MythTV Compared with Windows Media Center

what would be really nice by yagu · 2006-09-09 05:46 · Score: 4, Insightful

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 by smittyoneeach · 2006-09-09 05:54 · Score: 3, Interesting

"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".

--
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Re:what would be really nice by York+the+Mysterious · 2006-09-09 06:15 · Score: 4, Informative

It's called KnoppMyth

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

--

Tim Smith - Ramblings from Nerd Land
Re:what would be really nice by RonnyJ · 2006-09-09 06:20 · Score: 3, Insightful

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 by stefanlasiewski · 2006-09-09 07:06 · Score: 4, Informative

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.

--
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
Re:what would be really nice by smittyoneeach · 2006-09-09 07:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

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.

--
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Re:what would be really nice by York+the+Mysterious · 2006-09-09 07:28 · Score: 2, Informative

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.

--

Tim Smith - Ramblings from Nerd Land
Re:what would be really nice by GooberToo · 2006-09-09 07:33 · Score: 2, Informative

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 by dthree · 2006-09-09 12:12 · Score: 2, Informative

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

--
"I forgot my mantra."
Re:what would be really nice by Xabraxas · 2006-09-09 13:27 · Score: 3, Interesting

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.

--
Time makes more converts than reason
Re:what would be really nice by makomk · 2006-09-10 06:00 · Score: 2, Informative

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...)

Tivo still wins on user interface by queenb**ch · 2006-09-09 05:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

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.

--
HDGary secures my bank :/

Re:Tivo still wins on user interface by mkraft · 2006-09-09 07:32 · Score: 3, Informative

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:TV by MindStalker · 2006-09-09 05:50 · Score: 2, Informative

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. by Jedi1USA · 2006-09-09 05:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

....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.

--
My old sig was REALLY stoopid.

Re:MythTV could be great. by DevStar · 2006-09-09 06:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

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. by York+the+Mysterious · 2006-09-09 06:17 · Score: 2, Informative

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

--

Tim Smith - Ramblings from Nerd Land
Re:MythTV could be great. by femtoguy · 2006-09-09 06:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

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. by AusIV · 2006-09-09 06:38 · Score: 2, Informative

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.

Sub $500 HD-PVR? by M.E.+Polite · 2006-09-09 06:01 · Score: 2, Interesting

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? by kramulous · 2006-09-09 14:20 · Score: 2, Interesting

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.

--
.

This is a great opportunity for open source by Chris+Pimlott · 2006-09-09 06:02 · Score: 2, Insightful

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! by CaymanIslandCarpedie · 2006-09-09 06:03 · Score: 4, Informative

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.

--
"reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert

answer: when you can get it in the high street by rs232 · 2006-09-09 06:04 · Score: 2, Insightful

"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.

--
davecb5620@gmail.com

Article in a nutshell by Anonymous Coward · 2006-09-09 06:09 · Score: 5, Informative

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 by Cal+Paterson · 2006-09-09 08:29 · Score: 2, Insightful

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 by Cal+Paterson · 2006-09-09 14:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

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.

Customer Support != Community Support by ScentCone · 2006-09-09 06:16 · Score: 2, Insightful

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.

--
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.

Detailed Comparison Chart by rs232 · 2006-09-09 06:18 · Score: 2, Informative

"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!

--
davecb5620@gmail.com

Re:Commercial usage? by York+the+Mysterious · 2006-09-09 06:22 · Score: 3, Informative

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.

--

Tim Smith - Ramblings from Nerd Land

Why I love mythtv... by Junta · 2006-09-09 06:25 · Score: 4, Interesting

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).

--
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.

KnoppMyth is freaking awesome by thedbp · 2006-09-09 06:36 · Score: 5, Interesting

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.

Building a MythTV system isn't hard. Really. by Yeechang+Lee · 2006-09-09 06:45 · Score: 3, Informative

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

Strange comparison... by Jugalator · 2006-09-09 07:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

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...

--
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!

Re:TV by Lactoso · 2006-09-09 08:02 · Score: 3, Funny

"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?

A few options... by Zanthrox · 2006-09-09 08:52 · Score: 2, Informative

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.

Girly TV GUIs by PenGun · 2006-09-09 11:53 · Score: 2, Funny

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 !

Slashdot Mirror

MythTV Compared with Windows Media Center

37 of 248 comments (clear)