The Need for a Beyond TV Media Extender

[Kevin]

Let me start by saying that I am a full fledged Snapstream fan. Been a proud supporter since I started my HTPC venture 3 years ago. I've got the full rig so far...BTV, BM, and 3 x BTV Links, with 4 Hauppague tuners in all.

But in my struggle to truly make my media accessbile to me at anytime, anywhere, and at any place, Snapstream thus far has dropped the ball in one key area; The Media Extender. Yes I know that BTV Link was develeped for this reason. And it's great if you have a wireless laptop and want to watch some shows in your backyard. But let's face it. I'll be the first to tell you that I love my tech toys, but to place a PC next to every TV I own just to "extend" the Beyond experience that my family knows and loves....that's stretching it. I've been tempted many times to sway the MS way...due to their industry setting pressures that have 3rd party companies jumping to get onto the Media Extender bandwagon. So what does Snapstream have in plan for this. Surrely they must see this loopwhole in their business plan and want to fully address it. BTV Link as cool as it is, is honestly not the answer. And I think everyone who reads this would agree. What we need is a fanless, noiseless...extender type device that similiar to MCE's Media Extender, can extend the wonderous SS experience to other TVs in the house. What is required to make this work. I sometimes wish I worked for a Networking company like D-Link or Linksys so that I could approach Snapstream to initiate a project. Is something already in the works like this? I mean, if Microsoft can do it, I'm confident that Snapstream can. This I believe will truly put SS over the top. It already hands down kicks MCE feature for feature. But convenience is important too, and with XBOX extenders, MCE Extenders both leaning in MS's favour.

With all that being said...I am resorted to buying yet another PC (can't wait to explain this to the wife) for my master bedroom, just so I can extend my beautiful SS experience to my TV there. I have to go through pain staking measures to ensure that the case..fan...etc...are whisper quiet...not to mention to foot a bill of close to $650 CDN. The point here is that I can't wait to fulfill that vision. A SS Media Extender $1 less than what I am going to have to put out for this new PC would get me to switch in a heartbeat. Of course that' not to say I would like to see it retail for that much...but lets say a $299 CDN pricepoint would be feasible. I don't know. I guess I'm just ranting hear...but I sincerely think that SS needs to address this moving forward, because practically speaking the way it is now...it just doesn't make sense.

And that's just my 2 cents as a dedicated and loyal SS Evangelist. Replies welcome and encouraged :)

[optikhog]

Man, I really can't support this post enough. I would *LOVE* an extender which contained the features of BM and BTV. Or just BTV!

[queonda]

I 3rd it! :dude:

[foltz61]

Me also. There should be a poll for this.

[bshinkle]

I 4th it!

[boomerang]

Me too. Running a non-Microsoft OS, for security and stability reasons.

[cncb]

Yes, please.

[btvfreak]

I wouldn't run off to MCE and the Microsoft media extenders. They are not very good right now. Maybe the 360 will change this. It would be interesting to hear Snapstream's response to this. Maybe in their blog Q&A?

My feeling is that they are stretched thin trying to march to their current BTV4 and beyond roadmap. Although it would be interesting to see if they could find someone to partner with on this.

[queonda]

Maybe we need to ask in the Q&A forum and hope it get's answered in the next Q&A POST.

[boomerang]

What they need is to *not* make the extender box themselves. After all, they barely managed to make a remote control and did no or very little real market research before launching that.

What they need to do is *enable* the extender market.

*Licence* a *client* to OEMs and leave it at that. Let OEM's make the hardware, remotes, etc and integrate in the Snapstream client. Snapstream has no real expertise in hardware design, Firefly notwithstanding - it's a long way from an RF-only remote that barely reaches from the TV to the sofa half the time to a set top box that has to be reliable on the network (zero administration -none- plug and forget) and have a high quality picture on a big HD set.

But lets be realistic here - first they have to make a *non*-Microsoft client. No set top maker in their right mind would use Microsoft software. The license fees alone would keep costs prohibitive. Only one of the reasons that Linux is the market leader in the set-top-box market.

Which is one reason why I've been begging Snapstream to make a Linux version.

[optikhog]

Me also. There should be a poll for this.

As I recall, it was on the list of things polled by Snapstream itself in an email sent out not long ago...

[optikhog]

I've not seen the Media Center extender boxes in action - are they actually running some version of Windows on them?

[dequire]

While it's not an 'official' SS product, wouldn't the Hauppage Media MVP be condsidered a media extender? OK, not for BM, but at least for BTV?

[optikhog]

Well, since a bunch of the functions are not implemented and it can apparently no longer see recordings in-process, then I would vote "no". I had 2, but have given up on them since the release of 3.7.4.

Also, there appears to have been no development work in a long time on the interface.

[Schro]

Having an extender box would certainly be a nice thing, however, I was able to build a link client for under $300 that is whisper quiet-

Shuttle SN41G
800mhz Athlon
256mb RAM
80GB HDD
External DVD-ROM

Bill of materials, including my Link license was about $250.

