tuner system. I'm not using MythGame, MythFlix, or MythPhone but I am using MythStream, have all the other modules working whether I'll use some of them or not, and have only one significant bug to squash (for which I _do_ have leads) before I would declare my setup perfect for open source.

If I could put my finger on one key to success, I would say documentation. I blew away the KnoppMyth and installed Fedora 4 because a guy who has used various versions of MythTV with various versions of Fedora has the best documentation I found on the net. But not _comprehensive_ documentation. All-in-all, I have an expandible two-ring cover binding about an inch of hints, tips and other documentation printed single- and double-sided. Whether that is encouraging or discouraging depends upon the reader I guess. It _can_ be done. Some key links from my bookmarks:

http://wilsonet.com/mythtv/fcmyth.php#hw
http://wilsonet.com/mythtv/tips.php
http://www.irblaster.info/
http://www.mythtv.org/docs/mythtv-HOWTO-23.html
http://yolinux.com/TUTORIALS/LinuxTutorialMySQL.ht ml
http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/index.php/User_Manual:D aily_Use
http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/mythtv-users @mythtv.org/1654163.html
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users /170450

Re:MythTV could be great.

[dfghjk]

DVD authoring is more complicated than that. Ever seen anything that simple on any platform?

Re:MythTV could be great.

[dangitman]

Personally I went from a pile of bits to a working mythtv box in 10 hours

So, it only costs about $300 worth of your time to get it going? That doesn't sound very cost-effective.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[llefler]

Here's a gotcha on the KnoppMyth setup. If you haven't set up a Zap2It, be sure and stop right there and go set one up. Getting back to configuring the guide is going to send you to a few web sites to find the steps to do it manually. And if you bring it up without the guide, odd things will happen.

MythTV OTOH, has a few quirks of it's own. Without the guide it crashed. Because of a step missed during install, my video source wasn't configured correctly. Selecting Watch TV flashed the screen and re-displayed the menu. No error message saying something was wrong. I found it while browsing the logs looking for anther problem. There were a few other odd things, but I didn't keep track of how to reproduce them.

After you know all the steps, a KnoppMyth install is probably pretty smooth. But until you get the first setup working, there are a lot of places where you can make mistakes during the install.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[Darby]

ivtv is evil to get working on your box. As is lirc and the other 7000 packages you need for a good MythTV box.

Bullshit.

ivtv and lirc are both as easy as 'emerge ivtv lirc' on gentoo, and about the same (or maybe easier) on most modern distros.

Adding IRBlaster support if you have a douchebag cable company involves some work though.

Knoppmyth might work fine, but when I started with Myth, all it gave me was blinking lock lights. That was a few years back though.

Basically all situations are different, so there are no guarantees, but ivtv and lirc haven't been an issue in years.

Heh, and I went to Humboldt my Freshman year ;-)

Re:MythTV could be great.

[mikelieman]

It is if you enjoy it.

$30/hour is peanuts for some people entertainment budget.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[dangitman]

Exactly, which is why I put it at a lower estimate. If $30 is low, then surely they would be willing to pay more for something that doesn't take 10 hours to set up. Which is why MythTV does not seem cost effective. That's 10 hours you could be spending enjoying your entertainment, not screwing around. If I get a good freelance job, 10 hours of work can be worth $2,000 or more. Surely, somebody could make something better than MythTV for between $300 and $2,000?

Re:MythTV could be great.

[megalomaniacs4u]

So, it only costs about $300 worth of your time to get it going? That doesn't sound very cost-effective.

Well it took up an otherwise dead saturday - nothing planned for that day, nothing on TV, no books needing reading, no unwatched DVDs etc..

So it cost me nothing but being a waste of time with a worthwhile outcome. The final product was well worth the time spent.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[russ1337]

Its worth hanging in there though. I get a sneaky sence of "sticking it to the man" every time I use the 'advertisement detect -skip to the end of the ads' function.... That my friend, makes it all worth it.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[dangitman]

Most people have more abundant lives, and wouldn't call a Saturday "dead time" - they would find something better to do than waste it. Sure it cost you something - think of all the other things you could have done.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[mikelieman]

I don't think my point is clear.

The CREATION of the MythTV platform IS a recreation activity.

Think of it like pimping a car, but different.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[dangitman]

The CREATION of the MythTV platform IS a recreation activity.

That's a pretty stupid recreation activity. If the goal is "home entertainment" - then wouldn't those hours be spent better on something which allows one to enjoy more entertainment content, rather than dicking with setting and shit? You'd have to be pretty warped to enjoy messing with settings.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[megalomaniacs4u]

Well lets see, I had no chores to do, no real work. So I had a whole weekend with nothing planned & nothing I had to do. To me that was a dead weekend - 100% freetime to do whatever I wanted to do.

Things I could have done were completely optional. When you are going through a stress free period at work then there is less pressure to do stuff at the weekend.

It has been one chilled out (well hot & sweaty) summer. Which was a nice change, the previous few summers had been bizarrely busy normally I could take june, july, august easy or not work at all.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[femtoguy]

The ivtv drivers do require the binary firmware, but that really isn't an issue. Even if you compile them yourself, you need to get the firmware, so there is no difference. I suppose that I should do this myself, but there is no technical reason that a normal user shouldn't be able to do a simple synaptic/apt-get and have mythtv up and running with the most common cards. As I understand programming, if you can write a concise recipe to doing something, there is no reason that you cannot write a program to do them. Why isn't ther ea link that automatically downloads the driver, installs mythtv, puts the firmware in the right place, and leaves you with a running mythtv system. We are so close already.

Re:Offtopic - shit site design

[Fearless Freep]

Take a look at the average newspaper or magazine

Huh?

[kamapuaa]

But what is it...good for? Like a lot of people here (I imagine), I have a PC that outputs to a TV and a stereo. If I click on the movie a movie starts playing. If I click on the album the music starts playing. I've already learned the interfaces to these programs, I don't see a need for a suite of programs to accomplish something that any modern OS can already do anyway.

Everything else seems pointless. Installing modules to give weather reports? Like a lot of people, I can just click "home" in firefox. This is a solution in search of a problem.

Re:Huh?

[abigor]

MythTV is a PVR, not some simple media player. It allows you to record TV programs and watch them later, like a Tivo. Or does your "modern OS" have this ability built in?

Re:Huh?

[kamapuaa]

I'm sorry, I thought it was a "magnum opus of modular design, freedom of expression and personal entertainment."

Re:Huh?

[zlogic]

But what if you have a spare PC that's just collecting dust anyway?
On the other hand, you can turn your kitchen/living room TV into something more useful. Imagine reading a recipe from a kitchen TV screen or checking the weather (or playing a simple game) during some ad.
I don't have a PC in my living room and I don't want to run around the whole house after pressing "play".

Re:Huh?

[abigor]

How does that description preclude it from being a PVR? Try reading the article next time, or at least understand what's being discussed.

Re:Huh?

[fithmo]

But what is it...good for? Like a lot of people here (I imagine), I have a PC that outputs to a TV...

MythTV is good for people that have their cable input to their PC and their PC output to a TV. Just being able to play movies is, duh, not a big achievement; the PVR features are what it's good for.

Re:Huh?

[sweepkick]

Leave it alone. Kamapuaa is obviously off his or her medication.

Re:Huh?

[Rich0]

It is all about the interface. Try hooking your PC up to a TV without a monitor, and with only a remote control for input. Good luck with firefox...

The whole idea behind myth is that it is optimized to operate like a VCR/DVD/Tivo/etc. Sure, half the modules aren't needed if you're just running it on a computer with a high-res monitor, keyboard, and mouse. In fact, mythtv can be annoying on such a device since you can't just use the mouse to select stuff (mythweb instead is a good interface for programming from a PC)...

Re:Huh?

[TheNetAvenger]

MythTV is a PVR, not some simple media player. It allows you to record TV programs and watch them later, like a Tivo. Or does your "modern OS" have this ability built in?


Ya, but remember that Generic TV and Rage128 PRO w/TV has been providing this functionality to most users since 1998. They are full Guide based PVR systems and do quite well, even though they are not hardware based encoders. (Yes the out of box included software is a real PVR)

BTW as for the MCE/Myth/Beyond debates - the reason people (like myself) have ended up with MCE boils down to consistency and a good remote that my FAMILY can pick up, watch TV, schedule a show. I personally could have been happy with a wireless mouse and just flipping to my applications that already did this.

Media Center is not for tech geeks, but it does bring stuff that 'us' tech geeks were doing to a family quite painlessly. This is why it has success...

Re:Huh?

[NereusRen]

My MythTV box records free over-the-air HDTV using tv guide information to let me do things like "record every episode of Family Guy, unless I have already recorded or watched that episode." Oh, and I do this in my living room with no keyboard or mouse (or any visible computer setup), but rather with a remote control. Any modern OS can do that? Certainly not out of the box. Of course you could install software on your modern OS that would do all that... but that would be MythTV.

