Slashdot Mirror


D-Link's New Boxee Box Runs Linux, Eyes Netflix

DeviceGuru writes "OpenBoxeeBox.com is reporting that D-Link's new DM-380 Boxee Box, demonstrated last night in New York at Boxee's Boxee Beta unveiling, runs Linux but does not yet stream Netflix video-on-demand titles. However, according to an unnamed Boxee insider, 'the goal is to have the device support Netflix.' The DM-380 features ports for HDMI, optical digital and analog audio, dual USB, and wired Ethernet, plus it has an SD card slot and built-in WiFi. Photos and screenshots are at OpenBoxeeBox, and additional details are on D-Link's website."

138 comments

  1. Uhh... So, Hi guys. My name is boxxy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I aint trollin...

    1. Re:Uhh... So, Hi guys. My name is boxxy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All hail the queen.

  2. wifi, hdmi, usb... by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2, Funny

    What? No Lotus notes and a machine gun?

    1. Re:wifi, hdmi, usb... by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Funny

      If it came with Lotus Notes the users would only need one bullet.

    2. Re:wifi, hdmi, usb... by Mikkeles · · Score: 1

      You mean that you'd leave your loved ones to face it alone?

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    3. Re:wifi, hdmi, usb... by Kjella · · Score: 1

      You mean that you'd leave your loved ones to face it alone?

      You mean your mom when she comes down to the basement?

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:wifi, hdmi, usb... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Your going to need a hell of a lot more than one bullet. With Lotus Notes replication, when you kill one replica, every other replica just keeps chugging along like nothing ever happened. Then when the replica you shot comes back online, it replicates with it's peers, and the only indication that there was ever a problem are a few lines in the logs.

    5. Re:wifi, hdmi, usb... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, but does it run BSD ?

    6. Re:wifi, hdmi, usb... by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      Woooooosh.... :-)

      The bullet is for yourself.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
  3. It looks like crap by MistrBlank · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This will never sell. It doesn't fit into the entertainment center paradigm. It looks like a puzzle box and a toy.

    1. Re:It looks like crap by ottothecow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Granted it isn't large enough that you would try setting some other full sized entertainment device (dvd player or such) on top of it but....damn guys, you couldn't even set your remote control on top of that thing

      --
      Bottles.
    2. Re:It looks like crap by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      This will never sell. It doesn't fit into the entertainment center paradigm. It looks like a puzzle box and a toy.

      I thought you were joking, then I went and looked at the pics. Here's hoping they make one that looks a bit more, uhhh, normal.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    3. Re:It looks like crap by manyxcxi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This will never sell. It doesn't fit into the entertainment center paradigm. It looks like a puzzle box and a toy.

      I don't think it looks like crap, but it definitely doesn't look like it belongs in my A/V cabinet. Just make it look like a DVD player or something close and I think it would have a better chance of taking off. But, then again, the only people who will be buying this to begin with already know what Boxee is, which means this thing was never going to sell well anyways.

    4. Re:It looks like crap by qortra · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the only people who will be buying this to begin with already know what Boxee is

      You may turn out to be right if D-Link doesn't market this properly, but your underlying assumption is false. By way of example, most people who buy Nokia phones didn't already know what Symbian is. All people have to know to buy it is that it can stream "CNN, Hulu, CBS, YouTube, MLB.TV, Netflix (coming soon), Comedy Central, and more!"

    5. Re:It looks like crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If price is below 200$ as they say and it already runs linux, then perhaps hack it and use use it as a home "server"

    6. Re:It looks like crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If price is below 200$ as they say and it already runs linux, then perhaps hack it and use use it as a home "server"

      Brilliant idea! Especially for a device that doesn't have any internal storage!

    7. Re:It looks like crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just need to talk to the folks at goodvibrations.com about doing some touchup work on the design.

      (What you don't use your media PC for porn marathons?)

    8. Re:It looks like crap by sanjosanjo · · Score: 1

      Maybe they will sell some sort of "hat" as an accessory to place on on the top - to make it a level top.

    9. Re:It looks like crap by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Reminds me of a couple of years back when we hired a designer fresh out of art school. He had plenty of artistic and creative energy, but little to no concern with what consumers actually wanted or needed. I think he lasted about 6 months. I guess he's not compromising his vision in the unemployment line now.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    10. Re:It looks like crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Or you could buy any of the dozens of sub-200 dollar boxes that are designed to accept a new OS.

    11. Re:It looks like crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ZOMG it haz USB!

    12. Re:It looks like crap by Again · · Score: 1

      If price is below 200$ as they say and it already runs linux, then perhaps hack it and use use it as a home "server"

      And then create a beowolf cluster of these!

    13. Re:It looks like crap by jo42 · · Score: 1

      You are being too kind, merely using "crap" to describe it. Start with "fugly" and go from there. It needs a copious beating with an Apple beauty stick.

    14. Re:It looks like crap by dsoltesz · · Score: 1

      It's cute as a button!!! Uhhhh, gimme the standard entertainment system form factor so I can stack the damn thing on top of the DVD player please. I got nowhere to put that crazy cute thing.

    15. Re:It looks like crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh huh.

      The unusually shaped box measures 4.7-inches on a side and has a flush power button on its top. It was designed by Astro Studios, which counts among its past accomplishments Microsoft’s stylish Xbox 360+

    16. Re:It looks like crap by crispin_bollocks · · Score: 1

      That reminds me, an agency compliance guru at a telco once commented "Those fancy plastic bezels you guys all design to differentiate your product? We rip them off and throw them away before the equipment goes in a rack."

    17. Re:It looks like crap by Xoltri · · Score: 1

      I never understood why they still make home theater electronics so huge with gobs of empty space in them just to fit someone's idea of how they should stack together. This isn't 1980 anymore, move on.

      --
      -Xoltri
    18. Re:It looks like crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you don't understand what the word 'internal' means. I don't want to have a pile of crap sitting around acting as my 'server'. I want a small, quiet, self-contained box that tucks away nicely into the corner.