[MannyTC]

Well, since a bunch of the functions are not implemented and it can apparently no longer see recordings in-process, then I would vote "no". I had 2, but have given up on them since the release of 3.7.4.

Also, there appears to have been no development work in a long time on the interface.

optikhog,

This is the 2nd or 3rd post I have seen referencing the Media MVP not being able to play in-process recordings. I am confused about this because I have been using the MVP since it first came out and am still happily using it with 3.7.4 and have *never* lost the ability to play in-process recordings. Last time I saw that problem referenced in a post I was at that very moment watching Stargate SG-1 on the MVP while it was recording.

[optikhog]

Having an extender box would certainly be a nice thing, however, I was able to build a link client for under $300 that is whisper quiet-

Shuttle SN41G
800mhz Athlon
256mb RAM
80GB HDD
External DVD-ROM

Bill of materials, including my Link license was about $250.

Yah, but will it be able to keep up with HDTV when 4.x comes out? I'm running cheap link systems as well but I doubt they'll expand well into the future...

[optikhog]

This is the 2nd or 3rd post I have seen referencing the Media MVP not being able to play in-process recordings. I am confused about this because I have been using the MVP since it first came out and am still happily using it with 3.7.4 and have *never* lost the ability to play in-process recordings. Last time I saw that problem referenced in a post I was at that very moment watching Stargate SG-1 on the MVP while it was recording.

Wow, then your system is doing something cool which mine could not - the machine running the MVP software for me could see the hidden file as it was being written (I could see it via Explorer), but I could not get my MVP to view the file at all until the recording was complete. If it makes any difference, my MVP services machine was separate from my BTV machine - is yours local to the BTV machine itself?

Regardless, the features we now enjoy via a BTV Link pc are well beyond those of the MVP - my WAF is through the roof since I made the switch!

[dequire]

Well, since a bunch of the functions are not implemented and it can apparently no longer see recordings in-process, then I would vote "no". I had 2, but have given up on them since the release of 3.7.4.

Also, there appears to have been no development work in a long time on the interface.

I just realized that the live TV function no longer works. I updated the MVP thread with a thought that perhaps the new BTV V4 may actually provide an opportunity to improve live TV through the media MVP.

I've also noticed the declining activity around this project.

[dequire]

Wow, then your system is doing something cool which mine could not - the machine running the MVP software for me could see the hidden file as it was being written (I could see it via Explorer), but I could not get my MVP to view the file at all until the recording was complete. If it makes any difference, my MVP services machine was separate from my BTV machine - is yours local to the BTV machine itself?

Regardless, the features we now enjoy via a BTV Link pc are well beyond those of the MVP - my WAF is through the roof since I made the switch!

If my understanding is correct, there is a difference in how the Media MVP skin works when viewing a recording in progress vs. viewing the live TV buffer file - hence the problems post BTV 3.5.

[optikhog]

I've also noticed the declining activity around this project.

...which, unfortunately, leads us back to the need for a Beyond TV Media Extender. The last update was in April and none of the bugs have been assigned since March.

[boomerang]

...which, unfortunately, leads us back to the need for a Beyond TV Media Extender.

Which Snapstream is not capable of designing, from a hardware point of view. They don't have the resources.

They should focus on software. Period.

The way to solve this would be for them to license BTV Link to OEMs and authorize them to customize it as required. As their competition has already done with their not-to-be-named product (which BTW, runs on Linux in the OEM version, because Linux is what OEMs want for embedded devices like set-top-boxes).

But first they need to get BTV4 out the door, and it has to include back capture, fully integrated Beyond Media, and have all settings accesible via the 10-foot UI in version 4.0, not 4.1, not 4.2 in order to be successful. Anything that distracts them from this has to wait due to market realities.

[optikhog]

Which Snapstream is not capable of designing, from a hardware point of view. They don't have the resources.

Agreed. It was not my impression that this thread was in any way a *demand* for such a device; rather as with any feature request, it was an indication of what would be nice to have.

I would guess that any such device would have to be designed by a third party since, as you mentioned, it would likely have to run from a linux ROM.

[boomerang]

Agreed. It was not my impression that this thread was in any way a *demand* for such a device; rather as with any feature request, it was an indication of what would be nice to have.


I know. It's easy for a discussion like this to get carried away and become a demand though.

For the record, Snapstream... If some company can make a box with BeyondMedia/BeyondTV integration (so I can listen to music, watch ripped DVDs, view slide shows *and* get access to BTV) and can do it in a $199 or less box with no hard drive or fan and consuming very little power, running Linux, and be software upgradeable, I'll be first in line...

[optikhog]

I know. It's easy for a discussion like this to get carried away and become a demand though.

Hahah, I've been playing HTPC for 2 years now and I have yet to see any indication of Snapstream responding to a demand. It's actually pretty amazing how they do respond by actions rather than by words.