In fact, since you already have yours hooked up to a TV, it's a perfect candidate for MythTV! Then you could add "live and recorded TV" to the list of things you can easily play. If you want to transcode your recordings automatically to save space (pegging your CPU at 100% periodically), you might want to get a separate box to do all the recording/storage and processing, and network it. Then your main computer could play TV shows just like it currently plays movies and mp3s.

If movies and music is all you're interested in playing, then MythTV isn't aimed at you. Doesn't make it useless.

Oh, and checking weather is quite a trivial feature, but again, it is something that I can't normally do while sitting on the living room couch with a remote in my hand.

Commercial usage?

[daeg]

Has the MythTV community thought about developing a community-based real, physical product? E.g., a cheap system with a decent hard drive, decent tuner card, and comes with everything already installed?

Re:Commercial usage?

[Abreu]

Hear, Hear!

I would definitely pay for a Mini-ITX system with MythTV pre-installed and pre-configured

Re:Commercial usage?

[York the Mysterious]

There are a few companies out there offering solutions on a small scale. Not the best deal, but if you want support you pay for support. https://monolithmc.com/catalog.php http://mythic.tv/product_info.php?cPath=21_29&prod ucts_id=44&osCsid=1adfce851bdfddf0bd199eded2ddf5eb Personally I'd just build my own on KnoppMyth and be done with it, but whatever floats your boat.

Re:Commercial usage?

[russ1337]

You might find something you like here: https://monolithmc.com/catalog.php

(as seen 2 posts down)

Re:TV

[Anonymous Coward]

Fucking stupid.

Do you know why we own Tivos and why MythTV is useful? So we can go outside and do things and then watch TV on our downtime. But you missed the whole point there. Besides, I'm sure you NEVER relax and sit on your ass, right? And even if you did, I'd bet you sure wouldn't let yourself enjoy it.

GRUP, not MythTV

[Eradicator2k3]

"Enter MythTV, a grand unification of personal digital video recording and home theatre technology, and a magnum opus of modular design, freedom of expression and personal entertainment.'"

I'm sorry that would not be MythTV, it would be GRUPDVRHTT or GRUP for short. Not that long, unpronounceable names have ever stopped OSS project developers from using them before.

Sub $500 HD-PVR?

[M.E. Polite]

I'm glad this showed up here. I'm currently in the market for a HD-PVR, in the market since I convinced the financial adviser (wife) that I could build one for less then $500. Now I just have to build one. Any good sources for parts, including a case and remote?

Re:Sub $500 HD-PVR?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think you can build a HD-DVR at this point, no cards support it.

Re:Sub $500 HD-PVR?

[MadBrassMan]

If you mean HD from a cable box, I can't say. However, you can pick up a pcHDTV-3000 card (linux drivers only) that is designed for broadcast HDTV. I'm not sure you could build the whole box for $500, though, unless you already have some parts. My configuration is this, with current prices listed:

pcHDTV-3000 card $170 (newer pcHDTV-5500 is $130) at www.pchdtv.com
db-2 indoor/outdoor UHF antenna $49 at www.antennasdirect.com
AMD X2 3800+ processor $109 at newegg.com (dual core is needed if accelerated mpeg playback does not work well)

Throw in a cheap nvidia video card with component out ($50), motherboard ($100), a big hardrive ($100), and case with power supply ($50), and you are looking at $600 without a monitor.

Re:Sub $500 HD-PVR?

[jkmiecik]

Enter the ATI HDTV Wonder. ATSC (HDTV) over-the-air. Not a problem if you're in a metro area. I get great signal with about a 3' piece of coax stripped down to the bare copper.

Re:Sub $500 HD-PVR?

[kramulous]

XBox Media Center (XBMC). Cannot go past it. Buy an original XBox, chip it (a fun excercise), and download and install XBMC (sourceforge). Look it up ... I now have two and will never look back.

Re:Sub $500 HD-PVR?

[rmbzz]

Go to newegg.com, search for mythtv in the wishlists.
You ought to be able to do it for $500, though it might be
close.

Re:Sub $500 HD-PVR?

[sowth]

I had good luck with tigerdirect.com. I read some reviews saying they had problems with rebates, so I avoid them, though I saw a few that mentioned they never had problems. Maybe I'm just being paraniod. But I've ordered several things from them, and everything came promptly. They have good deals.

I've never put such a machine together, but I'd probably go with: Asus P5V800-MX Socket 775 Barebone Kit ($300 after rebate--again, I never tried their rebates and this one ends very soon--risky), ATI HDTV Wonder ($80 after rebate.

Never tried any hdtv cards, but this looks good--check for linux compatibility though), I bought a Geforce 6200 and was satisfied. You may want/need a different card, since you probably won't be focused on 3D graphics. I don't know which work well with mpeg decoding (I thought I saw one which supported encoding too while I was shopping for my 6200, can't remember what it was though...)

That doesn't leave much for a monitor, but I've seen some cheap CRTs...however you could just use the TV out on your video card, I suppose. (My 6200 has one)

Shop around. I'm sure you'll find what you are looking for.

Re:Sub $500 HD-PVR?

[M.E. Polite]

I've been running Xboxen modified to run XBMC in different rooms of my home for a couple of years now. It's great, except that it can't capture and is pretty much just a front end for a PC/Media Server. I'm looking to step into a custom PVR for the main TV viewing room, and using it to feed media to XBMC in other rooms.

Re:Sub $500 HD-PVR?

[Anonymous Coward]

You should check out the info on the PVR hardware database, they also have links to install guides for most distributions of linux. http://pvrhw.goldfish.org/

Some comparison...

[Anonymous Coward]

They compared MythTV to MCE 2004, which is over two years old. Comparison with MCE 2005 rollup 2 would have been more appropriate.

On top of that, they failed to go into any sort of interesting detail *and* ignored every other media thingymabob out there like MediaPortal, SageTV, etc.

I hope the follow-up articles they're promising make up for it but this is a disappointing article from the likes of Tom's...

Re:Some comparison...

[Jugalator]

With an as biased review as one that intentionally compares to an obsolete version of MCE, I think it's only fair to show the other side of the coin to give readers a chance to form their own opinion on the pros and cons: http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20041230/1293/

Re:Some comparison...

[Jugalator]

Sorry, that was just one part (why they returned their MCE 2005) -- I really meant to include the opposing view too. :-)
http://blog.mattgoyer.com/categories/mediaCenter/2 004/12/30.html

(this view is linked to in my parent post too)

Re:Some comparison...

[UnknowingFool]

I have never used MCE at all but has the overall capabilities of MCE changed since 2004?

Proprietary; pay to obtain and use but not modify
Proprietary codec cannot be changed
No support for DivX or MPEG2
Simple setup and configuration
Runs on Windows only
Modest system requirements
No plug-in support
Basic TCP/IP network support (single unit)
Record and play locally only

If not then the review is mostly accurate. MCE2005 might be more stable and have more features than 2004 but the capabilities remain the same.

Re:Some comparison...

[Anonymous Coward]

In MCE 2005 R2:

Proprietary: Yep

Codec: it's not clear which codec they're refering to in TFA, but MCE records in MPEG2 (same as DVD) with a wrapper for metadata, using a 3rd-party codec (not an MS one)

DivX/MPEG2: MPEG2 support is built-in, DivX support can be enabled with installation of DivX codec

Simple setup & config: Yep

Win only: Yep

Modest requirements: depends on your definition of modest, but yes

Plug-in support: MCE 2005 R2 has this (weather plug-in, film plug-in and others available, some for free, some for pay but just about all 3rd-party)

TCP/IP: MCE 2005 R2 can play/manage media from any machine (you can add any UNC to the music/TV/DVD libraries).

Records/plays locally: Plays from anywhere (see above). Records locally by default but can record to a mapped drive instead as well.

This is a great opportunity for open source

[Chris Pimlott]

This is a chance to get the message out about open source to a wider crowd. Firefox was a good start, but watching TV is something that gets almost everyone interested, not just computer users. And open source has a strong tactical position - while all the companies have a vested interested in pushing their formats and restricting you with their DRM, open source has no reason not to support as many file formats as possible and giving the user complete control.

This is a great opportunity to make some inroads into the consciousness of the average consumer.

Bad title!

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

1) Its an article about MythTV which doesn't even really mention MS Media Center except in one small table at the very end
2) The table mentioned above compares Myth against MCE 2004 not MCE 2005 which has been out forever, MCE 2005 R2 which has been out for some time, or Vista which is almost here.

Re:Bad title!

[boringgit]

Agreed - Myth TV is great - the article was a butt kissing hommage as opposed to a balanced comparison.

Shame - I would be interested to read an unbiased comparison of the two.

answer: when you can get it in the high street

[rs232]

"I have been using Linux for years (so I am not a total noob) and decided to Give MythTV a try. After months of work and changing TV tuner cards 3 times I gave up."

You know something, you're the third experienced Linux enthusiast on slashdot that can't get their hardware working under nix. What make of cards and OS version? Were the support forums of any help

MythTV will never be any competition to Windows MCE until you can just put in a disk, answer a few yes or no questions and then start using it.

