I used XMLTV for a year and finally gave up on it. It constantly needs to be updated to continue to pull the listings correctly. I hate having to keep up with XMLTV just so that my listings are correct. That is the why I think a BeyondTV based solution is better for an HTPC. They(I) pay for their guide data (price included with one-time software purchase) and it is more accurate and vastly more reliable than XMLTV based solutions like Myth. (might be different outside the US) Although Digiguide was pretty awesome till they pulled out of the US market.
Give me Myth when I can rely on the TV listings. Until then it's not worth much.
The only magazine that I read on a regular basis is Network World. It's probably one of the most informative telecommunication magazines out there. Better, yet I don't have to pay a dime for it.
This recommendation is really a good rule of thumb, and more people than "nontechie grandmothers" should follow it. Recording to a cpu intensive compression scheme like DivX or WMV does not work well for real-time compression that showshifting/pausing live TV requires. You end up with a bunch of Dropped frames. Unless you are compressing below 640x480.
However, in scheduled recordings that you want to record at resolutions in upwards of 640x480 you can and should record real-time in a less CPU intensive codec like MJPEG, than schedule your PC to recompress to a more intensive compression scheme sometime when you are not using your PC. Works well.
But I guess as hardware gets faster and faster that that statement will get much more dated.
None of this software holds a candle to Showshifter. Easily the best PVR software for windows. You can do any of the options talked about in the article and you're not locked into any single codec like MPEG-2 or any proprietary remote control. One of the problems mentioned was the quick use of hard drive space which can easily happen when using MPEG-2. With showshifter you control the codec used. DivX or WMV8 sure do a better job at keeping the file sizes down than MPG. I've used this software for over a year and am very happy. If you plan on trying to use your PC/TV as a PVR you should take the time to evaluate Showshifter, just like the reporter should have. I think he might have had a better experience.
Spokeswoman Sarah Eder says it's considering charging customers based on the number of bits and bytes they send over the network.
They are going to charge us for bits _AND_ bytes! That's why they want to do this. They are going to make a killing charging us twice for our traffic! Bastards!
No one seems to be talking about reception. I work in the middle of nowhere and getting decent radio on the drive is tough. I can listen to cd's but sometimes news is what I want to hear, and it's tough to listen to crappy quality AM. High quality radio with a good reception area and good selection and I'm sold. I hope this turns out to be good.
If we look at this without the means of distibution provided by the internet, it really becomes a very simple question.
Why did some guy build himself a tool rack, a shed, a white picket fence? The answer is simple, because it adds value to his house, garage, whatever. Now give this same person the ability to at the touch of a button create a duplicate item for his brother, neighbor, friend, or coworker, and ask him whether or not he would share. I'd say a very large majority would share. That's open source. Not so difficult to understand really.
Slashdot Mirror
I used XMLTV for a year and finally gave up on it. It constantly needs to be updated to continue to pull the listings correctly. I hate having to keep up with XMLTV just so that my listings are correct. That is the why I think a BeyondTV based solution is better for an HTPC. They(I) pay for their guide data (price included with one-time software purchase) and it is more accurate and vastly more reliable than XMLTV based solutions like Myth. (might be different outside the US) Although Digiguide was pretty awesome till they pulled out of the US market.
Give me Myth when I can rely on the TV listings. Until then it's not worth much.
The only magazine that I read on a regular basis is Network World. It's probably one of the most informative telecommunication magazines out there. Better, yet I don't have to pay a dime for it.
This recommendation is really a good rule of thumb, and more people than "nontechie grandmothers" should follow it. Recording to a cpu intensive compression scheme like DivX or WMV does not work well for real-time compression that showshifting/pausing live TV requires. You end up with a bunch of Dropped frames. Unless you are compressing below 640x480.
However, in scheduled recordings that you want to record at resolutions in upwards of 640x480 you can and should record real-time in a less CPU intensive codec like MJPEG, than schedule your PC to recompress to a more intensive compression scheme sometime when you are not using your PC. Works well.
But I guess as hardware gets faster and faster that that statement will get much more dated.
-Mike
None of this software holds a candle to Showshifter. Easily the best PVR software for windows. You can do any of the options talked about in the article and you're not locked into any single codec like MPEG-2 or any proprietary remote control. One of the problems mentioned was the quick use of hard drive space which can easily happen when using MPEG-2. With showshifter you control the codec used. DivX or WMV8 sure do a better job at keeping the file sizes down than MPG. I've used this software for over a year and am very happy. If you plan on trying to use your PC/TV as a PVR you should take the time to evaluate Showshifter, just like the reporter should have. I think he might have had a better experience.
-Mike
-Milo
No one seems to be talking about reception. I work in the middle of nowhere and getting decent radio on the drive is tough. I can listen to cd's but sometimes news is what I want to hear, and it's tough to listen to crappy quality AM. High quality radio with a good reception area and good selection and I'm sold. I hope this turns out to be good.
If we look at this without the means of distibution provided by the internet, it really becomes a very simple question.
Why did some guy build himself a tool rack, a shed, a white picket fence? The answer is simple, because it adds value to his house, garage, whatever. Now give this same person the ability to at the touch of a button create a duplicate item for his brother, neighbor, friend, or coworker, and ask him whether or not he would share. I'd say a very large majority would share. That's open source. Not so difficult to understand really.
-milo