[queonda]

I know I would like the look and feel of BTV on an media extender with High Def out + be able to play a networked DVD, Mpg1, mpg2, mpg4, divx, and other video formats. But have anyone played with :
Roku HD1000 High-Definition Digital Media Player (plays mpeg2 only i think) Brochure (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect-to-external-url/ref=mt_mo_view_42659/102-2545332-9516165?path=http%3A//media-server.amazon.com/exec/drm/digital/moleproxy.cgi%3Fname%3DUm9rdSBIRDEwMDAgSGlnaC1EZWZ pbml0aW9uIERpZ2l0YWwgTWVkaWEgUGxheWVyIE1hbnVhbA%3D %3D%26file%3DTUFOVUFMMDAwMDU3OTYyLnBkZg%3D%3D&append-uid=no)
Buffalo LinkTheater PC-P3LWG/DVD HD Media Player (I don't care/need the dvd player, plays WMV, mpg) review (http://www.i4u.com/article3304.html)

Damn, would mind buying something that can play multiple formats (hopfully ratdvd too), need it to be quite and no start up time (I don't want to build a computer and leave it on all the time.

[boomerang]

The Roku looks *great*.

Here's (http://linuxdevices.com/articles/AT5269795535.html) another review. It does run Linux which is the right way to go, but the price point is much too steep. It's as much as a new PC.

[queonda]

Boomerang,

Check out Ruko website (http://www.rokulabs.com/) Their store sells them $199 referbished or $299 new.

The only thing I see it can only play Mpeg2. Which it could do more. Ruko even has a SKD version for people to Mod.

They have a cinemaSix "It's capable of playing MPEG2 Transport Streams, MPEG2 Program Streams (typical MPEG files, including unencrypted VOBs), and playing streamed content from VideoLan."

and

Video Lan Client " Early version of a port of VLC for the HD1000. Currently tested with MP3, Ogg Vorbis and MP4." Mp4 is that the same as MPEG4?

I called and they said they can play WMV but he didn't know about HDWMV.

[mikem]

The problems that I see would be in putting together something that would satisfy everyone.

ie what type of connection to display, what networking, audio connectivty.

Personally I would want HDMI output to a receiver for combined video and audio output. As I still have to buy the receiver this is not an issue as I can buy one with HDMI. Hoever other people will want DVI, VGA, Coponent, Composite and optical SPDIF others coax SPDIF etc

I would also expect to have display acceleration for MPEG, WMV, DIVX and H.264, I would also want it to be upgradable to support future formats

[dequire]

The problems that I see would be in putting together something that would satisfy everyone.

ie what type of connection to display, what networking, audio connectivty.

Personally I would want HDMI output to a receiver for combined video and audio output. As I still have to buy the receiver this is not an issue as I can buy one with HDMI. Hoever other people will want DVI, VGA, Coponent, Composite and optical SPDIF others coax SPDIF etc

I would also expect to have display acceleration for MPEG, WMV, DIVX and H.264, I would also want it to be upgradable to support future formats

No offense intended, but it sounds like you need BTVLink, not a media extender :lol:

[MannyTC]

Wow, then your system is doing something cool which mine could not - the machine running the MVP software for me could see the hidden file as it was being written (I could see it via Explorer), but I could not get my MVP to view the file at all until the recording was complete. If it makes any difference, my MVP services machine was separate from my BTV machine - is yours local to the BTV machine itself?

Regardless, the features we now enjoy via a BTV Link pc are well beyond those of the MVP - my WAF is through the roof since I made the switch!


Yes, my MVP services are local to the BTV Server machine. That might be the difference.

[Rich A]

This thread started off looking for support for something like the MS MCE 2005's "Media Center Extenders".

1. Most of those set top box media extenders are just custom PCs in an aesthetically pleasing small box. So in that case you can just build one yourself and run BTV Link on it. And put a fancy label on it saying, "Media Center Extender". The problem? Cost.

2. The actual STB Media Centers made for the Windows MCE system are usually dedicated boxes and usually have wireless network access. They are similar to an Hauppauge MVP box (except the MVP doesn't have wireless). The problem? Cost.

This whole subject is basically covered by the guy who said to just give us a box that will run link for under 199 bucks.

Pressure should be applied to the manufacturer's who already have Media Center Extenders .. like Linksys etc. Tell them they just need to produce a unit that can interface with BTV-link as well or as a custom config or something. But again, the problem? Cost.

[optikhog]

Pressure should be applied to the manufacturer's who already have Media Center Extenders .. like Linksys etc. Tell them they just need to produce a unit that can interface with BTV-link as well or as a custom config or something. But again, the problem? Cost.

Well, better than applying pressure would be presenting a profitable business case. Microsoft has the muscle to go to companies like Linksys and offer money-losting licenses in order to push the core product harder (MCE boxes themselves ovbiously having a good margin).

I would suspect that it would be harder for a company as small as Snapstream to apply any pressure to a company; rather it would just have to make good business sense.

[boomerang]

Cost can be alleviated to a big degree by getting away from the X86 architecture with it's huge demand for power and cooling as well as high relative cost. Linux runs very well on cheap low power devices. You can use an X-Scale processor and BlueCat embedded Linux for this as an example. I don't know if MontaVista will run on non-X86 chips. You can use dedicated chips for mpeg playback so you don't suck up processor cycles. Throw away the reliance on Direct-X and go with simple overlay rendering that's been used for years. You use a cheap plastic case and a cheap wall-cube for power. You *don't* use wireless except as an added-cost option. You use offshore manufacturing. That's how you build a low cost device. It *is* possible, but your margins will be low, so it can't be your only product (unless you sell a lot of 'em of course).