    19. Re:It looks like crap by uglyduckling · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is TINY. It's not meant to fit into any 'paradigm', it's meant to live behind the TV amongst the cluster of cables, or else in the gap between the TV panel and the shelf/table it's on, if you prefer to see the unit. Check out TFA, the device is the size of a coke can.

    20. Re:It looks like crap by uglyduckling · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What were you hoping to stack on top of a box that's about 5cm wide?

    21. Re:It looks like crap by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      I need all that space to put my 400 DVDs in!

    22. Re:It looks like crap by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      and more

      It's given that the killer feature is porn, right?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    23. Re:It looks like crap by sootman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It doesn't fit into the entertainment center paradigm.

      FFS, it doesn't fit into an entertainment center, period. Nor can anything be stacked on top of it. Plus it's needlessly hard to manufacture, find components for, and assemble. This is quite possibly the most horribly designed piece of consumer gear I've ever seen in my life.

      ATTENTION LOSERS WHO WANT TO COPY APPLE: Design doesn't just mean making it look neat. Apple's stuff looks flashy but it actually works. (Most of the time, anyway.) And if your design only looks "neat" to 14-year-old males, you should throw it right the fuck away and never venture down that path again. Seriously, this thing looks like a prop from a bad SciFi (excuse me, SyFy) movie-of-the-week, or maybe a Roomba from Eureka that gains sentience and starts causing problems.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    24. Re:It looks like crap by GungaDan · · Score: 1

      "the device is the size of a coke can"

      Clarence? Is that you?

      --
      Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
    25. Re:It looks like crap by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      No kidding - it didn't take but 1 quick glance at this thing to determine "Nope, I'm not buying that.".

      Then again we may see "corner addons" appear on Ebay to make the thing into an actual box shape . . .

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    26. Re:It looks like crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does pornhub among others. It also has a special mode so that you don't accidentally tell everybody your wanking to shemale surprise 3.

    27. Re:It looks like crap by msimm · · Score: 1

      It looks like an interesting experiment. I've been using their DSM-750 for a year or so and although it's missing some of the more advanced features of something like MythTV (no imdb lookups, no cover browsing) it's been a pretty nice way to get away from the computer and enjoy my media without burning everything to coasters. I agree the design of this thing is terrible (for a piece of functional hardware) but if it does marginally well I'm sure we'll see other vendors take a more tasteful approach in the near-future.

      --
      Quack, quack.
    28. Re:It looks like crap by tbuskey · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's ugl, but it ain't
      I see lots of reboxing mods.

      My TV is on the wall
      I have a set top box, DVD player and a TiVo stacked.
      It can replace my TiVo for playback, but I probably still want to stack it.....

    29. Re:It looks like crap by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      It needs a copious beating with an Apple "fashionista" stick.

      FTFY

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
    30. Re:It looks like crap by forand · · Score: 1

      Did boxee get Hulu working again? Last I heard it was dead.

    31. Re:It looks like crap by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 1

      What were you hoping to stack on top of a box that's about 5cm wide?

      His iPod

    32. Re:It looks like crap by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      This will never sell. It doesn't fit into the entertainment center paradigm. It looks like a puzzle box and a toy.

      I hit the page for comments, and the first 5 amount to "It'll never work, get off my lawn". I'm reminded that when Apple came out with their first iPod, comments here on slashdork were loaded with downer reviews. Here's a couple of them

      "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."

      This, btw, was in the article summary. A little further down:

      Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.

      Or, next comment down:

      Since when is Apple concerned about market share? They do what capitalism was born to do. Cater to a small market, and do it the right way.

      Sure, not everyone was downer, but being pissy because you can't stick a remote on a 4" wide box? I don't know about you, but I have 2 or three FEET behind my flat-screen TV in my entertainment center, because although my 32" TV is just 3" thick, the stereo and media center computer are still like 2' deep, with piles of ugly cords carefully hidden in the back.

      Don't tell me that this "won't fit" the media center paradigm. The media center paradigm needs to get rid of piles of wires and switch to bluetooth, with lightweight devices that fit wherever they look nice. (EG: on the bookshelf or mantle piece)

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    33. Re:It looks like crap by gknoy · · Score: 1

      It looks "interesting", but also useless. I can't stack anything on top of it, like my remotes, or game controllers, or a stack of DVDs. I'm unlikely to buy one so strange shaped.

    34. Re:It looks like crap by howe.chris · · Score: 0

      ... I want a small, quiet, self-contained box that tucks away nicely into the corner.

      Did you see the pics? It might actually fit in a corner. Well... maybe the leaning tower of pisa's corner.

    35. Re:It looks like crap by uglyduckling · · Score: 1

      Haha, indeed. Everyone here seems to think this is a 5" box not a 5cm box. It's not a Mac Cube or NeXT Cube, it's no more meant to stack than an iPod or the dongle for your infrared headphones.

    36. Re:It looks like crap by nanospook · · Score: 1

      A red hat?

      --
      Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
    37. Re:It looks like crap by lysdexia · · Score: 1

      Cool, I'll hook a light sail to it and zip out to the galactic router.

    38. Re:It looks like crap by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      No machine with a significant amount of storage is going to satisfy that criteria.

      That's why there are all of these quiet little diskless (or nearly so) machines with good video acceleration.

      Media files take up a lot of space.

      The 5TB thumbdrive just isn't here yet.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    39. Re:It looks like crap by wahini · · Score: 1

      Obviously, nobody here can "think out of the boxee", what pathetically pablum sucking dweebs. Since the size is about that of a coke can, you can't stack anything on it and if would fit next to anything you already have. Of course, the RF remote control means it doesn't have to be visible at all! Now get back in to your boxes and go back to sleep.

  4. Form over functionality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Too bad that thing is formed to take as much as space as possible, there is no way I get a permission from the mrs. to purchase one.

    1. Re:Form over functionality by Nerdfest · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One could argue that the design discourages the rear vents from being covered (from what I remember of seeing the design before) but yeah, I prefer audio/video equipment (and computer equipment) to be as FSM intended ... black & rack mount.

    2. Re:Form over functionality by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      1. you're on /. , you obviously haven't gotten close enough to a girl to ask one out, let alone marry one

      Yawn. That wasn't even funny five years ago. However...