How difficult would the average Windows user have in installing WinCME from scratch.

was Re:MythTV could be great.

Re:answer: when you can get it in the high street

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

How difficult would the average Windows user have in installing WinCME from scratch.

MCE 2005 was a bit of a pain in the but to setup. Just a few days ago I moved to the Vista RC1 build for my media center and it really was as simple as anything I've installed. Detected all my cards automatically and installed correct drivers, hold one button for a few seconds and it recognized my remote (dish network), auto-detected my XBox360 as media center extender, etc. I was amazed at the improved ease of setup compared to previous versions.

My one complaint (well besides the Divx thing) is at least thus far the Vista version doesn't yet support the original Xbox as a media center extender.

Re:answer: when you can get it in the high street

[93 Escort Wagon]

"How difficult would the average Windows user have in installing WinCME from scratch."

Well, the thing is your "average Windows user" has a tech friend that they run to whenever they've got a Windows problem. I know - unfortunately I've let myself get sucked into that role before, and still do it on occasion out of friendship.

Y'know, if all of us that do this for our friends were to stop... I really think it just might put some big cracks in that Windows monolith.

Re:answer: when you can get it in the high street

[drsquare]

How difficult would the average Windows user have in installing WinCME from scratch.

Compared to MythTV it would be a walk in the park. At least 70% of the problems with these things in getting the hardware to work. Most hardware installs easily with Windows, with Linux (which MythTV runs on), it's an absolute nightmare.

Re:answer: when you can get it in the high street

[makomk]

Compared to MythTV it would be a walk in the park. At least 70% of the problems with these things in getting the hardware to work. Most hardware installs easily with Windows, with Linux (which MythTV runs on), it's an absolute nightmare.

Depends which hardware you're using. With MCE, you have to use the approved hardware, but then it should work OK. With MythTV, anything with a decent Linux driver should work (and that's not a bad selection), but note the "should". For example, there are are various cheap framegrabber cards (based on the BTTV chips and their successors) that work nicely with MythTV, but are completely and utterly useless with MCE. (In fact, since MCE doesn't support software encoding, you either have to use digital terrestrial TV - which I can't get here - or buy a card with an expensive hardware encoder).

Article in a nutshell

[Anonymous Coward]

Features in MythTV that are not in Windows MCE 2004:
- Open Source; free to obtain, use, and modify
- Software and hardware decoding support
- Output to DivX and MPEG2
- Runs on Linux and MacOS, feeds to Windows (Windows MCE runs on -- guess what -- Windows only!)
- Ultra-low system requirements
- Support for companion and third-party plug-ins
- Scalable network architecture (master/slaves) (MCE has only basic TCP/IP support)
- Record once, transcode and play anywhere (in MCE you can only record and play using the same device)

Features in Windows MCE not in MythTV:
- Simple setup and configuration

Guess which one will have the biggest market share?

Re:Article in a nutshell

[zlogic]

>Guess which one will have the biggest market share?
I wouldn't bet on any of them.
Remember how bad the iPod was compared to the Nomad? Well, it still won.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[dean.collins]

Yep, what Myth is missing is a really simple iso like www.Trixbox.org is to Asterisk (and no knopmyth isn't it).

You may have the best mousetrap (pvr) in the world but if only geeks can install/use it then your market share is always going to be limited.

Dean

Re:Article in a nutshell

[drsquare]

- Open Source; free to obtain, use, and modify

Only a benefit if you're cheap or poor, or a programmer.

- Software and hardware decoding support

That just sounds like buzzwords.

- Runs on Linux and MacOS, feeds to Windows (Windows MCE runs on -- guess what -- Windows only!)

If you use Windows (where your hardware actually works), this isn't a benefit, it's a drawback. Linux is all well and good until it comes time to get your TV card and remote control to work.

- Ultra-low system requirements

You instead have the requirement of picking your hardware with a fine-toothed comb. Have fun switching in and out dozens of 'Linux compatible' TV cards and remote controls until you find one that actually works.

- Scalable network architecture (master/slaves)

I don't know what that means. Is it relevent to anyone other than hardcore nerds?

Re:Article in a nutshell

[Cal Paterson]

Please figure out what you're talking about before you go ahead a speak on the matter.

Only a benefit if you're cheap or poor, or a programmer.

Not at all. Open Source benefits the users directly. Case in point: MCE can't write to MPEG4, because MS will never care about writing the feature. Obviously, someone around MythTV wanted this (honestly, essential) feature and wrote it in. MCE only has support for DRM formats. Open Source in this instance basically means you can play the movie you recorded on any computer. Obviously a benefit. A big one.

That just sounds like buzzwords.

Well, they aren't. Hardware encoding requires a powerful capture card that outputs in a compressed format (normally, either MPEG2 or MPEG4). Software uses the CPU to do the encode with something like transcode on mencoder. This is important because encoding hardware is expensive, and, if use of the machine in intended to be light, then money can be saved by doing the encode via the cpu and buying an el cheapo brand capture card.

If you use Windows (where your hardware actually works)

The linux and *BSD kernels have excellent support for hardware (as tend to support old and exotic hardware far better than windows), and are far more reliable than a windows machine. Some capture cards actually are linux/*BSD only (a good example is the one on the systm mythtv episode). Linux, I would say, has support for most of the best capture cards, and both Linux and *BSD have much better drivers than windows (meaning decreased load on the machine, which is useful when you want to do more than one thing at once).

I don't know what that means. Is it relevent to anyone other than hardcore nerds?

Well, until you do know what it means, maybe it's best you reserve judgement? You're obviously poorly informed about this subject. (For the record, it's a feature which lets you play your recorded tv, on, you know, more than one machine. Kinda useful.)

Re:Article in a nutshell

[Anonymous Coward]

Open Source; free to obtain, use, and modify

Useless to everyone except the very few that are programmers with time to spare.

Software and hardware decoding support

MCE 2005 supports software encoding via plugin. Tom should have used a more recent version of MCE

Output to DivX and MPEG2

Only useful to those who know what those formats are.

Runs on Linux and MacOS, feeds to Windows (Windows MCE runs on -- guess what -- Windows only!)

So Mythtv doesn't run on over 90% of the computers out there?

Ultra-low system requirements

Only if you use hardware encoding - otherwise you need a pretty fast machine.

Support for companion and third-party plug-ins

Supported by MCE, one is even mentioned above.

Scalable network architecture (master/slaves) (MCE has only basic TCP/IP support)

MCE has front end support - MCE extenders. An XBOX can even be used for one.

Record once, transcode and play anywhere (in MCE you can only record and play using the same device)

See the extenders comment above.

I still wouldn't get either. I use my cable company's PVR - they set it up and fix it if it breaks.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[fotbr]

Speaking only for myself:

I don't care about MPEG4 vs MPG2 vs MS DRM'd video streams for this purpose. I just timeshift stuff, I don't keep it, burn it, or care about handing it to friends. I don't care about watching video on multiple machines, or streaming it to my laptop in some hotel somewhere.

MythTV may have its benefits for some people, but don't call them "obvious" since some people just flat out don't care one way or the other about them. What is an obvious benefit for someone with 8 tvs in their house, each with a PC attached, isn't necessarily a benefit for someone who prefers to keep the TV in the living room, and out of the rest of the house, and it sure isn't an "obvious" benefit.

Responses like yours are part of the reason that many people (outside the slashdot crowd) don't like, trust, or care about "open" software. They see the people pushing open source as snobby, pushy fanboys who look down on everyone they don't see as an "equal". Until the open source community is more welcoming to noobs, and drop the damned holier-than-thou attitudes, you're not going to make much progress.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[DaveCBio]

The bigger market share? It's already MCE of course. And you (and TH) got one point very wrong, Windows (and MCE) both support hardware and software decoding and encoding. The average Joe is NEVER going to need any scalable architecture for a friggin' media center. Lastly, I have no idea what they are smoking when they say you can only play on the same device. It's entirely possible to move music and videos to a portable player from Windows MCE.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[Martz]

Guess which one will have the biggest market share?

Market share only matters to Microsoft who aim for markets they think they can sell their product in.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[kimvette]

Only a benefit if you're cheap or poor, or a programmer.

Not at all. Open Source benefits the users directly. Case in point: MCE can't write to MPEG4, because MS will never care about writing the feature. Obviously, someone around MythTV wanted this (honestly, essential) feature and wrote it in. MCE only has support for DRM formats. Open Source in this instance basically means you can play the movie you recorded on any computer. Obviously a benefit. A big one.

Another benefit: Open source pretty much guarantees your software will always be supported, at least minimally. When Vista comes out there is little chance ATI will release drivers for the AiW Radeon series, but with Gatos being merged into X.org the chances are fairly high that MythTV will eventually work with the AiW cards, and provide an upgrade path for Win2K and WinXP users. Ditto for various no-name USB tuner cards which are produced by fly-by-night vendors.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[Peter La Casse]

I don't care about MPEG4 vs MPG2 vs MS DRM'd video streams for this purpose. I just timeshift stuff, I don't keep it, burn it, or care about handing it to friends. I don't care about watching video on multiple machines, or streaming it to my laptop in some hotel somewhere.