If Snapstream would port Link over to Linux, license an OEM version, than as Rich said, someone like Linksys could then easily (?) add it as an option so they wouldn't have all their eggs in one BTV basket.

I wish I was permitted to name the PVR company who is already pursuing this strategy, with appropriately named client/server products, purely for the sake of discussion but I think everyone already knows who it is anyway (it's not Microsoft).

[joseph_chapman]

I'd scrape the cash together for an XMas gift to myself of a BTV-extender.

They could try to port Link, but I would agree with the previous posters who say work on 4.0 shouldn't be distracted.

Wouldn't it be easier to either (a) publish how to connect/communicate with BTV (which is probably already done via the SDK) or (b) create a 'plugin' which would provide compatibility with existing MS media center extenders?

If they could somehow take advantage of the existing deployed MS MCEs they are using MS's resources to their (SS) advantage. MS must be publishing how to communicate with MC, tho they probably make you sign something ridiculous which could be the issue.

[boomerang]

If communicating with BTV requires any reliance on Microsoft OSes or technologies, then there will be problems for OEMs, who generally don't like to have to use Microsoft software on cheap appliances.

Might as well just built the cheapest PC you can and load Link on it (one other advantage of doing it on Linux - no "per system OS license" requirement, saving quite a bit of money when the box is used only as a DVR - I wonder if BTV Link will run under Wine...).

Even then the problem with Link is that is doesn't hook in with Beyond Media to access the rich media on the BTV Server machine. They need to seriously expand Link to be able to hook in to Beyond Media remotely to access the photos, music, movies on the BTV Server as if they were local files (like a certain competitor's product does).

That's what's keeping me from purchasing Link. I keep using it in demo mode, downloading the latest betas. When it's fully integrated with BM then (and only then) I'd consider buying it. I'm not about to go out and buy Beyond Media *and* Link for remote machines, that's a waste.

[mikem]

No offense intended, but it sounds like you need BTVLink, not a media extender :lol:

None taken, I was merely trying to highlight the difficulty of getting something as basic as the mere connections needed correct to satisfy people. Personally I will be getting a BTV Link machine later this year once these DVB cards are supported.

[timmytee]

Give the customer 2 choices:

1. create a BTV Link client for Linux (saves cash on licensing, and perhaps older computers can be used - I suggest a Pentium 3 as a likely platform for this)
2. develop a media extender

[boomerang]

Timmy - What do you expect the "Media Extender" to run ON??? Windows? Ain't gonna happen. If you're going to have a Media Externder running Windows, then build a PC. If you want a small cheap set-top box, then it has to be running a non-X86 processor and Linux.

[extremefire]

Which is one reason why I've been begging Snapstream to make a Linux version.
I would be happy if they would at least make the BTV Link software for Linux.

[joseph_chapman]

If communicating with BTV requires any reliance on Microsoft OSes or technologies, then there will be problems for OEMs, who generally don't like to have to use Microsoft software on cheap appliances.

If a non-MS MCE can communiate with MC, then it can be done. I'm advocating taking advantage of boxes (MCE) that are already deployed.

And, you're not quite right about OEMs not liking to use MS on appliances. Wind River and MS are neck-and-neck in embedded OSs with unix/linux coming from behind.

Might as well just built the cheapest PC you can and load Link on it (one other advantage of doing it on Linux - no "per system OS license" requirement, saving quite a bit of money when the box is used only as a DVR - I wonder if BTV Link will run under Wine...).

But I'm already trying that route and it sucks. If I wanted a PC, I'd get a PC. The point is that I want an 'appliance'. If I want a router, I by a router, I don't make a cheap PC with a bunch of ethernet interfaces -- even though it's technically possible.

Another example is the VPN market. I'm really waiting for someone to make what would essentially be linux embedded box (like the Linksys NSLU2) running OpenVPN (IPSec is too problematic and just about everyone allows SSL on their network).

I could do it myself but I don't have the time or patience to learn what I need to learn to make it work. I want a turnkey solution.. ...an appliance.

For the same reason, I want a DVR appliance. And you can't forget the WAF...

Even then the problem with Link is that is doesn't hook in with Beyond Media to access the rich media on the BTV Server machine. They need to seriously expand Link to be able to hook in to Beyond Media remotely to access the photos, music, movies on the BTV Server as if they were local files (like a certain competitor's product does).

That's what's keeping me from purchasing Link. I keep using it in demo mode, downloading the latest betas. When it's fully integrated with BM then (and only then) I'd consider buying it. I'm not about to go out and buy Beyond Media *and* Link for remote machines, that's a waste.

Can't argue with you there... but I think we're still back where we started:

(A) BTV needs an appliance which can take advantage of the 'rich media' on the BTV server.

(B) SS really isn't capable of doing this, but they can control the APIs required to make it work.

