What PVR are you using?

Fortunately, with the support available at the forums at www.toppy.org.uk
(including the individuals there offering excellent and cheap replacement of
PSU capacitors which would otherwise make most Topfields land-fill after
four or five years), I won't have to move to anything else - unless I get an
irresistible desire to watch in HD.

André Coutanche

-----


I have no wish to get HD with DOG **** so hence my Toppy will stay for the
foreseeable.

Jerry Brown wrote:
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 11:02:40 +0100, "Tim Downie"
wrote:

AnthonyL wrote:
(Apologies for including this in digital-tv as well but .pvr seems a
bit dead.)

A couple of years ago it seemed that Humax and Topfield were
generally the top choices for PVR.

Now it seems that there are numerous options.

So what did you opt for and how do you find it?

Thomson TiVo. Best one available 10 years ago and still going
strong. ;-)

What are you planning on replacing it with when the service shuts down
in a couple of months? I'm having a hard time finding something to
replace mine.

I'll probably keep it but with a new hard drive so that it can access the
new program guide (see http://www.tivocentral.co.uk/unofficialtivoguide.php
for more details and the TiVo community forum) but it's bound to get
relegated as a second line machine because of it's lack of HD recording.

Toying with the idea of building a Media PC with Windows 7 but it doesn't
seem to be a cheap option.

Tim

On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:02:27 +0100, "Tim Downie"
wrote:

Jerry Brown wrote:
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 11:02:40 +0100, "Tim Downie"
wrote:

AnthonyL wrote:
(Apologies for including this in digital-tv as well but .pvr seems a
bit dead.)

A couple of years ago it seemed that Humax and Topfield were
generally the top choices for PVR.

Now it seems that there are numerous options.

So what did you opt for and how do you find it?

Thomson TiVo. Best one available 10 years ago and still going
strong. ;-)

What are you planning on replacing it with when the service shuts down
in a couple of months? I'm having a hard time finding something to
replace mine.

I'll probably keep it but with a new hard drive so that it can access the
new program guide (see http://www.tivocentral.co.uk/unofficialtivoguide.php
for more details and the TiVo community forum) but it's bound to get
relegated as a second line machine because of it's lack of HD recording.

Toying with the idea of building a Media PC with Windows 7 but it doesn't
seem to be a cheap option.

Tim

Excellent news. Thanks Tim.

Jerry Brown
--
A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

http://www.jwbrown.co.uk

On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:02:27 +0100, "Tim Downie"
wrote:

Toying with the idea of building a Media PC with Windows 7 but it doesn't
seem to be a cheap option.

I wouldn't bother. I have done, and don't find it satisfactory.

The biggest issue is that I can't get the screen presentation right.
I've tried both ATI and nVidia cards connected to my TV by HDMI.
Although both will happily tell me that they're outputting 1080p,
there's a significant black margin around the image on the TV. Of
course, that might be an issue with the TV, but I don't see it with
HDMI signals from other sources.

I've found other issues with it, too, not least the fact that the
computer comes out of sleep mode for no good reason. (This might be a
software issue which could be resolved by running, say, Linux instead
of Windows.)

Be aware that if you want to play Blu-ray video discs on a PC, you'll
need additional software for the purpose. (The cheapest I found was
from Roxio, at about GBP35. I dunno how good it is.) Windows Media
Center doesn't incorporate the necessary codec. And, as far as I know,
there is no Linux software that does.

The boot process became a lot longer after I loaded the TV tuner card
drivers. Also, the BIOS POST info seems not to be output through HDMI
- the screen's black until the Windows desktop appears. If I want to
see that, I have to hook up an analogue PC monitor cable.

Even buying quiet components, you might find the fan noise obtrusive
by comparison with purpose-built kit.

Also, as you noted, it's not a cheap option.

End result:
1. I think that purpose-made video equipment (PVRs, DVD recorders
etc) are better for the job.
2. What was built as a media centre PC will only ever get used as
a general purpose computer - and probably running Linux rather than
Windows. (I knew that I might reach this point before I started my
experiment. But it's not the end of the world for me, since I have use
for a new general purpose box.)

Peter.

On Wednesday, April 6th, 2011 at 17:13:26h +0100, Peter remarked:

And, as far as I know, there is no Linux software that does.

2011-01-30, Sunday :: MPlayer 1.0rc4 released -- unencrypted Blu-ray support.

At the present time, playing of encrypted BluRay discs requires use
of DumpHD to decrypt and dumping the data to disk first in order
to play the video --

https://help.ubuntu.COM/community/RestrictedFormats/BluRayAndHDDVD

On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:01:18 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Wednesday, April 6th, 2011 at 17:13:26h +0100, Peter remarked:

And, as far as I know, there is no Linux software that does.

2011-01-30, Sunday :: MPlayer 1.0rc4 released -- unencrypted Blu-ray support.