It sounds like a prepackaged, consumer-oriented system would best meet your needs. I recommend looking into Tivo. The new Series 3 looks like it will be quite nice.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[jt2377]

prepackaged, consumer-oriented system is what sell. Not everyone give a damn about OS war or Opensource vs closed source. people will pay to save them "time". Not everyone is a nerd or have nothing better to do than playing with hardware/Linux. people want thing that just work out of box.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[dfghjk]

"MCE can't write to MPEG4, because MS will never care about writing the feature."

Only for TV recording.

"MCE only has support for DRM formats."

This is not true. Recorded MCE content can be transcoded to other formats.

"Open Source in this instance basically means you can play the movie you recorded on any computer."

True for MCE as well. You can play MCE content on other MCE's or extenders and you can transcode it.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[Cal Paterson]

Responses like yours are part of the reason that many people (outside the slashdot crowd) don't like, trust, or care about "open" software. They see the people pushing open source as snobby, pushy fanboys who look down on everyone they don't see as an "equal". Until the open source community is more welcoming to noobs, and drop the damned holier-than-thou attitudes, you're not going to make much progress.

Responses like mine? I was responding to a poorly informed, idiotic statement by someone who didn't actually know what he was talking about. As soon as people in the Free Software movement stand up and say You're wrong, and have no idea what you're talking about closed software apologists quickly jump in and say that With that attitude, you'll always be alienating users like drsquare.

Well, boy, if I'm ever cut up about that.

If people want to spout wrong infomation and mistaken viewpoints on issues they obviously know little to nothing about, then any community (be it football, or literature) will treat them with unpleasantness. We're not "elite" or "snobby", we just have a certain preference for the facts.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[drsmithy]

Case in point: MCE can't write to MPEG4, because MS will never care about writing the feature. Obviously, someone around MythTV wanted this (honestly, essential) feature and wrote it in.

If it was an "honestly, essential" feature, MCE would do it.

Do not confuse a feature of interest only to a tiny proportion of people as "honestly, essential".

It is quite easy to transcode MCE recordings into whatever type of file takes your fancy. People have even written plugins so you can do it completely from within the MCE interface using the remote.

GP is correct. MythTV being Open Source - including follow-on consequences of that - is, at this point in time, a point of great irrelevance to the vast majority of consumers.

The article is utter rubbish. The "detailed comparison table" in the conclusion is largely incorrect when applied to modern versions of MCE (hey, why don't we compare to a version of MythTV release in 2004 - that would at least start to approach a fair comparison) and is both worded and defined in a way to obviously favour MythTV.

I'm a quite advanced Linux user. I have tried on numerous occasions to get a MythTV environment up and running, easily wasting days at a time doing so. When compared to the maybe 3 hour from-scratch setup time it takes to get MCE going (and that's in a country without any official guide data, necessitating third-party hacks and on a hhome-built machine) and the fact that MythTV simply doesn't do any of interest that MCE doesn't, there is no comparison.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[Cal Paterson]

Limited transcoding from DRM isn't the same as total freedom to do whatever you want, which is what MythTV offers.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[Cal Paterson]

Do not confuse a feature of interest only to a tiny proportion of people as "honestly, essential".

It's not a small group: many people have MPEG4 players (including iPods). I expect to see MPEG4 and xiph codecs to become the mp3 of video. It already has a huge following among early adopters; rippers, pirates, etc. These are the same groups that were early adopters of mp3.

The article is utter rubbish. The "detailed comparison table" in the conclusion is largely incorrect when applied to modern versions of MCE (hey, why don't we compare to a version of MythTV release in 2004 - that would at least start to approach a fair comparison) and is both worded and defined in a way to obviously favour MythTV.

I don't think the article was excellent, but it was a reasonable attempt to examine the features of MythTV. I think it was mis-advertised in the slashdot summary as a comparision. Seeing as the title was "MythTV Unifies Personal Video Recording And Home Theatre Technology", personally, I don't see how the mistake occured. It was never much of a comparison.

It is quite easy to transcode MCE recordings into whatever type of file takes your fancy. People have even written plugins so you can do it completely from within the MCE interface using the remote.

Transcode is the key word here. Transcoding from vastly different, high compression codecs yields poor results. It's not the freedom you get with MythTV.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[chmod a x mojo]

You sound lke you have a AiW card, have you had any luck getting it to work in Xorg 7.0 yet (the GATOS project was supposedly merged into this release) Because i still have not gotten mine to work, i have gotten it to be recognised and even to accept the firmware initialisation but any time i try to access the TV tuner it seems to shutdown the video output of the card. I would definately use mythtv if my capture card worked, but i am too cheap to buy a new card that is more linux friendly.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[dfghjk]

"Limited transcoding from DRM isn't the same as total freedom to do whatever you want, which is what MythTV offers."

And it's what MCE offers, too. MCE records in a format that doesn't use DRM. It's simply MPEG-2 with an alternate container and can be converted to the format of your choice.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[drsmithy]

It's not a small group: many people have MPEG4 players (including iPods). I expect to see MPEG4 and xiph codecs to become the mp3 of video. It already has a huge following among early adopters; rippers, pirates, etc. These are the same groups that were early adopters of mp3.

And when it does, MCE will do it. I imagine one of the major steps is deciding on "which" MPEG4 codec will be the market leader.

It was never much of a comparison.

Indeed. It shouldn't have even made the effort at comparing with such a ridiculous table at the end, which devalued the entire thing.

Transcode is the key word here. Transcoding from vastly different, high compression codecs yields poor results. It's not the freedom you get with MythTV.

MCE records in uncompressed MPEG2.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[ookaze]

Features in Windows MCE not in MythTV:
- Simple setup and configuration

Actually, that's not true at all. You never tried to install MCE right ?
It's the exact same situation than MythTV, sometimes it's worse, as MythTv actually works with more hardware : if you take the well supported hardware, you have no problem.
Go look support forums for MCE if you don't believe me.
Only time it's simpler, is when MCE comes preinstalled in a media center, and there are some preinstalled for MythTV too.

You also forgot lots of Pros for MythTV. You didn't even touch the best ones (auto programming, plays EVERY video and audio files, integration of games, ...). And I won't talk about the next version of MythTV as it's not out yet.

Of course, perceived simpler setup and configuration will still win, I won't deny that.

A rare instance when OSS is superior

[The_Abortionist]

OSS can at times be better than commercial solutions. MythTV and Firefox are some examples. It happens when software is built with the normal user in mind, and the developper is the normal user, not some ivory tower living geek power user.

Re:A rare instance when OSS is superior

[Duhavid]

not some ivory tower living geek power user.

I dont think it is that, I think it is that corporate developers
dont have a lot of choice in answering to the corporation. And
the corporation has a large set of inputs that are not customer
oriented.

Re:A rare instance when OSS is superior

[Ash Vince]

There is another reason why OSS can come up with better solutions, the projects are usually managed by experienced developers who understand what makes good code.

Most companies are stuck with management who cant code and hence dont understand what makes good code. These people then usually hire which ever dev kisses their arses the most in the interview.

Question about 2 locations

[laurensv]

I know it isn't ask slashdot; but does anybody here know how to put 1 Mythbox in one loaction and have it record,
sync/copy/backup the HD and put in an another Mythbox for viewing (the two are not connected in any way) ?
I tried several FAQs and forums and I reaaly don't seem to find an answer. thx

Re:Question about 2 locations

[York the Mysterious]

Get a knoppmyth CD and install the second box as a front end. Once you comment out the "skip networking" line in mysql it will allow outside connections to your box. From there the front end just connects and does it's business. http://www.mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html

Re:Question about 2 locations

[B5_geek]

This is how I would do it.

1) Use an external drive for transferring the data.
2) copy/move the data to your desired "media" directory that Myth uses for it's data store.

This is nothing more complicated then copy/paste. You should be able to have Myth rescan your collection so that it shows up on your menus. (or however else you organize your life)

Re:Question about 2 locations

[Dr_Barnowl]

(the two are not connected in any way)

Use the mythrename perl script that renames the programs to something more helpful than their time and channel of recording. And then, since your boxes are unconnected in any way, dump the files to a removable media, and load them into the folder configured for MythVideo on the other box.

They won't show up in the "recorded media" database tree, but in the "external media" ("Watch Video") tree. Which is fair enough, because that's what they are.

Customer Support != Community Support

[ScentCone]

Has the MythTV community thought about developing a community-based real, physical product? E.g., a cheap system with a decent hard drive, decent tuner card, and comes with everything already installed?

I don't think the "MythTV community" wants to get a phone call from a drunken frat pledge 10 minutes before Super Bowl XXMXVIIC comes on, wondering which connector goes where. You can say RTFM on the phone to your community, but you can't say it to your customers.

Detailed Comparison Chart

[rs232]

"Its an article about MythTV which doesn't even really mention MS Media Center except in one small table at the very end"

Actually its titled a Detailed Comparison Chart.