(C) There are media extenders already deployed. Taking advantage of existing APIs may allow them to shortcut the process.

What's more likely to sell more 'BTV systems'? The BTV + Link (multiple PCs) solution or the BTV + 'MCE compatible' solution?

[boomerang]

Before it'll sell any *systems*, Snapstream has to treat it like a complete product. Which they don't today.

[crush157]

Cost can be alleviated to a big degree by getting away from the X86 architecture with it's huge demand for power and cooling as well as high relative cost. Linux runs very well on cheap low power devices. You can use an X-Scale processor and BlueCat embedded Linux for this as an example. I don't know if MontaVista will run on non-X86 chips. You can use dedicated chips for mpeg playback so you don't suck up processor cycles. Throw away the reliance on Direct-X and go with simple overlay rendering that's been used for years. You use a cheap plastic case and a cheap wall-cube for power. You *don't* use wireless except as an added-cost option. You use offshore manufacturing. That's how you build a low cost device. It *is* possible, but your margins will be low, so it can't be your only product (unless you sell a lot of 'em of course).

If Snapstream would port Link over to Linux, license an OEM version, than as Rich said, someone like Linksys could then easily (?) add it as an option so they wouldn't have all their eggs in one BTV basket.

I wish I was permitted to name the PVR company who is already pursuing this strategy, with appropriately named client/server products, purely for the sake of discussion but I think everyone already knows who it is anyway (it's not Microsoft).

This is exactly what a MediaMVP from Hauppauge is. It is an IBM RISC processor with media processors. The core OS used is Linux. This platform is very robust and there is a lot of activity on re-writes. Those re-writes are not BTV specific, but a community could write one. see http://www.shspvr.com/forum/index.php?sid=3396e1fe06bf20765b0084c68587ea70

[boomerang]

Right. Great example. Except that for many people the MediaMVP is useless. Right concept though. Just a poor implementation on Hauppauge's part. I was so fed up with mine I gave it away.

[megardi]

boomerang wrote: Right. Great example. Except that for many people the MediaMVP is useless. Right concept though. Just a poor implementation on Hauppauge's part. I was so fed up with mine I gave it away.

I have seen a couple of posts to this affect. I wonder if they tried the MVP with the MediaMVP BTV3 Interface found here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mvpbtv

I have been using this setup for months now and I love it. You basically have most of the playback capability of Link on the MVP (like browse recorded shows by series, see show descriptions, and manage files (ie Delete)). Add to that much better file browsing of your non-BTV material (text based titles instead of stupid big icons) than the standard Hauppage interface (which I will admit leaves a lot to be desired). I have BTV Link on my laptop so I really don't need the BTV scheduling and guide viewing capability (and the rest) on the MVP so I don't miss this.

Now I realize it's not perfect. The interface could be a bit more responsive (but it's not as bad as some have portrayed). Fast forward and rewind for "transcoded" material (Divx or Xvid AVIs say) doesn't really work, but the skip ahead 30 seconds and skip to a point in the file (10%, 20%, etc.) work fine. Also fast forward and rewind of BTV recorded MPEG video works well.

When I was reading this thread I wanted to say that the device being described was the MVP but crush157 beat me to it.

Mike

[boomerang]

Glad it works for you. For me it was simply unacceptable.

It wasn't just the non-responsive interface, it was the fact that by simply trying to skip through commercials you can confuse the firmware so badly it either hangs, reboots, or goes into "can't find server" mode. And yeah, I always had the latest firmware on it. Simply worthless in my book. A $50 DVD player has better firmware.

[Rich A]

boomerang wrote: Right. Great example. Except that for many people the MediaMVP is useless. Right concept though. Just a poor implementation on Hauppauge's part. I was so fed up with mine I gave it away.

I have seen a couple of posts to this affect. I wonder if they tried the MVP with the MediaMVP BTV3 Interface found here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mvpbtv

I have been using this setup for months now and I love it. You basically have most of the playback capability of Link on the MVP (like browse recorded shows by series, see show descriptions, and manage files (ie Delete)). Add to that much better file browsing of your non-BTV material (text based titles instead of stupid big icons) than the standard Hauppage interface (which I will admit leaves a lot to be desired). I have BTV Link on my laptop so I really don't need the BTV scheduling and guide viewing capability (and the rest) on the MVP so I don't miss this.

Now I realize it's not perfect. The interface could be a bit more responsive (but it's not as bad as some have portrayed). Fast forward and rewind for "transcoded" material (Divx or Xvid AVIs say) doesn't really work, but the skip ahead 30 seconds and skip to a point in the file (10%, 20%, etc.) work fine. Also fast forward and rewind of BTV recorded MPEG video works well.

When I was reading this thread I wanted to say that the device being described was the MVP but crush157 beat me to it.

Mike

I have a Hauppauge MVP here also. But only tried it when it first came out. The video quality was much better than my A/V distribution, but I didn't like loosing the the functionality and other program capability like Beyond Media and all the plug-ins.