      2. if we assume, for the moment, that the first part of your premise is in fact factual, way to wear the pants in the family, letting the mrs encroach on your domain, wussemeyer...

      I wouldn't take relationship advice from someone who claims to have never been close to a girl.

      And to be on topic, the design of this unit makes me want to avoid it out of spite for the idiot who thought that looking crazy was a good idea. This is why you should never draw your designs on a folded up napkin.

    3. Re:Form over functionality by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      ...obviously designed by someone not familiar with the "ask forgiveness rather than permission" principle.

      A box that can "fit in" with the rest of your AV gear could be sitting in your room chugging along for weeks before anyone notices it. This is actually what you want out of AV gear. It is not supposed to be an eyesore that sticks it's tongue out at you as you walk by it.

      If you are able to put an eyesore in your living room then this sort of box has sea of extra competition to deal with.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:Form over functionality by phozz+bare · · Score: 1
      The thing is the size of a soda can and can be placed anywhere you want, including out of sight. From http://blog.boxee.tv/2009/12/09/step-1-make-a-boxee-box-no-need-to-cut-a-hole/ :

      Rest assured the Boxee Box will fit into your entertainment center. If the look doesn’t quite fit with your decor, not to worry. The RF remote means you can place the box out of sight and still control it. Of course, the Boxee Box prefers being on top : )

  5. Tongue twister? Gosh, yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boxee Box Beta Linux boxen botox begorah Batman! This could only be the work of the Riddler.

  6. So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what is so special on this? Most networking devices use Linux kernel as their OS to run all needed other features on it.
    My 4 year old travel router (WL-520G if I remember correctly) has Linux on it. Same thing is on my 8 year old Telewell ADSL-modem.

    The Linux might have a small marketshare by statics companies when it comes only to desktop use, but when it comes to real world usage statics... it has almost same market share as NT (NT 6.0/6.1 is the operating system on Windows Vista and Windows 7!).

    Even my Digital TV -set has Linux in them. The DVD/VHS-recorder, 500GB DVB-T and DVB-C devices and even my cellphone has a Linux kernel working as the operating system. (And no, none of the Linux OS's rans the GNU software, so of course the RMS is angry about the fame what Linux has got because GNU did not got their own OS working).

    1. Re:So? by Fri13 · · Score: 1

      Even that this is not so special news for tech people, but this might be first time when the network deive manufacturer is marketing it with Linux.

  7. HD Limitations? by soup4you2 · · Score: 1

    Does anybody know about HD support, I know it has it but curious if it's limited to only 720p like the AppleTV or if it will display 1080i/p. And is there anything to stop me from installing XBMC on there. (I doubt there is but I'm not a big fan of boxee)

    1. Re:HD Limitations? by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...anything interesting hardware-wise most certainly has binary proprietary drivers with no interfaces available for hackers or non-corporate programmers.

      OTOH, you can just get yourself an ION nettop and it won't look like some sort of an attempt at modern art.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re:HD Limitations? by Junior+Samples · · Score: 1

      Does anybody know about HD support, I know it has it but curious if it's limited to only 720p like the AppleTV or if it will display 1080i/p.

      And is there anything to stop me from installing XBMC on there. (I doubt there is but I'm not a big fan of boxee)

      I was looking for a high definition media player and ended up purchasing a Popcornhour Model C200 networked media player after ruling out Apple TV. http://www.popcornhour.com/onlinestore/

      The C200 accommodates 1 or 2 internal hard drives and has a 3.5" bay for a Blue Ray or DVD player as well. 1080P playback is not a problem. There are very few file formats that won't work with this player.

      Here are the C200 technical specifications: http://www.popcornhour.com/onlinestore/index.php?pluginoption=productspec&item_id=12

    3. Re:HD Limitations? by hemp · · Score: 1

      The Popcord box doesn't support Hulu, which seems to be the way the networks are working to now a days.

      --
      Skip ------ See the latest from http://www.anArchyFortWorth.com
    4. Re:HD Limitations? by dotgain · · Score: 1
      Early Apple TVs supported 1080i as well as 720p (I have one). Newer models support 1080p in addition.

      Maybe you got it confused with iTunes rentals, which don't seem to be available higher than 720p. Hope this helps, anyway.

    5. Re:HD Limitations? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      You might want to clue is in regarding how a weak ass Celeron and an nv7100 is supposed to deal with HD content.

      Sure, you might be able to coax it to handle MPEG2 broadcast streams OK at 1080i. However, anything encoded with a non-jurassic codec at a reasonable bitrate is going to choke the AppleTV good.

      Your claims might go over better in a forum not hip deep in HTPC users and ATV hackers and such.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    6. Re:HD Limitations? by Junior+Samples · · Score: 1

      A Flash player is presently under development for the C-200.

    7. Re:HD Limitations? by dotgain · · Score: 1
      Clearly you know the AppleTV better than I do. I was only trying to clear up what seemed like a misconception that the AppleTV was limited to 720p. They're not my claims, but Apple's, and I'm only putting them out there. Thanks for the correction, however blunt.

      Sincerely,

      AppleTV user mixed up between 1080i output, and actual processing high bitrate 1080i.

    8. Re:HD Limitations? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      If you put a lawnmower engine in a Ferarri, it's not going to go 180mph regardless of what the rest of the drivetrain is capable of.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  8. Why not Tivo? by wift · · Score: 1

    First thought. Gimmicky, not stackable and this is something that Tivo should have already done. Seems like a bunch of us had the same first impression too. Won't bode well.

    --
    ....... Thus ends my attempt at wit or whatever
    1. Re:Why not Tivo? by uglyduckling · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Everyone here is missing the point. This is TINY. It's the size of a coke can (look further down TFA). You don't stack anything on it - even if it were right-angled it's way too small and the vents would get covered. The idea is that you put it between the shelf/table/base of the TV is on and the bottom edge of the TV panel. Or hide it behind out of the way.

    2. Re:Why not Tivo? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Where do you buy your pop?

      Or do you mean some sort of 4.7 inch wide can that you keep your drugs in?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Why not Tivo? by uglyduckling · · Score: 1

      *sigh* it's 4.7" wide at the base, but just look at the picture, it really is tiny and not something you would stack anything on even if it were a right-angled cube. It's smaller than a Nintendo GameCube.