"The table mentioned above compares Myth against MCE 2004 .. MCE 2005 .. MCE 2005 R2 .. Vista .."

What information presented in the chart doesn't apply to MCE 2005/R2/Vista.

Proprietary; pay to obtain and use but not modify, Proprietary codec cannot be changed, No software decoding support for 2004, No support for DivX or MPEG2, Simple setup and configuration, Runs on Windows only, Modest system requirements, No plug-in support, Basic TCP/IP network support (single unit), Record and play locally only.

was Re:Bad title!

Re:Detailed Comparison Chart

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

Comparing 10 properties hardly seems very detailed.

What information presented in the chart doesn't apply to MCE 2005/R2/Vista.

There is now software decoding
There is not extensive plug-in support
Its not single unit, you have the same master/slave they talk about with Myth with use of media center extenders
Record only locally but play locally or any extender device

Re:Detailed Comparison Chart

[rs232]

That was quick. You must have had that information at your fingertips. Do you have a link to a site detailing the specifications?

Re:Detailed Comparison Chart

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

Well, there are quite a number of sites where you can find pleanty of info (MS, MSDN, etc, etc) about all the above, but here is probably the best source for just about everything MCE related. Its a community site, but also offers tons of plug-in info, and can help with basically any questions you have if you cannot already find it with a quick search. A great community who are happy to answer any questions you have.

Re:Detailed Comparison Chart

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

For a more specific example, here is a article (long read though) with code examples for creating a MCE plug-in which converts the default MCE recorded TV files (DVR-MS) into WMV files. There are similar tools for converting to MPEG, etc but this has the nice article explaining everything.

Why I love mythtv...

[Junta]

It enables me to make the ideal media setup, for me.

The potential for separation of backend and frontend allows me to have my loud, big, lots-o-storage system somewhere far away from my TV, and a quiet, yet affordable box with my TV.

My frontend is nothing but a micro ATX case with a motherboard (ASUS A8N-VM CSM), processor (Athlon XP64 3000), and 1 512M DIMM. No hard drive, no extra video card, booting diskless. Thanks to the linux base I'm able to PXE boot, and have a tmpfs root with about 40M of ram used, and nfs mount usr. Now I have a really slick frontend that I can sleep and resume, and it comes up in less time than my TV takes to turn on its lamp right back to whatever menu I left it at, but still have no hard disk whatsoever in it. It's very quiet, and passes the WAF test. The kind of power and flexibility I can get out of a mythtv on linux solution is far beyond anything that involves Windows (try having a fully persistant-storage free (including optical drives or usb storage) windows box that can run MCE and serve reliably as a frontend, persisting through all sorts of activity including sleep... My backend records OTA HD and uses a free service to get TV listings, no subscription, has everything stored on a software RAID5 with 4 250GB disks, and I can access it to make scheduling changes from anywhere via the web if someone say recommends a show while I'm at work. Can also download other media (i.e. fansubs), dump them in a particular directory tree, and the frontend can access it in an easy-to-use interface as well.

One thing I will say is that for more exotic configs, it naturally takes more work to set up than probably other things do, and in allowing the exotic configuration, a lot of confusing options end up facing the novice user (kinda like vi vs. notepad). Also, as it is only part of a full solution, it can't even simplify some config options because it quite frankly has no idea if the user will have a remote, if so what remote, if they will use a keyboard, maybe a joystick, if a joystick no idea on the keymapping... If it will be running backend and frontend type tasks on the same box, if separate the frontend may not know where the master backend is... It has various playback options that work better depending on your video card and such, and while they have a 'decent' default behavior, it doesn't de-interlace by default, doesn't enable any sort of sync to vblank by default, and doesn't enable XvMC by default, because it can't assume any of these are wanted or will perform right with the frontend's hardware. It could be assissted by a discovery architecture for the frontend (if localhost not responding, discover backends), and maybe a hardware/configuration database where it uses, say, lspci data and checks for XvMCConfig and other config files to have a better guess as to what the user can do, but it shouldn't sacrifice the power of it's configurability whatever may happen.

Once configured, it's slick and easy to use, no one has ever been confused by the interface that's used it at my house, I've never had to answer any questions pertaining to usage and once I got everything behaving correctly, I haven't had to touch configuration. Other people have scheduled recordings without being confused or anything, and that's about the hardest task left to do with the frontend. It could be leveraged as a part of a pre-configured solution where hardware and software config is already known (last I heard MCE had particular config requirements, so mythtv's ability to cope with a wider config probably contributes to this criticism).

Re:Why I love mythtv...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but what does your girlfriend think?

Re:Why I love mythtv...

[Junta]

and passes the WAF test

As I said, the wife loves it.

As I said in my post, setting it up isn't admittedly the easiest thing in the world, but once it is set up, it ends up really easy to use. Setting it up as a single backend/frontend box (first thing I did) wasn't very hard. Even setting up a backend and frontend wasn't that much more so. Getting to a diskless system that can sleep I went through some convoluted stuff over the course of a few hours, but that is also the point where using Windows to acheive my goals becomes impossible, afaik. Maybe you could do something BartPE like, but ultimately the platform just wasn't designed for that stuff and even if possible, it probably would be as difficult or more so than what I did.

If you look piecewise at the parts I used, it costed about as much up front as a Tivo, but no monthly fees. I don't get cable (ditched it as all my content came from online or via major networks), so the cable provider DVR isn't an option, and if it were, another monthly fee. People at work with Tivos seem to be happy, other people who have other DVRs seem to complain, particularly from the cable company, about things like forced firmware upgrades that break frequently and such.

MCE doesn't have the flexibility for me to build what I want, and requires a higher hardware investment (i.e. another hard drive). Other DVRs aren't cheaper up front and/or come with a subscription fee to continue use, and in many cases are dodgy but without giving the users the ability to make it right or keep it right. MythTV fits my needs perfectly...

Re:Why I love mythtv...

[gatzke]

I have seen people selling Myth boxes, but not with this kind of setup. It would be ideal for me, as I tried myth a while back and it was horrible.

Have you posted all your specs and setup details online? It could be quite useful to people trying something similar.

I am looking to get into HD finally, but my main problem with Myth (other than the setup) is the lack of Cable card/ HDMI support. I am thinking tivo series 3, but I really really want the power of myth too... Tivo is so much easier though, so I am leaning that way right now.

pulling a Red Hat ?

[rs232]

"I can't tell my neighbors MythTV is bitchin' because they're not going to have a clue how do it themselves"

Tell them where they can buy it in the high street.

"and I'm running out of support hours and don't have time to set up everyone with MythTV, let alone support it afterwards."

How would that be any different than supporting MS MCE. If you charged more you would get less 'support' calls.

"What would be really cool is if some company pulled a Red Hat, or Suse, etc., with MythTV whereby they offer their "version" of a MythTV distribution bundled with hardware and all"

What exactly are you refering to when you say pull a Red Hat. Since MythTV *is* GPL-licensed why would they even need to pull a SuSE or what ever.

was Re:what would be really nice

Re:pulling a Red Hat ?

[stefanlasiewski]

How would that be any different than supporting MS MCE.

Media Center requires far less technical knowledge then MythTV. Just read the other responses in this Slashdot discussion to see the variety of issues that come up.

My MythTV barely works--- I'm running a pretty vanilla version of Ubuntu 6, with the default MythTV package. "mythtv-setup" crashes, and I don't have the time or patience to debug the problem.

It's easier to get Windows Media Center to play DivX and XviD videos.

Re:pulling a Red Hat ?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm running a pretty vanilla version of Ubuntu 6

No you're not. You want to know how I know you're not? Because there's no such thing. Is this post pedantic? Probably, but it helps you sound like you know what you're talking about if you don't fudge the facts.

Re:pulling a Red Hat ?

[redcane]

IT is *not* easier to get media center to play Divx and Xvid videos. Especially when media center crashes, or ignores the installation of your mpeg4 decoder, or whinges about hardware changes and this version of windows not being licensed etc etc.... IF you have problems with mythtv, you can wait for the new release (this weekend as I understand it), or you can try different packages. I also find it hard to believe "mythtv-setup" crashes without giving you a decent explanation of what the crash was, whereas everytime I've had a good crash on windows it a "generic error". If you don't have the time and patience to debug the problem, I presume this would be true for windows as well. What are you going to do when windows MCE gives you a problem? Like for instance where i live, Microsoft couldn't organise an EPG for MCE, but I've been running one on mythtv for a while? (I believe this has been resolved now, but not supported by microsoft). There are going to be problems on any kind of computer set up. I don't believe the problems you encounter on knoppmyth (or variants) are more common or obtrusive than those on MCE, and if they are, it is still cheaper to by a prebuild mythbox from d1.com.au, than a media centre PC. And you can run a myth frontend on an EPIA machine, and that is not going to happen on MCE (as far as I can tell).