I output the S-Video port of my VGA card to a modulator that broadcasts throughout my house on channel 92. I have IR repeaters at each TV in the house. So I have full control and viewing of BTV and all the BM cool stuff at any TV location. The only downside of this (and this would be a big downside for most people) is that only one position can control the Server at a time. Or in other words you can't have one person in the living room watching one thing while someone in a bedroom or the home theater is watching another.

I don't have this problem as my four kids now have their OWN kids and their own homes .. so it's just me and grandma watching the boob tube .. where ever it may be. Be even when our viewing habits differ, one of us just uses the regular channels and the other uses the "BTV Network" on channel 92. :dude:

[areviaki]

I output the S-Video port of my VGA card to a modulator that broadcasts throughout my house on channel 92. I have IR repeaters at each TV in the house. So I have full control and viewing of BTV and all the BM cool stuff at any TV location.

I have a similar setup to yours except for the IR repeater. Can you provide some details on this unit. Make, price, availability, and general setup info.

I use the Firefly but it's not as good on the TV at the far end of the house. It does work but sometimes I need to be pointing it at some weird location for it to work.

As for watching 2 things. I just spent my labour day weekend getting my xbox to play the mpg's from the main server over the network (took a fair bit of tweaking but with the help of this forum and others I finally got it to work). I'm pretty impressed with the tweaked quality of the picture as well.

Now someone can watch a recorded show on the xbox setup, while someone else can watch either live TV or a different recorded show. Solved the "wife" problem, now to solve the "daughter" problem. I'm thinking of building a BTV Link machine out of spare parts for her.

[NickHark]

I have two MediaMVPs each connected to a Netgear wireless bridge running the skin on top of BTV 3.7.4. It works fine.

[Rich A]

I have a similar setup to yours except for the IR repeater. Can you provide some details on this unit. Make, price, availability, and general setup info.

I use the Firefly but it's not as good on the TV at the far end of the house. It does work but sometimes I need to be pointing it at some weird location for it to work.

As for watching 2 things. I just spent my labour day weekend getting my xbox to play the mpg's from the main server over the network (took a fair bit of tweaking but with the help of this forum and others I finally got it to work). I'm pretty impressed with the tweaked quality of the picture as well.

Now someone can watch a recorded show on the xbox setup, while someone else can watch either live TV or a different recorded show. Solved the "wife" problem, now to solve the "daughter" problem. I'm thinking of building a BTV Link machine out of spare parts for her.

I have those little pyramid IR extenders. There's an IR receiver that converts the signal to RF which the RF receiver in the home theater receivers and converts it back to IR which it emits. The IR receiver in the HT, also has an 1/8 jack so you can plug in a blaster to attach directly to a device's IR sensor. I got mine at www.smarthome.com. I think Radio Shack sells them as well. At SmartHome you can buy extra IR receivers to put in other rooms. If you are having trouble with the RF remote, I'd be careful about these RF IR repeaters. They work between each other with RF as well. But in my case I can use it from anywhere in the house. These are inexpensive units, and they make others that do the same thing and are "higher end" devices. These little pyramid extenders have been good for me for a few years.

[areviaki]

I have those little pyramid IR extenders. There's an IR receiver that converts the signal to RF which the RF receiver in the home theater receivers and converts it back to IR which it emits. The IR receiver in the HT, also has an 1/8 jack so you can plug in a blaster to attach directly to a device's IR sensor. I got mine at www.smarthome.com. I think Radio Shack sells them as well. At SmartHome you can buy extra IR receivers to put in other rooms. If you are having trouble with the RF remote, I'd be careful about these RF IR repeaters. They work between each other with RF as well. But in my case I can use it from anywhere in the house. These are inexpensive units, and they make others that do the same thing and are "higher end" devices. These little pyramid extenders have been good for me for a few years.

Thanks, I think those are called the "Powermids". I googled "IR extender" and that model came up quite a bit. Got a decent review at MyTV.com.

I'll start with 1 set to see how they work.

[Couch Potato]

Yes, my MVP services are local to the BTV Server machine. That might be the difference.

That's what I have - one machine that's running BTV and MVP, and when recordings are in progress, the MVP box can't see them. Though this isn't particularly surprising as the MPEG files are marked as hidden (attrib +h XYZ) while the recordings are taking place.

Perhaps a new version of the MVP software looks for hidden files too? I've not updated mine in a while.

I'm pretty sure this was working fine on 3.5.3, but it definitely worked sometime before the 3.7.4 upgrade.

[Kevin]

Okay..okay…so I started this thread…but I did not expect to get this many replies. I guess I touched on a topic that really hit home. Well I’m glad to see the community come out and participate in these discussions. Now I thought I would post an update to my Client PC construction that prompted this entire thread. While I still hold firm to the need of a Beyond TV/Media Extender device, I have to admit that BTV Link with the proper Client PC running is simply amazing! I bit the bullet and put down around $500 CDN to build a BTV Client PC. I’m attaching specs below for those who maybe interested in building their own BTV clients. I have tested this setup for about a week, and it is truly flawless. I mean…it’s unbelievable how smooth everything works.