    4. Re:Why not Tivo? by maxume · · Score: 1

      So we've established that it doesn't really resemble a soft drink can?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  9. opengl to directx? by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Interesting bits from the Boxee beta preview page. First it lists 'Official support for OS X "Snow Leopard" and Ubuntu "Karmic"', then it goes on to say:

    Finally, Ronen notes that with the Beta release, Boxee's graphical engine has migrated from from OpenGL to DirectX, allowing it to take advantage of Direct X video acceleration.

    So the "officially supported" OS X and Ubuntu versions will be running on OpenGL, but the Windows version gets full hardware acceleration by using DirectX?

    --
    This guy's the limit!
    1. Re:opengl to directx? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      In what sense is OpenGL not "full hardware accelleration"? I'm legitimately curious, not snarking. Are we talking hardware video decoding?

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:opengl to directx? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OpenGL should be properly hardware accelerated on both OS X and Linux. The problem is that most driver vendors (NVIDIA, ATI) don't bother with good OpenGL implementations for Windows, so the only real alternative for good performance is DirectX.

    3. Re:opengl to directx? by LOLLinux · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, they re talking about DXVA support.

    4. Re:opengl to directx? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they had it under OpenGL why port the code to DirektX instead of just using their OpenGL implementation?

    5. Re:opengl to directx? by limaxray · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Ubuntu version (and I assume the OS X version) use OpenGL solely for the menus and overlays. VDPAU is used for decoding video on the GPU, and it works exceptionally well.

      Up until now though, this meant Windows users were SOL when it came to hardware accelerated video decoding - I'm guessing DirectX gives them this functionality.

      The amusing part though is that the original project (XMBC) used DirectX since it only ran on the original XBox, and the XBMC project ported to OpenGL to support other platforms.

    6. Re:opengl to directx? by trjonescp · · Score: 1
      From the Boxee blog:

      As part of the Beta we also changed the underlying graphic library on Windows from OpenGL to DirectX

      --
      Only speak when it improves the silence.
    7. Re:opengl to directx? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhhhh, yeah. I think everyone here already knew that, since DirectX is a Microsoft technology that's only available on Windows. Way to contribute to the discussion!

    8. Re:opengl to directx? by HermMunster · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The key here is "for Windows". There's plenty of hardware acceleration under OpenGL.

      The reason behind the lack of OpenGL in windows is that Microsoft dropped it in Vista. When you discontinue a "competing active technology" you can easily guess the reason.

      Under Linux HD video's play just fine, even under cheap onboard video chipsets.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    9. Re:opengl to directx? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, OpenGL is a 3D graphics API (although people may use it for other things anyway to get access to it's supported hardware).

      The equivalent Khronos API for media decoding is OpenMAX, but afaik none of the major desktop OSes or hardware accelerators implement it publicly right now. However, the working group's members include AMD, Apple, ARM, Imagination, IBM, Intel, Nokia and Nvidia, so I wouldn't be horribly surprised to see at least parts of it implemented on Mac and Linux machines with all the major GPU families eventually.

      For right now there's DXVA on Windows, VA API and VDPAU and XVBA and XVMC on Linux, and really nothing publicly supported on Mac.

      As I understand it Boxee uses VDPAU on Linux, so it's decoding should be hardware accelerated for recent Nvidia GPUs (but not for those of ATI who use XVBA rather than VDPAU, or Intel who use VA API).

      So basically, Linux is a mess of incompatible solutions, Apple is ignoring outside developers entirely for the moment, and only Microsoft has a single API.

      Anyway, that's all just the result of a bit of interested googling, I wouldn't be too surprised if it's wrong on some points...

    10. Re:opengl to directx? by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      Your description of the landscape sounds about right.

      So basically, Linux is a mess of incompatible solutions, Apple is ignoring outside developers entirely for the moment, and only Microsoft has a single API.

      And that line seems to describe so much more than just this situation... : p

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    11. Re:opengl to directx? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Ultimately, the only thing that matters is "what cards are supported" and "how much do I have to spend".

      The "chaos" on Linux doesn't concern me if stuff works. The level of "elegance" on Windows or MacOS is irrelevant to me if things don't work.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  10. with DTV/PVR? by Kludge · · Score: 1

    Is there anything out there like this that also does DTV/PVR?
    I don't want to have multiple computers to maintain sitting around my TV set.
    Oh, yeah, and it has to run Linux.

    Thanks.

    1. Re:with DTV/PVR? by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      Is there anything out there like this that also does DTV/PVR?
      I don't want to have multiple computers to maintain sitting around my TV set.
      Oh, yeah, and it has to run Linux.


      Yes, it's called a Linux box running MythTV (or some other PVR software) and Boxee.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:with DTV/PVR? by jhol13 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, for example TViX PVR M-6640N or DreamBox. I don't know where you live, those probably do not work in USA as they use DVB-S/C/T.

      It would seem that WD TV Live Full HD might be better than the "advertised". YMMV.

    3. Re:with DTV/PVR? by dsoltesz · · Score: 1

      Why do you want this thing? Just get over it and build your own.

    4. Re:with DTV/PVR? by Killer+Orca · · Score: 1

      I recommend having a computer handle the back-end work of recording and separate devices that can accept network streams at each TV. As for a setup that allows this, I know Dvico makes many, including this http://www.tvix.co.kr/ENG/products/PVRM6640N.aspx for recording. I can't verify their reliability though, never used one.

    5. Re:with DTV/PVR? by Kludge · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's called a Linux box running MythTV (or some other PVR software) and Boxee.

      Yeah, I tried setting all that up. Got mythtv installed, got the database going, got the client going, got the programming service going, got the recording going, etc, etc. Then I tried to play a video that I recorded and... blank screen. I could play the video directly with mplayer, xine, kaffiene, etc. etc, but no go with Mythtv.

      I'm sure I have the ability to diagnose and fix the problem, but I am at a time in my life where I now have significantly more cash than time. I am willing to blow the latter to keep the former. I want to be able to purchase a single box that just works, and does everything: PVR, internet video sites, computer games, internet flash games, plays CDs, DVDs, etc, etc, etc, and open source hackability when I really need it.