KnoppMyth is freaking awesome

[thedbp]

I have some experience with Linux ... I've played with Ubuntu, Red Hat, DreamLinux, and Freespire on my brother's PC, so I only ever get occassional exposure. I'm good with the OS X command line, but don't use it for day to day tasks usually. I'm familiar with apt-get and Synaptic and can usually work around dependency problems.

however, getting MythTV running on my brother's box proved to be really, REALLY difficult.

Enter KnoppMyth.

20 minute install and 10 minutes to configure. And it all just worked. I'm sold.

Plus, he can use his main machine, a Tiger-running Mac, as a front end as well. Its terriffic. Download it. NOW.

Re:KnoppMyth is freaking awesome

[Fratz]

"20 minute install and 10 minutes to configure."

Or 17 minutes to install and (mostly auto-)configure on reference hardware: http://mythic.tv/product_info.php?products_id=44

Building a MythTV system isn't hard. Really.

[Yeechang Lee]

First, please see http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=193371&cid=158 64227a prior Slashdot comment for my detailed writeup of what a totally state-of-the-art MythTV high-definition system is capable of. I've had this system up and running since early January 2006, and its power and features still so far exceed any available commercial application it's not funny.

The funny thing is that I heard so many stories about how MythTV is the ne plus ultra of difficult installations that I actually put off getting started for some time after assembling the necessary parts. Some common MythTV installation mistakes:

MISTAKE: Not trying to build one because everyone knows MythTV installation makes grown men weep.
SOLUTION: It might do so . . . For those who've never installed Linux before. Yes, having some experience with Linux, or the willingness to learn along the way with learning MythTV internals, is essential.

MISTAKE: Not trying to build one because MythTV only runs on custom-built, homemade systems and I don't know how to build one.
SOLUTION: I'm two thumbs when it comes to hardware; even my earlier 2.8TB RAID 5 array (which I'm not using for MythTV storage, but will at some point) was more a software project than a hardware one. For MythTV, as I mention in my message above, I simply bought a stock 3.0GHz Pentium 4 Sony Vaio system. It did have the advantages of a) being pretty darn quiet and b) being black with flip-down covers covering the drive bay (a family member who visited recently didn't even recognize the case as belonging to a PC until I pointed it out), but these were simply superficial bonuses. There's no need to have to handcraft a SFF system in a "media PC" case unless one really wants to.

MISTAKE: Trying to build a high-definition system on the cheap.
SOLUTION: Anyone who does not feel confident about his technical skills and doesn't need high defintion ought to buy a TiVo. Seriously. Don't think that a MythTV system will somehow save you money, because it probably won't and probably won't look as nice sitting under the TV set. For those who moan and groan about the monthly TiVo fee, I'll bet they're also the ones who moan and groan about paying $15 a month for World of Warcraft despite it being a far, far, far better value per dollar than any movie, DVD, or other videogame purchase. Get out of living in mom's basement, loser!

That said, anyone who wants to build a high definition-capable system needs to look at MythTV hard because, as mentioned, it can do things no commercial system can do. However, high definition takes horsepower. Lots of horsepower. The mythtv-users list sees a constant influx of new people who think that they can get away with assembling a HD-capable system with the spare parts sitting in their closets. They fail, then go away whining about how "MythTV is hard."

Here's what one needs:

* 3.0GHz Pentium 4 or better. Don't try to use a less-powerful system and then rely on XvMC to fill the gap.
* Nvidia FX 5200 or better. No, don't try ATI. No, don't try a MX400.
* Lots of storage space. Each high-definition recording stream takes 5-8GB per hour. I can record three such at once. Do the math.
* A standalone PC. The best way, by far, to install MythTV is to follow Jarod Wilson's justly-famous installation guide, which uses Fedora Core. Don't try to press in a system already being used for something else to the task (at least not as a frontend); it's not worth the hassle.

BOTTOM LINE: Anyone with some prior Linux i

compiling the apt-get repositories ..

[rs232]

Is there one experienced Linux user replying here who had a straight forward experience in getting MythTV running, just the one. You know something, with all the above experienced Linux users having difficulty getting mythtv working, having to compile the ivtv drivers, adding the correct repositories and typing apt-get .. I think I'll swim back in to safer waters and license a MS Media Center. All those big tech sounding words have scared me right off:). was Re:MythTV could be great.

Re:compiling the apt-get repositories ..

[rlbond86]

Try GB-PVR. It runs on windows and is free.

Re:compiling the apt-get repositories ..

[geckofiend]

I'm one. Setting up a Myth box on Suse takes all of a couple hours including download time.

Re:compiling the apt-get repositories ..

[kabz]

It took me days of misery, including hacking on the MPEG decoder so that switching channels didn't leak streams ...

It was hackiest, hacky mcHack thing I have ever done, aside from maybe patching running 6502 assembly code, whilst running... ohh-err.

Now I make a living writing multipage SQL statements. Sadly the closest I'll ever be to getting paid for functional programming.

Media Center Part of Vista

[DavidD_CA]

It should be noted that Media Center will now be part of certain versions of Vista.

I've been testing it out the last few weeks and it is really quite slick. I can even assemble a "playlist" of MP3s, WMVs, GIFs/JPGs, and just about any other media on the computer and have it burn it all straight to a DVD. Not only that, but the DVD has a very professional menu-driven interface that worked perfectly on my 1995 Sony DVD player.

MythTV looks great when it's up and running, but with the majority of tuner/video cards having Vista support out-of-the-box, I really can't see Myth getting market share on Vista.

Re:Media Center Part of Vista

[Tim Browse]

I'm sorry, we were comparing MythTV to a 2 year old version of Windows Media Center that you can't even buy any more, so all your talk of Vista MCE is no help at all :-)

I also hear Windows XP has features that Mac OS 8 can't compete with.

Strange comparison...

[Jugalator]

Why did they compare to Windows Media Center 2004 and not 2005 at least?
And in a month or two, the version after that will be released as part of Vista.

Hmmm...

Re:Strange comparison...

[MioTheGreat]

Hell, I'm using Vista on my media center right now, and I have to say I love it.

Re:Strange comparison...

[Shadyman]

That is, of course, assuming they made it BETTER.

Re:Strange comparison...

[BigFootApe]

And in a month or two, the version after that will be released as part of Vista.

Sure it will.

Seriously, you just go on thinking that. Yeah.

It is Easy!

[fuzznutz]

Use a Haupage card with KnoppMyth. The newer versions even support the Windows Media Center USB Remotes out of the box. It's pretty easy.

I love my Myth unit. If Zap2it ever starts charging for listing data, I am gonna have to pay.

Sony's Tivo remote didn't have that problem

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.replacementremotes.com/store/productdet ailp.cfm?productid=3742&categoryid=88

Feels very comfortable in your hand and you'd know in a second even in pitch black if you picked it up backwards.

That was one of the reasons I paid extra to get Sony-designed Tivo HW (Sony's version of the Series 2 just plain looked better too).

Tivo knows software but they're poor at hardware design.

It could be worse.

[Stalyn]

At least it wasn't like getting Quake 3 to run under Linux.

Tried Myth, Gave up.

[Oz0ne]

First, I've been using linux since 1994 in desktops and servers. I no longer use it as a desktop anywhere, but have several servers running various flavours.

I tried MythTV about 3 months ago. I had decided I wanted a media PC to play our fansubbed anime, silly viral videos, and huge mp3 library. I figured myth would be my best bet. I was wrong. First I tried a gentoo install so I could optimize for the hardware I had. Lengthy system install/compile later I couldn't emerge mythtv because of licenseing issues of some of the components. I found some forums giving alternate emerge sources and ways to get around it, but they didn't work.

Enter Knoppmyth, easy setup, it worked... sort of. After playing around with it for a day or two I found the interface almost useless to me. I have a large library of files, both mp3 and avi/mpg. Trying all the various configuration options browsing to find what I wanted to play was still a painful and slow process. The available mp3 playing options were even worse, it took forever to setup a playlist. I decided to just use the stand alone apps and forget the front end, use a file browser to get to what I want, but then realized... why bother? winamp or itunes blows the linux knockoff players away for mp3, and I can use vlc and mplayer on windows with a better interface.

So I installed windows. I hate windows. I don't use windows as a rule. It's quirky and buggy and a hog, but it still offers a better way for me to play my videos and mp3s in the livingroom. What's more, I can play WoW in there if I want now, or some small party type games (you don't know jack!)

I see the myth does offer superior recording and transcoding abilities, which is fantastic and maybe one day I'll setup a myth backend-only system. Right now it just doesn't do anything well for me. When you're dealing with an embedded or rather specific-task computer the user interface is very important. Myth doesn't have it. I'd go so far to say that even linux still doesn't have it. Probably if I had spent a week or two tinkering with it I could have had a really well setup system, maybe I would've had to write my own front end, but who has that kind of time?

I would have continued to use my xbox and xbox media center but it can only handle a very small percentage of HD files on that processor.

Re:TV

[Lactoso]

"Go outside, breathe some fresh air, join a club or band, do something instead of vegging away your life."

Uh-huh. And you typed that message on your wrist-PC while skydiving and enjoying the great outdoors, right?