At the present time, playing of encrypted BluRay discs requires use
of DumpHD to decrypt and dumping the data to disk first in order
to play the video --

https://help.ubuntu.COM/community/RestrictedFormats/BluRayAndHDDVD

OK, I sit corrected to the extent that it apparently *can* be done
under Linux. Thanks for the correction. But it doesn't seem to be the
simplest of operations. I certainly wouldn't want to go to the effort
of ripping a disc as a prelude to playing it. I haven't properly read
the article to which you referred - I've only skimmed it - but that
appears to be the general idea.

Anyway, this one point doesn't seem to undermine the overall thrust of
my argument. I remain of the view that a media PC isn't worth the
money/time/effort.

Peter.

On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 19:40:06 +0100, Peter
wrote:

On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:01:18 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Wednesday, April 6th, 2011 at 17:13:26h +0100, Peter remarked:

And, as far as I know, there is no Linux software that does.

2011-01-30, Sunday :: MPlayer 1.0rc4 released -- unencrypted Blu-ray support.

At the present time, playing of encrypted BluRay discs requires use
of DumpHD to decrypt and dumping the data to disk first in order
to play the video --

https://help.ubuntu.COM/community/RestrictedFormats/BluRayAndHDDVD

OK, I sit corrected to the extent that it apparently *can* be done
under Linux. Thanks for the correction. But it doesn't seem to be the
simplest of operations. I certainly wouldn't want to go to the effort
of ripping a disc as a prelude to playing it. I haven't properly read
the article to which you referred - I've only skimmed it - but that
appears to be the general idea.

Anyway, this one point doesn't seem to undermine the overall thrust of
my argument. I remain of the view that a media PC isn't worth the
money/time/effort.

YMMV. I would have built a media PC if SWMBO was not in a hurry to
get a PVR. You can make them almost silent and it's not that
difficult. My main PC is virtually silent and you can only hear the
HDs in a quiet room. I could do something about that but I have run
out of round tuits.

What partcularly attracts me to a media PC, apart from the fact that
you can put in any tuner card you wish and choose the UI is that you
can get a DVD player where you can skip the locked parts of the film
(i.e. all the logos, trails and legal threats).
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

In article , Peter wrote:
Anyway, this one point doesn't seem to undermine the overall thrust of
my argument. I remain of the view that a media PC isn't worth the
money/time/effort.

And of course you are entitled to your view because it is yours, but I
hope you can accept that others are valid, and even your own may change
with circumstances. What is tricky with today's technology will become
commonplace with tomorrow's if enough people want it, and with the
proliferation of incompatible equipment and standards and annoying
commercially motivated restrictions, one device that can play anything
will become an increasingly attractive thing to have. An internet
connected PC with an HDMI output comes pretty close to that ideal
already, and may one day reach it. VLC, for example, seems to be able to
play just about any audio or video file, as well as DVDs and CDs, and is
available for both Windows and Linux. There are even free programs for
both systems that will play radio and television broadcast channels, and
of course any of the main web browsers can show "video-on-demand" in the
form of iPlayer and the other broadcasters' equivalents, and Youtube,
and TED, and Skype, and video clips from your digital camera, etc, etc,
all free of charge. I can't think of any other single box that can do
all of this.

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 09:17:19 +0100, Mark wrote:

My main PC is virtually silent and you can only hear the HDs in a quiet
room. I could do something about that but I have run out of round
tuits.

You should try buying some SSDs instead.

If one is prepared to pay a premium for case and small form
factor mainboard, then one should take a look at Shuttle
for building an HTPC

http://www.shuttle.EU/

On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 10:06:18 +0100, Roderick Stewart
wrote:

In article , Peter wrote:
Anyway, this one point doesn't seem to undermine the overall thrust of
my argument. I remain of the view that a media PC isn't worth the
money/time/effort.

And of course you are entitled to your view because it is yours, but I
hope you can accept that others are valid, and even your own may change
with circumstances.

Certainly. Of course that's true. I didn't intend to suggest
otherwise.

What is tricky with today's technology will become
commonplace with tomorrow's if enough people want it, and with the
proliferation of incompatible equipment and standards and annoying
commercially motivated restrictions, one device that can play anything
will become an increasingly attractive thing to have.

In principle, I agree. That was why I tried the media PC experiment in
the first place. All I said was that I didn't find the end result
satisfactory for me, and I explained why. Essentially, I don't think
that the technology is yet far enough advanced for me to find it a
viable proposition. It might become one in the future. I hope it does.

(An aside:Much the same is true of self-service checkouts in
supermarkets. In principle, I think that they're a great idea. In
practice, though, I find any attempt to use them a hugely frustrating
experience. I'd still rather queue and pay a real person. I really
hope that they can improve the things to the point at which I don't
want to shout at them. Incidentally, I think that the real problem
there lies in the software, not the hardware.)

Maybe I just expect more of equipment than others do?

Peter.