    6. Re:with DTV/PVR? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Have fun waiting...

      Meanwhile, the rest of us will be using DIY franken-systems and spending the vast majority of our time simply using what you can't be bothered to spend a little time to build.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    7. Re:with DTV/PVR? by tji · · Score: 1

      I'm in the same position.. I tried XBMC / Plex / Boxee as "the one true frontend". But, had no end of problems getting MythTV working with it. I got tantalizing glimpses of it working well, but it never stayed working.

      I also have been using a Mac Mini as an HTPC that can do most everything I need between Front Row / iTunes, Plex/Boxee, and MythTV Frontend. It works passably well. But, I ran into too many oddities with the Mac OS X version of MythFrontend (others claim it's rock solid for them, so YMMV).

      I ended up using an HDMI switching tuner and a Harmony remote, to easily switch back and forth between my Mac HTPC which does a lot of things, and a small Linux box as my MythTV frontend. I used an Acer AspireRevo running MythBuntu for the myth frontend. It has an nvidia GPU which supports VDPAU video acceleration. Video playback is rock solid, but I don't do anything else on that box (I made a couple attempts to get XBMC running on it, but it didn't go well).

  11. Still no Blu-Ray? by Tyr_7BE · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's too bad. Otherwise this would have been a serious contender for my next media box.

    It seems there's no "do-it-all" media center on the market. Games, Blu-Ray, XBMC. Pick any two. I'm waiting for someone to get XBMC going on a PS3. When that happens, I will have chosen my corner in this fight.

    1. Re:Still no Blu-Ray? by crazycheetah · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you could find a USB blu-ray drive, you should be able to just plug it right in there. The wikipedia page on it says something about it being licensed for use in blu-ray players, so that should work, in theory. Though XBMC (or Boxee, comparing it to this box; it's built off of XBMC) on a PS3 would kick this thing's ass, easily.

    2. Re:Still no Blu-Ray? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      You do not want a consumer device with an optical drive built in, unless the drive is the device. It's always the first thing to fail. That's not a big deal on computers, where such drives are commodity OEM products, so replacing them is not an expensive send-it-back-to-the-factory process. But everybody I know who's bought a TV, VCR, or game console with a blu-ray built in has regretted it.

      Since this box looks extremely hackable, you could probably add a blu-ray drive to it. Problem solved.

      'm waiting for someone to get XBMC going on a PS3.

      Why does it have to be a PS3? Why not just run XBMC on a Linux box with a blu-ray drive?

    3. Re:Still no Blu-Ray? by Sancho · · Score: 1

      This box runs Linux. Plugging in the Bluray drive won't get you anywhere towards watching Bluray movies.

  12. Netflix by qazwart · · Score: 1, Troll

    Doesn't Netflix use SILVERLIGHT?

    Let's see:

    1). BoxeeBox uses Linux.
    2). Linux doesn't run Silverlight.
    3). You need Silverlight to run Netflix

    Now fill in the missing word:

    Therefore, BoxeeBox will never be able to run ____________.

    The truth is that I've given up on standard Linux distros when it comes to multimedia. It simply isn't as good as Windows or Mac OS X. For about a year, we tried to run Mythbuntu, then Ubuntu w/ MythTV and Boxee. It simply never worked very well. Incompatibility issues with drivers and configuration problems drove us up the wall. When Windows 7 came out, we "upgraded" to Windows 7. (Why not?, it was originally a Windows Vista box).

    The problem I see with the Boxee Box is that it is competing against HDTVs that can connect with Netflix right out of the box. Plus, these HDTVs are better at displaying video than what Boxee will be able to do.

    Don't get me wrong. I use Linux (Fedora Distro) at work. In fact, I installed it at work over my Windows box and am running Windows under VirtualBox on the machine. I prefer to do my development on Linux because it is faster, and it comes with all the development tools I need. Plus, it is two to three times faster running Subversion and Eclipse than Windows.

    However, I have that Windows under VirtualBox instance if I have to read email (our corporation uses Exchange and Evolution is an awful Exchange client). I also use my Windows side if I have to display a video or a Flash application. If I can get Flash to work on Linux, it is splotchy at best, MP4s look awful, and don't even try to run in full screen mode. Linux based Android is much better, but that's because Google isn't shy about adding a few proprietary pieces to get things to work.

    Boxee is a nice concept, but they're concentrating too much on cool and not enough on getting things to work at a consumer level.

    1. Re:Netflix by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Doesn't Netflix use SILVERLIGHT?

      Let's see:

      1). BoxeeBox uses Linux. 2). Linux doesn't run Silverlight. 3). You need Silverlight to run Netflix

      Now fill in the missing word:

      Therefore, BoxeeBox will never be able to run ____________.

      Roku runs Linux, and does Netflix. Now... Doesn't do much of anything else, but it does run Netflix.

      The truth is that I've given up on standard Linux distros when it comes to multimedia. It simply isn't as good as Windows or Mac OS X. For about a year, we tried to run Mythbuntu, then Ubuntu w/ MythTV and Boxee. It simply never worked very well. Incompatibility issues with drivers and configuration problems drove us up the wall. When Windows 7 came out, we "upgraded" to Windows 7. (Why not?, it was originally a Windows Vista box).

      I have Linux on several personal PCs, my media center, lots of systems at work, and some provate clients. Other than WiFi, I have no driver issues, and other than Netflix, no multimedia issues. While DVR functionality is lacking, if you are having multimedia problems, you are having problems, not Linux.

      The problem I see with the Boxee Box is that it is competing against HDTVs that can connect with Netflix right out of the box. Plus, these HDTVs are better at displaying video than what Boxee will be able to do.

      Boxxee can do 1080p. What TV do you have that can do better? The rest of your comment is dead on... Assuming it eventually gets netflix, even...

      Don't get me wrong. I use Linux (Fedora Distro) at work. In fact, I installed it at work over my Windows box and am running Windows under VirtualBox on the machine. I prefer to do my development on Linux because it is faster, and it comes with all the development tools I need. Plus, it is two to three times faster running Subversion and Eclipse than Windows.