Indeed

[Bender Unit 22]

I started out trying MythTV and others and I would really like to run Linux on my media center machine and not give MS 150$. After a week I must admit that I gave up, although I like playing with stuff like that, I just wanted something that worked. My 3 largest issues was, getting the right resolution for my TV with the HDMI connection, getting the IR to work and getting the TV Schedules.
I installed MCE and had it running in an hour or two, and the most important thing I wanted, automatic scheduling of series, workeded after installing rollup pack 2.
Now this is getting close to a year since I last tried and I have seen a lot has happened since then. So I might plug in another hd soon and use an evening or two with MythTV and others again.

More reviews... Maximum PC

[Anonymous Coward]

In the October issue that just came out, Maximum PC also reviewed Windows MCE versus MythTV, and with Beyond TV as well, a third-party application. They weren't impressed with MythTV in terms of ease-of-use during the install and configuration, and gave it an overall poor recommendation as a result (they ranked it worst of the 3), but they did acknowledge that one of its pluses is the way it records to open, unencumbered formats without restrictions, unlike Windows Media Center. They give the highest recommendation to Beyond TV because it was both easy to install and relatively unencumbered, Windows Media Centre next, and MythTV last. I guess it depends upon what you consider important, such as cost and willingness to fiddle with the setup (I'm willing to forgive alot for $0 :-), and, personally, the DRM in Windows MCE is a HUGE negative).

Unfortunately, it looks like they don't put the reviews on-line for a couple of months after the issue runs (the most recent one with articles visible is August 2006), but I suppose they have to make their money off the paper publication somehow.

Anyway, another review to compare with, if you can get access to it.

Still no HDTV support for Tivo..

[Zanthrox]

Yes..Tivo is great..unless you want to use it with HDTV media. Then Myth starts looking quite a lot better.

I might change my tune once the HD Tivo is out, though -- somehow I doubt we'll be seeing any myth boxes with functioning cablecard slots any time soon.

A few options...

[Zanthrox]

Every now and then I see CompUSA have specials for $200 PCs. My parents just picked one up to replicate my myth HD setup. That's cheaper then I can piece together. On the off-chance that the video included doesn't support XVMC, a PCI XVMC card can be had for as little as $50.

For capturing..Myth does have support for firewire input from the cable box. You're kinda dedicating your cable box to myth that way, but it does seem to work okay..just not for the scrambled stuff. What you can get through firewire seems to vary by region. Check out the AVS forums -- they have info on what's available for most (larger) areas.

If you don't want to dedciate a cable box to myth, there are a couple linux-friendly cards for ~$100. I picked up an Air2PC card for that, as it's supported under both linux and windows.

For a remote, I might suggest the ATI Remote Wonder 2. It's an RF remote with lots of buttons -- nice for myth. Should be available for $40.

So...a HD PVR is quite doable for ~$500 if you're willing to wait for the right sales to come around.

Hardware Solution: MythTV Extender

[Anonymous Coward]

The parent poster is correct; there is a need for a company here to specifically make a MythTV Extender device.

Nobody wants duplicate high-end, power hungry hardware in each room which is why Windows Media Center's MCX are great.
Unfortuately Microsoft is too greedy and has cripped their MCX reference designs to prevent people from decoding non-WMV content including ISO of backed up DVDs.

That is the only reason why I haven't spent gobs of money on a media center solution ... because there is no 'perfect' solution yet.

I would like a high-end media machine with multiple (2-4) input feeds, a large RAID array to keep 'tivo'ed show, high damage-risk DVDs (the kids) and my music collection. With low-power extender devices (think ASIC/DSP) scattered throughout the house to act as a audio or visual 'terminal'. There are great audio streaming solutions like Slim Devices or Roku and networked DVD players ... here's to hoping MS doesn't get greedy with their next MCX for Vista MCE or some ideal HW vendor for MythTV Extender....

Re:Hardware Solution: MythTV Extender

[redcane]

Have you thought about a mini-itx fanless EPIA machine, running knoppmyth or similar? I am netbooting EPIA machines, into a mythfrontend setup, from a server running 500 Gbs of RAID, and the tuners. They can schedule recordings, watch live tv or recordings, Divx, rmvb, mp3 ogg and (non-drm) wma..... They come with TV-out sound and network built in... If you want a no fuss solution, go buy a plutohome setup (Not that it would be hard to install yourself), it does myth etc, and can follow you between rooms with whatever your watching or listening to, and it just boots your "extender" devices over the network.

Re:TV

[Jekler]

"vegging away your life" is a behavioral problem not a technological one. Like other posters have suggested, the big motivator behind MythTV, Tivo, and similar DVR solutions is to help you fit TV into your schedule instead of building your schedule around the TV.

The fact that you take such an extreme position against media suggests you've got some unresolved mental issues. Maybe your parents beat you whenever you turned on the TV and the very thought of watching a TV makes you wince in pain. You need to learn about moderation; an important concept for a healthy life.

Windows Media Center sucks

[oohshiny]

I bought a PC with Windows Media Center. It was OK while it worked But after loading music onto it and using it as a TV for a couple of months, it started falling apart and became unusable: weird error messages, crashes, BSODs (and it wasn't the hardware). I gave up on it. I frankly don't think Windows Media Center is ready for the consumer.

Re:Windows Media Center sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

See now, if it wasn't the hardware, then you wouldn't expect to have people like me how have been using MCE for a while without any problems. You might want to take another look at your hardware. On the other hand, I did try MythTV first, and KnopMyth. I wanted the commercial deletion and I didn't want the lousy codec that MCE uses for recorded TV. Unfortunately, MythTV just isn't as easy to install as MCE. After beating my head against a wall with Myth for the day, I decided to give up and put on MCE. No issues. While MythTV may well be better, (I wouldn't know as I never got it working), MCE just works. It doesn't do everything I want, but at least it does something. MCE is definitely ready for the consumer. Apple may have made a big mistake not getting into this market by now.

Re:Windows Media Center sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

See now, if it wasn't the hardware, then you wouldn't expect to have people like me how have been using MCE for a while without any problems.

It wasn't the hardware.

And, no, I don't expect that MCE fails consistently for everybody. MCE's failure is probably due to something I did that you didn't do, like install a particular piece of software, or a particular driver update, or a particular set of settings, or some interaction of those. But those are things that shouldn't bring an operating system to its knees, and in particular not in such a painful and drawn-out manner.

MCE just works

MCE may have "just worked" for you, but that doesn't mean that it "just works". Systems only "just work" if they do so reliably for almost everybody that uses them, and MCE doesn't seem to meet that criterion.

The way to get MythTV to run is to buy a supported configuration, and I gather if you do, it's straightforward to install. Or, you could take the easy way out an get a Macintosh and one of its media applications.

"pretty much" ... "minimally"

[Anonymous Coward]

In other words, it's quite possible there will be open source projects that have little or no support.

Xbox front end?

[cat_jesus]

I've been playing with modded xboxes for a few months now and I was wondering how difficult it would be to get a mythTv front end running on an xbox while having a dedicated machine in another room doing the actual recording. Anyone try this yet?

Re:maybe they couldn't read it

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps the article was slashdotted before it was posted... with digg and dupes it's getting harder to read any /. articles these days.

Not a surprise

[epp_b]

How hard can it be to beat someone who's sold their souls to the recording industry?

HOWTO make myth better.

[cheekyboy]

Step 1. Get some new programmers on the team that NEVER touched myth before
Step 2. Give them free reign to make a better auto setup/install interface.

Always new fresh people will see short commings easier and spot weaknesses faster
than if someone who has been using it endlessly for years and are used to all
the quirkiness/shortcuts whilst knowing all the hidden features or not easily documented
features or options that might be not quite logically laid out.

Just look at XBMC for the xbox as a player it rocks and its easy.

If the issue is with drivers, then recompile them on 4-6 different linux's for gods sake.
Is it really that hard to make official releases with proper drivers that work in 90% of linuxs? Even if
you require 16 copies of the same driver, DO IT!!!

Girly TV GUIs

[PenGun]

Oh come on. All you need is 'at', the dvb tool set with 'szap' and you good to go. The kids these days ... I dunno.

    PenGun
  Do What Now ??? ... Standards and Practices !

My experience with PVR

[Tibor the Hun]

OK,
some years ago I had received a TV tuner card and installed it on a Win2K box.
It pretty well worked as advertised, but the scheduling software was standard windows... you could only run it if no other programs were running.

I've had a DVR from my cable company, but with all the add-ins (Digital tier, remote charge, box charge) it proved to be too expensive, plus it needed frequent hard reboots.

Then... enter Miglia's TV Micro.
A little USB dongle (with an included USB cable) that decodes the signal and software that works perfectly on my Mac.
(The downside is that you need a beefy Mac to run it, or pretty much any new 2-core system, since the tiny thing has no hardware compressor, but from what I understand a reliable, worry free MythTV setup requires beefy hardware too.)
It also can export videos to iPod and synch them overnight. I can also stream them to my other computers on the home network via iTunes sharing.