The Specs…

AMD Semperon 2500+ 64 Bit Socket 754
Kingston 512 DDR 400 RAM
Gigabyte GA-K8U Motherboard
WD 80GB IDE
LG Multiformat DVD-ROM
GeForce 5200 8X AGP
On-board sound
SilverStone SST-ST405 400W Silent P/S
Netgear 108mbs Wireless G Adapter PCI
Generic Black Case

Well…it runs quiet…and streams Live TV, Recorded TV, Music, Pictures, Home Videos FLAWLESSLY. I should note that I am running a Netgear 108mbs wireless G router, so I am averaging a strong 100mbs + feed continuously. However, I tried switching to just the 54mbs only mode, and it worked just the same. My simple conclusion here is that the work that the Snapstream team put into BTV link is well worth the effort. The program truly extends the Snapstream experience. I added BM to the scenario, and another Firefly remote, and quite simply, there is no difference between my BTV Experience in my main family room (where my BTV server resides) and in my master bedroom (where this new BTV Client resides) Best of all, it’s truly Wife-Friendly. My wife picked up the remote and started using it like a pro! The learning curve of BTV and BM is very small if any, and after having become familiar with the way the Living Room setup worked, this was a no brainer. I mean, it’s one thing to experience BTV and BM in your main TV room. I’ve “oohed” and “ahhed” my family and friends many times with my setup. But quite honestly, a lot of the TV viewing is done in our bedroom late at night, when we just want to kick back and relax. This setup offers that critical link that truly completes my dream of a truly digital home. The end benefit is living our lives the way we want, not trying to fit it in to the fat cats at these TV studios that try to tell me when I should watch my shows. Add to that the ingenious ability to SmartSkip right over commercials, and I get back time in my life that I can spend doing other things, while still enjoying the programs I watch.

All in all, I have to say that I am more than pleased with Snapstream’s solution to the digital home, and can safely say that they have a customer for life as they continue to define the present and future of the Digital Home.

[waz67]

Ok, maybe this has been mentioned, but probably the easiest thing would be for Snaptream to create a version of BTV Link for the Xbox. The hardware is similar to a PC, and they only cost a couple hundred dollars. What's stopping them? I'd buy 2 in an instant, rather than futzing around with mediaMVPs or cheap client PCs.

[optikhog]

Ok, maybe this has been mentioned, but probably the easiest thing would be for Snaptream to create a version of BTV Link for the Xbox. The hardware is similar to a PC, and they only cost a couple hundred dollars. What's stopping them? I'd buy 2 in an instant, rather than futzing around with mediaMVPs or cheap client PCs.

Forgive my ignorance, but would this not be a hack of the Xbox?

[queonda]

Ok, maybe this has been mentioned, but probably the easiest thing would be for Snaptream to create a version of BTV Link for the Xbox. The hardware is similar to a PC, and they only cost a couple hundred dollars. What's stopping them? I'd buy 2 in an instant, rather than futzing around with mediaMVPs or cheap client PCs.
I like that idea! I'm getting the Xbox 360, then my Xbox will be ready to go in my bedroom. If I need to mod, I will.

[dequire]

Forgive my ignorance, but would this not be a hack of the Xbox?

Yep...lol...Maybe some enterprising young programmer will give it a shot. Sourceforge.net anyone???

[cat6man]

i have been using a couple of mediaMVP's which were adequate but don't quite cut it today. i would also like a BTV media extender but can live
with a playback only client, since that gives me 90% of what i need.

i have pre-ordered a JVC SRDVD-100 which is a media player that supports
HDTV streaming as well as DVI/HDCP output. it is based on the IOdata linkplayer2 and should be here in 2 weeks. it also is an upconverting DVD
player so i get to replace two boxes with one while upgrading to HDTV streaming.
cost is $379 from B&H photo who are taking pre-orders now.

many other devices/boxes based on the same chip will be coming out in the next few months. i have to assume that hauppage is also working on something but is not ready to announce it.

i would assume that a hdtv-capable media client, without dvd player, would be less than $200 once there is some competition out there. by this time
next year, there should a ton of alternatives....in the meantime, there are already a few options for us bleeding-edge techy types.

[waz67]

Why would it have to be a hack of the xbox? Why couldn't it be done as a proper commercial product, just like any xbox game?

[queonda]

Because Xbox was only supposed to be a game machine + if you bought the remote a dvd machine. You are able to mod it to allow you to do things a computer can. People can stream movies, play divx and other codecs.

Xbox 360 (Xbox 2) is supposed to be a gaming machine on steriods. Allowing you to stream music/video/pictures. supposed to me a media extention.

[jimg]

I've been using the Hauppage Media MVP. The UI isn't the same, but it does let me watch the recorded shows, and it only costs about $100 US. It only has composite video, though. Good learning experience.

I've also got an XBOX 360 on pre-order, so I can use the media center extender features, and it will support hd videos. I suppose I'll let my boys use it for games.....
I don't think it will be long before it gets hacked.