      However, I have that Windows under VirtualBox instance if I have to read email (our corporation uses Exchange and Evolution is an awful Exchange client). I also use my Windows side if I have to display a video or a Flash application. If I can get Flash to work on Linux, it is splotchy at best, MP4s look awful, and don't even try to run in full screen mode. Linux based Android is much better, but that's because Google isn't shy about adding a few proprietary pieces to get things to work.

      You do know that Outlook can run in WINE, right? And I have no problems with flash on my systems. This goes back to my point above... You may want to look at what you are doing with codecs.

      Boxee is a nice concept, but they're concentrating too much on cool and not enough on getting things to work at a consumer level.

      Agreed...

    2. Re:Netflix by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      moonlight is a linux implementation of silverlight. It has at least some support from microsoft.

    3. Re:Netflix by no_such_user · · Score: 1

      Tivos runs Linux. Tivos support Netflix. Therefore, BoxeeBox might just be able to run Netflix.

      It's still ugly, though. Maybe someone will offer a 3rd party case for it.

    4. Re:Netflix by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Two options, either Moonlight improves to the state where it can work with the Netflix service, or D-Link goes to Netflix and says 'we have n units installed and connected to TVs, we think this is a market that could make you money and we'd like to work with you to get it supported'. The place I rent DVDs from streams using Flash, so it already works with Linux and OS X. They originally trialled some MS solution, but a lot of people complained (it turns out that the people who ditch their TV and pay a monthly subscription to rent DVDs is a group with a large overlap with people who don't use Windows). If Netflix is losing potential customers by using Silverlight then they may well switch to Flash or something open. If they're going to deploy a second system to support non-Windows users, and this also works on Windows, there's no real reason for them to keep maintaining the Windows-only one.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:Netflix by domatic · · Score: 1

      I suspect MS will just pay Netflix the difference. They'll do it under the table if need be.

    6. Re:Netflix by CrankyFool · · Score: 1

      The technology Netflix uses for streaming movies on your computer (and by that, I mean "your x86 box that runs Mac OS or a modern version of Windows," unfortunately) is, in fact, Silverlight.

      But Netflix is, and has been, pushing hard for more device adoption of streaming -- at this point, you can stream Netflix on Roku boxes, Samsung and LG players, some Sony TVs, PS3s, XBoxes, etc. It's not the case -- and you should not assume -- all these systems are using Silverlight to do aforementioned streaming.

      Someone below mentions the possibility of D-Link coming to Netflix and saying "we have X boxes, we'd like to have some help." I suspect they'd find a warm reception.

    7. Re:Netflix by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      moonlight is a linux implementation of silverlight. It has at least some support from microsoft.

      But it has none of the MS DRM, so it will not do any secure Silverlight stuff, like NetFlix.

    8. Re:Netflix by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Flash is just bad on all operating systems, not just linux. It has the advantage of doing something on a lot of different machines, but it's a braindead least-common-denominator to do it. Flash video is just bog standard other kinds of video, but because it's encapsulated in flash, it has to be decoded in flash, which only uses the CPU. Why the heck should Hulu, which isn't even SD in resolution, require "2.0 ghz Core Duo" as a minimum when better-resolution video plays just fine on an iPod.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    9. Re:Netflix by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      That could be part of the "eventual" aspect. It may be implemented in moonlight at some point.

    10. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect MS will just pay Netflix the difference. They'll do it under the table if need be.

      I suspect they'll have to pay a lot for the Netflix crew to give up on implementing a solution that will stream to iPhones.

    11. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the moonlight project takes care of the silverlight side of things, but it appears that the netflix viewer attempts to load an activeX control, that seems to handle the drm for wmv encoding. that is where every linux user I've talked to about it runs into trouble. it sucks. if I don't get it fixed soon, she'll make me buy a copy of windows....

    12. Re:Netflix by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      My main multimedia machine runs Linux and is connected to a 47" TV via HDMI. I have no problem running any program and playing back any sort of multimedia. Now, I fix computers for a living and I know there are all levels of comfort when it comes to what people expect. My thoughts here are just that, that it is the end-user perspective on what you think should or should not work. We work pretty hard in the Linux community to satisfy people's demands and things get fixed pretty quick.

      What we ask more than anything in the Linux community is to have you stop thinking that Linux is a clone of Windows. Not only is it not, but we don't want it that way, for several reasons; one of which is that we don't want predicate our advances upon whether Microsoft has implemented them beforehand.

      Boxee runs fine on Linux and though I do have Netflix I do not have the desire to try to get it to run under Linux (after my initial attempt), as silverlight is pretty much a Microsoft technology that really can't compete with Flash. I'm amazed that Netflix went with them and that they are still using it. 80% of all streamed multimedia is done with flash. Those are hard fast numbers. silverlight is just Microsoft attempting to get back at Adobe due to Adobe punching them out of the market on PDF.

      One has to wonder just how many other services use silverlight or how many other products are based on it. On top of that one has to wonder just how many people use Netflix streaming. Even if it is 2 million or even 5 million that's nothing compared to how many that don't use it. That makes it essentially a moot point as it isn't significant enough to worry about. What incorporating Netflix into Boxee does is to give it some sense of legitimacy--that is for the product itself. If it is seen to be partnering with legitimate companies it seemingly is perceived as a legitimate product--for the consumer as well as for their partners (e.g., D-Link).

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
  13. Blu-Ray: not ready yet by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't buy Blu-Ray until the DRM gets more fully defeated. When Blu-Ray becomes ready, there will be some BD library that developers will be able to use to read the discs, and people will be able to implement players without getting licenses that specify that the product is required to suck (which is why there currently aren't any good players), and then good players (all-in-one boxes, MythTV, etc) will finally appear on the market.

    Until then, if you want high-definition movies, just let pirates deal with the hassles of Blu-Ray's flakiness, and you can download them with bittorrent. You'll end up with movies that just work, including with your own all-in-one box.

    Save your money until Blu-Ray becomes a serious consumer-friendly product. Right now, it's a problem-plagued scam for suckers only.