Other than a 100 bucks USB dongle, there's no expense. I can even set shows to record from the web.
Now if only Apple would release an airport that can stream video, I'd be all set to watch my library directly on the TV.

The article is fluff as well

[ink]

I think this was all architected to get page hits at Tom's. The article sucks, and the mouse-overs on the page popped up more than once _accidentally_ for me. I'm not "looking forward" to part two. Maybe Ars will do a proper article on MythTV someday.

Mod this guy down further

[John Jamieson]

Responding to the previous well thought out post, with this venomous garbage is just unacceptable! This is the type of person who should have no karma.

I have to agree with the previous to last post that the modern Linux Distros are a wonderful install. With windows I do the base install, spend another half an hour or more on getting drivers onboard. Then the next hour is spent putting on zone alarm, avg, spybot, opera and on and on...
Then I am still not ready. I spend the next few hours doing updates. I support WAY to many friends and relatives, and this is getting OLD.

With a Mandriva, Suse, Kubuntu, Freespire or whatever. I spend anywhere from 18 - 40 minutes, and it just works! No driver mess, no service packs, and I already have OpenOffice.org and much more ready to go.
Did I mention that most of the distros are much more polished and fun to watch during the install as well?

Re:Mod this guy down further

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh wow...

This is the crapiest post I've read about Linux in a long time!

First of all, I'm all for open source, I'm not a linux guy per se, I prefer BSDs.

BSD/Linux/Whatever OS/Distro is no match for Windows when it comes to drivers. Period.

I'm not even going to try to quantify the hours I spent trying to get BSD's to work with my old machine's built-in sound cards, or trying to get Linux and wireless to play nicely together (FreeBSD's ndiswrapper worked like a charm with my pcmcia wireless network card).

Point in case, Windows has scored big time with the hardware vendors' driver support, no one can deny that.

With free software (which I love), the first question I ask myself when I'm installing it is "Will this (the hardware piece) even work?". With Windows it's more like "Will I even need that crappy CD that came with it?".

I'm not praising windows or nothing, but attacking windows on the drivers front is pretty low.

It's my only day off and I wasted a couple of minutes responding to this. I better go get some sleep done.

Re:Mod this guy down further

[Anonymous Coward]

What a fucktard you are. You can't even stay on topic you dipshit!

Everything you ranted about has nothing to do with anything you retard. Let a life.

Re:Mod this guy down further

[Afrosheen]

Jeez, I never fall for troll bait, but this time I have to step in.

  You shouldn't even begin to compare driver support in BSD to driver support in Linux OR Windows. BSD is about 4 years behind any Linux distro in this respect. However, for the most part, Linux has a much more complete driver set for common hardware *out of the box* than Windows does. XP just seems to be a black hole when it comes to drivers these days..hell anything I order from Dell or other vendors, out of the box on a fresh OEM OS install, needs at LEAST 40 patches from Microsoft before it's somewhat trustworthy.

  You should seriously take a nap instead of posting half-ass driver criticisms that aren't even relevant to the discussion. :)

Re:Mod this guy down further

[east coast]

With windows I do the base install, spend another half an hour or more on getting drivers onboard. Then the next hour is spent putting on zone alarm, avg, spybot, opera and on and on...
Then I am still not ready. I spend the next few hours doing updates.

How does it feel to be an incompetent? Adding all this stuff shows that you have zero clue on how to set up windows (the right way). Go back to your jerking off over how good linux is... we'll be laughing at you.

Re:Mod this guy down further

[John Jamieson]

Who is incompetent?

The thread was started by someone who was claiming that a linux install was long and difficult for the average Joe (keeping it from dominance).
And then you prove the point that a "incompetent" person takes hours to set up a windows box, and only 20 minutes on Linux.

If you are so smart, how do YOU set up a secure windows box without "Adding all this stuff"? Hmmm, I bet 50 to one you will not reply with the info, because it can't be done.

Two choices: 1) Pay money. 2) Pay time.

[Futurepower(R)]

MOD PARENT UP!!

Two choices:

1) Buy expensive software.

2) Spend a week trying to get free software to work.

Slashdot editors are slow learners

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to Slashdot, where in 9 years the editors have not learned to be editors.

What about Teletext Subtitles?

[Heavy Machinery]

This question probably won't be relevant to US users, but is more directed to anyone in the UK, Europe, Australia, or NZ...

I tried out MythTV some time ago and tried to get it to record Teletext subtitles with the program, and failed miserably, mainly due to my lack of ability, more than anything else.

Can anyone tell me if MythTV now has built-in support for recording Teletext Subtitles?

Re:What about Teletext Subtitles?

[makomk]

MythTV has supported Teletext subtitles for a while now, actually - I found it generally worked with my old BTTV-based card most of the time, but doesn't work too well with my current hardware (partly due to a nasty driver bug that causes a kernel OOPS on about every other recording if you try such a thing, and partly due to the AleVT-derived code that it uses not liking the output from the driver for some as-yet unknown reason - downsides of using new hardware with new, experimental Linux drivers).

MythTV=No premium HDTV content

[markdavis]

As much as I love MythTV, it will never meet my needs because it cannot and will not be compatible with any premium HDTV content. If all I cared about was crappy local network HD, then it would be OK. But I am far more interested in Discovery HD Theatre, HDNet, ParamountHD, etc... the only way to get those (and others) is through satelite or digial cable... neither of which is going to work with MythTV. Soon, DirecTV will offer *hundreds* of HDTV channels.

So I am still "stuck" with an HD TiVo + DirecTV. It is sad, too.... I thought the whole point of cablecard was going to be to allow third party hardware and software to operate seamlessly on proprietary and protected video networks. But I don't see that happening.

Save your root partition

[omnirealm]

I just spent the last couple of days re-building my MythTV box after a drive failure (why, oh, why did I build my entire RAID out of Maxtor drives?). My RAID-5 corrupted the XFS filesystem (software bug). My last system was Debian/x86-based, and it ran pretty well for about 9 months. There were a few annoyances, mainly having to do with stability and a few hacked-together packages not quite working together (e.g., transcode). This time around, I went with Gentoo/x86_64, mainly so that video transcoding codecs will run faster. I have ivtv (PVR-250) and cx88 (HD3000) both working in a fully 64-bit environment. The system, so far, has been stable, and all of the parts are well-integrated and functional.

There is just one issue I need to work out at the moment; HDTV is consuming 100% CPU and skipping a lot on playback under MythTV. This was not happening under Debian/x86. I know I have XvMC working on the box; if I dump the mpeg video straight to disk from the capture card and then play back to XvMC under MPlayer, I get 20% CPU utilization, and the video plays back smoothly, so I'm going to have to do some investigation in to how to coax MythTV to use XvMC right.

Based on personal experience, I have a few bits of advice:
  - Don't rely on RAID-5 (software or hardware) to save your butt when a hard drive fails; keep regular backups if your media -- including a dump of your mythconverg database -- on external media (e.g., a 750GB USB disk).
  - Keep detailed notes about anything special you had to do to get your machine to work right. Print them out and tape them to the inside cover of your box. Keep copies of your configuration files (lirc, etc.) somewhere off the box.
  - Once you have everything in your root partition the way you want it, tarball the whole thing up and burn it a couple of times out to DVD-R's. My complete installation, with original package files and all, weighs in at under 4 gigs when gzipped. Should I need to restore the system back to a functional state, I can go through the first few steps of a Gentoo minimum install and then simply untar the root partition image.

Not competition to MCE?!

[RareButSeriousSideEf]

You cannot just put in a disk, answer a few yes or no questions and then start using MCE. Au contraire; I am a developer on MS platforms, and I've also been a sys admin. I've been building hobby systems for about 11 years. After buying a 56" Samsung HDTV, I decided to "do MCE right" by starting with bare metal & selecting each piece of hardware very carefully for this special-purpose system.

To get a reliable & stable system took me six weeks. FYI, I can usually do a PC from bare metal (I do them often for friends) in about 3 hours, and they don't generate "support calls." Between install issues, Windows Update snafus, DRM issues and driver issues, MCE drove me nuts for all of the six weeks it took me to finally nail it. And I still can't do 30% of what I bought it to do - namely, timeshift HDTV cable programming (sorry, cable provider decided to lock out FireWire) and archive certain of my recordings to DVD Video (M$ DRM in MCE prevents you from burning recorded shows from certain channels - like all of HBO and Showtime's channels). There is no solution that I know of for the first problem, but switching to MythTV would most definitely take care of the second.

In short, even for an experienced Windows system builder, building a MCE box right is a daunting task. I've toyed with a few linux distros lately, and given my experience with those, I can't imagine MythTV being worse. You could be thinking in terms of prebuilt MCE systems, but even those create a boatload of conundrums for users, and since there *are* sources for MythTV boxes prebuilt, it would be unfair to make an apples-to-oranges comparison of prebuilt-MCE machines to DIY Myth ones. I for one am about ready to willingly forfeit the fruits of my six-week ordeal and start all over with Myth. I have a working, stable HD system now, but I'm pissed off enough now that I don't care; I want one without artificial restrictions on what I can do with my recorded programs.