    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    1. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Don't buy blu-ray at all. It's a transition format. Just enough to showcase the higher resolution screens we were trying to push (to get the digital terrestrial broadcast rollout going), but the rough edges are very visible. For instance, high-contrast regions frequently show visible fringing, and low contrast regions show blockiness on the disks I've tried so far.

      Go ahead and rent, but blu-ray isn't going to be long-term for a number of reasons. In terms of picture quality, it's not like VHS where there were features that could make a huge difference (quad head, etc.). Any player should be as good as another since the outputs are all digital. But it's dumb to put your money into the media itself for the reasons we've both mentioned.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by Killer+Orca · · Score: 1

      Do you have any reasons other than your own to believe this, or is BluRay technologically inferior to the next-gen displays?

    3. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      No, just my own experience. I suppose it could just be that the people responsible for the tailoring the compression aren't being as thorough as they could be: it might take six times as long to properly look over the details, time they're just not given. Possibly they're using tiny monitors with bad eyes, or worse, monitors whose resolution is less than the target resolution in scaling mode.

      I really don't have a good explanation for why something with six times the data capacity as DVD, and a target output of six times the pixels, has more noticeable artifacts. Since compression is being used, quality should improve faster than storage space.

      Just a observation that, so far, it's not as great as it could be.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    4. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by mr_lizard13 · · Score: 1

      which is why there currently aren't any good players)

      I hear your point about DRM etc, but can I ask why you don't think there are any good BD players on the market at the moment?

      I use the Sony DBP-360 and it's great. I'm just curious how it could be made better because DRM becomes more defeated.

      --
      "We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
    5. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by dotgain · · Score: 1

      In terms of picture quality, it's not like VHS where there were features that could make a huge difference (quad head, etc.).

      This was always a misgiving, actually. Only two playback heads are required (one for the even field, one for the odd) for realtime playback, and adding extra heads won't improve anything. Extra heads only help when shuttling or in still-mode. Granted, they help a lot there, but they're not not used at all during playback.

    6. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by Sancho · · Score: 1

      I'm glad I wasn't the only one confused by that statement. My guess is that he means software players. I've never cared for PowerDVD or WinDVD, though in all fairness, I haven't used them in ages. The lack of variety does, in general, reduce the incentive to make your player really good.

      There's no playback on Linux or Mac, whatsoever.

    7. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by adolf · · Score: 1

      In my experience, it depends a lot on the material.

      I've got a reasonably well-calibrated 52" Samsung 1080p LCD, which I sit about 9 feet from.

      The biggest problem I've noticed with Blu-Ray is that some (mostly older) releases are badly transferred, as if someone simply took some 480p DVD video and scaled it up. The picture is too soft.

      Usually, though, things look (and sound!) rather nice. And I consider myself quite a picky bastard when it comes to encoding errors.

      Perhaps your display is just set up poorly, in such a way as to accentuate Blu-Ray's artifacts? (Hint: The sharpness control for digital sources should always be rather a lot closer to 0, than any positive integer.)

    8. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      I use the Sony DBP-360 and it's great. I'm just curious how it could be made better because DRM becomes more defeated.

      Select some content that shows off the beautiful capabilities of the player in question, in whatever medium is most convenient for the player (e.g. a Blu-Ray disc). Hook up the player to a high resolution monitor without HDCP (e.g. use your SVGA or DVI input, or put some middle man on an HDMI cable), and play the aforementioned medium.

      Under these circumstances, mplayer will display a high definition movie file in high definition. What does a Sony DBP-360 do with a Blu-Ray disc under such circumstances?

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    9. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Hah. Well there you go. Damn it's easy to get sucked into these things.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    10. Re:Blu-Ray: not ready yet by mr_lizard13 · · Score: 1

      Never tried that, but I'm guessing it won't play? (Or won't play in HD?)

      But I've not come across a TV in this country that isn't HDCP compliant. Not one that's been sold in the past few years anyway.

      And why would I use SVGA or DVI, when every TV on sale has at least 2/3 HDMI ports, and the Blu-ray player has an HDMI port?

      --
      "We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
  14. Fugly by goto11 · · Score: 1

    Agree. Could never pass the WAF (wife acceptance factor). WTF?
    And while I'm at it, could Apple please make a Mac Mini, AppleTV, whatever, that was the proper width for my stereo system? Or somebody make me a box I can put my Mac Mini into, and add a 3.5" SATA HD.... but I digress...

    And the same fugliness applies to my friggin' silver, half-width cable box (black, please). This crap has got to go. Make it matte black and 17-1/8" (435mm) wide or it will look hideous on my AV rack. It's not rocket science.

    --
    Why don't you just make 10 louder and make 10 be the top number...and make that a little louder?
    1. Re:Fugly by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Or somebody make me a box I can put my Mac Mini into, and add a 3.5" SATA HD.... but I digress...

      It's not exactly what you're asking for, but there are plenty of (google "mac mini external hard drive") hard drives that are basically the same size as the mini.

  15. They called it OpenBoxeeBox... by Interoperable · · Score: 1

    Seriously?

    --
    So if this is the future...where's my jet pack?
  16. Re:Netflix on linux by Zinho · · Score: 1

    You've got it the wrong way around - once D-Link contrives a Linux solution for Netflix streaming, then we'll be able to stream Netflix to any Linux platform we like.

    Yes, it's not possible now, but the Netflix streaming overlords might be more persuaded by a potential corporate partner than they are by the unwashed masses. I wish D-Link the best of luck in this effort!

    --
    "Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
  17. Suicide. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suicide... that's that the GP meant.

    I have to use Notes at work as well, and I have experienced what you described (and worse). I believe the GP's approach is pithy and more efficient.

  18. Re:Netflix on linux by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

    You've got it the wrong way around - once D-Link contrives a Linux solution for Netflix streaming, then we'll be able to stream Netflix to any Linux platform we like.

    Yes, it's not possible now, but the Netflix streaming overlords might be more persuaded by a potential corporate partner than they are by the unwashed masses. I wish D-Link the best of luck in this effort!

    Roku and Tivo both have Netflix on Linux. But it is not open source, so we still do not have it...

  19. This is brilliant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i watch hd encodes on both linux and windows same experiance but i have found vdpau in linux a benifit see watching a hd movie dont have to use your processor with vdpau linux cuda windows, it can use your video card and it plays hd's really well that way and your cpu usage at 0% and the reasoning why mplayer took out vdpau compatibility beats the hell out of me, stupid on there part. now i have to use vlc to use vdpau under linux and vlc has went a very long ways since the last time i used it. but vdpau is for nvidia 8 series or higher cards to tell you a truth i was expecting a drag or something running a hd encode 1080 x264 working that way, but played very smooth, video quality very good to. I dont know what a boxee is like ive never used one, but the thing is neat ive been wanting to do all of that on my tv, without the need of my pc and boxee is my answer and it beeing wifi is neat to i can move my files from my pc to boxee through wifi, im gonna buy one ive been wanting something like this for along time, but my curiosity theres something the linux one does that they wont reveal till the tech show, i cant wait to see im very curious, I love new technology and what it says it offers so far ill proudly spend 200 and not think twice about it and not regret it, and size doesnt matter for a brilliant idea. The netbook has proved that handsdown. Theres people who cant imagine a day without there netbook now even though they own a laptop, who would of thought something so small would be such a sucess, it fooled me, and again i dont cut nothing till i try it for myself and i love it. Netbooks are awesome. So beeing small dosnt matter for this boxee, its for what it does is unique and it will sell itself for that. btw i dont care about netflix that can be sent to your tv allready without a computer thats been done, but the linux boxee having netflix is just a plus nothing unique.

    1. Re:This is brilliant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /head explodes

  20. This IS D-Link we're talking about. by Chas · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Marketing? Yeah right. The REAL issue will be SUPPORT. Having had to deal with D-Link support (both consumer and professional), I'd much rather be slowly eviscerated with a knitting needle.

    And if it's something that can't be reduced to a cookie-cutter firmware setting with no options available, D-Link will fuck it up.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:This IS D-Link we're talking about. by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

      I'll second that - had a cheap 30 dollar switch die within a few weeks - they asked for me to send in the CD and the rubber feet , if not they'd charge me an additional $12 for the CD and $2 for the rubber feet ....

  21. Popcorn Hour by g8oz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Popcorn Hour still looks better

    1. Re:Popcorn Hour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just gotta say I absolutely love my Popcorn Hour (C-200). As I don't watch cable or satellite I have no idea about those aspects of the different devices, but with a 1TB hard drive inside and a bit of time ripping my ~2 yr old son isn't a danger to the disks...

  22. XMBC on PS3 : Non trivial by DrYak · · Score: 1

    I'm waiting for someone to get XBMC going on a PS3.

    But don't hold your breath. It's technically possible, but it's going to be a lot difficult.

    You see the PS3 isn't closed to homebrew development. Quite the countrary. You can even install Linux on it and develop whatever you want.
    But there's a restriction, when running homebrew software, the hypervisor doesn't give access to the GPU.
    You can program all the scientific number-crunching application you want, you have full access to the CELL SPU units for some crazy parallel computing. But no 3D GFX only limited to some basic 2D stuff (This is supposedly done that way by Sony, so evil pirate couldn't get to run pirated games using the homebrew mode).

    So although it's greate for a lot of stuff, a PS3 can't get graphically intense homebrew software out-of-the-box.
    And saddly, XBMC *is* a graphically intense application (requires hardware support to accelerate lots of the decoding steps).

    Also, depending on where you live, the decription of blue ray's DRM might break you local stupid DMCA-like law.
    I doubt that the PS3 Blueray official player key will be available to Homebrew developers (Sony fearing that this might make the PS3 a convenient Blue-ray ripping machine), and thus I suspect that using collections of extracted keys like BackupHD will be necessary.
    Which should be legal in most jurisdiction which respect the fair-use exception, but not all.

    So, we'll have to wait until Linux PS3 gets an OpenGL implementation which is accelerated on the CELL SPUs instead of the (restricted) GPU. Work is currently done in Gallium3D (the Next-Gen Mesa3D). Once this is finished, you'll have all the necessary acceleration, only running as custom software on the SPUs instead of shaders on the GPU.
    Then it'll be only a matter of packaging a PS3 Linux with Gallium3D and XBMC.
    (And maybe other software using OpenGL and VA API or VDPAU. As long as their requirement stay within what is achievable on a Cell's streaming units).

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:XMBC on PS3 : Non trivial by Sancho · · Score: 1

      The PS3 used to be able to rip Bluray DVDs merely by using dd. I assume that Sony put a stop to that, however.

  23. Looks stupid by Eil · · Score: 1

    Take a look at the pics of that device. No, really: RTFA. That is one of the dumbest designs for consumer electronics gear I've ever seen. I looks like someone took a cube and hacked off about half of it at a completely random angle, and then laid it awkwardly on its cut side. I don't care what kind of multimedia experience this thing offers, I would not buy this thing simply for its stupid looks.

    I wouldn't be caught dead with this thing in my living room and that's saying a lot since my entertainment center is a bunch of equipment stacked up on a fish tank stand.

  24. No surprise - XBMC is using DirectX on win32 now by itslifejimbutnotaswe · · Score: 1

    Given that the mother project (XBMC) also switched to DirectX on win32 this is no surprise. It makes sense too - on Windows, you get much easier hardware acceleration of videos if you're using DirectX (i.e. you can get a DirectX surface out easier) You also tend to get better hardware support. It appears the Boxee gues worked with the XBMC team on this - kudos. Let's hope the boxee box is open enough to get XBMC on there.

  25. PS3 and AACS by DrYak · · Score: 1

    I might have failed to express myself correctly :
    I wasn't speaking about obtaining the files from a Blueray. That's also easy to do on PC.

    I was speaking about the decryption of Bluerays' DRM (AACS encryption and BD+) with which the content of said files is encrypted.
    As the PS3 plays Bluerays, it must have valid device keys into its firmware (or into some dedicated TPM-like chip).
    (Just like, on PC, WinDVD and PowerDVD have similar keys).

    Or do you mean that the way the PS3 is build, the Blueray drive can decrypt the AACS from files on-the-fly ?!?

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:PS3 and AACS by Sancho · · Score: 1

      Sorry, my mistake then!

      You're right, Sony would almost certainly not want to allow that.