[stevehiner]

This is a minor issue and tangential to the discussion but I feel the need to correct Boomerang's misrepresentation of the truth. Licensing Microsoft's embedded operating systems is not prohibitively expensive. Often the license can be obtained for a few dollars per device. Certainly more than Linux but not enough to drastically change the list price of a $200-$400 product.

I find that a lot of people think embedding a Microsoft OS in a device is going to cost as much as Windows XP or something. If that were the case Microsoft wouldn't sell very many licenses which would defeat the purpose of creating the embedded OSs to begin with.

I don't work for Microsoft but I'm certainly one of their biggest fans. I was a bit Linux fan about 8 years ago but I grew tired of it. My current company has it's own Linux distribution for embedded devices so don't just categorize me as an ignorant Linux hater.

Oh, an Xbox BTV extender could certainly be created. It would require the approval of Microsoft but if SS could get them to agree it would probably be pretty easy to port BTV-Link to Xbox since it's just a PC with Windows and DirectX. That would probably one of the cheapest ways for SS to get remote functionality. Good luck getting Microsoft to agree to it though - it would compete with their MCE for Xbox so I doubt they'd allow it.

[loftygoals]

I used to be extremely active in the SnapStream community. The lack of extenders is precisely what drove me away from BTV. I currently use the xBox extender with MCE. It’s still not an ideal solution, because of the lack of HDTV support, but it is reliable and cost effective.

I would love to see SnapStream develop an extender using the same design that MCE uses. MCE extenders are based WinCE. This allows their devices to establish an RDP session back to the MCE PC. This lets Microsoft leverage all of the UI and code in the core app. They don’t have to write a separate version for the device. The RDP session handles the graphic UI and 2 channel audio playback such as MP3 and WMA. When video is used, the WinCE device uses a separate transport outside of the RDP connection to stream the video and audio. I assume that they are just using a video overlay to display the video stream in the GUI.

This seams like a simple and cost effective way to develop an extender device. It minimizes the new code that needs to be written and leverages a low cost embedded OS device.

That’s just my 2 cents.

-bj

[queonda]

I've been looking at some other options but non are completly there.

Vantec has a hard drive based jukebox which has SD and HD outputs. the only problem it doesn't have is a network connection. http://www.vantecusa.com/

I wonder if ip set-top boxes is another name for media extenders. I found a list of them but havn't had a chance to go through the list. http://www.globalsources.com/manufacturers/IP-Set-Top.html

[prelude20Si]

Me too. Running a non-Microsoft OS, for security and stability reasons.

Then why don't you go and get a Tivo....

But lets be realistic here - first they have to make a *non*-Microsoft client. No set top maker in their right mind would use Microsoft software. The license fees alone would keep costs prohibitive. Only one of the reasons that Linux is the market leader in the set-top-box market.

Quite the over-generalization...

(which BTW, runs on Linux in the OEM version, because Linux is what OEMs want for embedded devices like set-top-boxes).

Then go buy it and stop bantering on about linux as the panecea OS for PVR's and set top boxes.

running Linux, and be software upgradeable, I'll be first in line...

Then go over and load up the Freevo's, MythTV's of the world, and post on their forums the functionality you want.

then there will be problems for OEMs, who generally don't like to have to use Microsoft software on cheap appliances.

Another over-generalization...

Timmy - What do you expect the "Media Extender" to run ON??? Windows? Ain't gonna happen. If you're going to have a Media Externder running Windows, then build a PC. If you want a small cheap set-top box, then it has to be running a non-X86 processor and Linux

Because you say so?

In any event, if Snapstream wanted to do Linux they would've from the get go. They have enough on their hands maintaining their current codebase. Why would they want to introduce another codebase to support? And the last thing they would want to do is 'copyleft' their stuff that they've worked hard on.

Plus the maintenance headache of trying to maintain the app running on all the different flavors of the week linux distributions that are out there. They have enough on their hands now just maintaining the different tuner card implementations.

And as I said before linux is *not* the panecea for all software/hardware woes. All you're doing is trading one set of problems for another. All software has bugs regardless of who wrote it, plain and simple, none of the methods out there result in anything significantly better. It just comes down to the devil you know.

And if want something OEM'd, just get Tivo and be done with it.

[queonda]

Ok. Found this: <http://www.adstech.com/products/MXL-581/intro/MXL-581_intro.asp?pid=MXL-581>
Any heard of it, use it, comments?

[queonda]

This one looks cool but no longer available (at least 2 years old): <http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/archives/000206.php>

[MickP]

Anyone care to build a link box based on embedded xp? You can download it from http://msdn.microsoft.com/embedded/default.aspx

I wonder how little disk you could get away with. I can purchase a 256mb flash ide drive like this (http://www.eyo.com.au/prod_E-PQIModel-I256_proddesc_PQI_IDE_Flash_Storage_-DiskOnModule_Industrial_256MB_40-pin.html)for $112.20 (aud) locally. I'm sure there are cheaper/better options out there too.

<edit> PXE boot looks a good option too </edit>

Mick.

[optikhog]

Anyone care to build a link box based on embedded xp? You can download it from http://msdn.microsoft.com/embedded/default.aspx

It's not exactly open source, is it?

{edit}Oops, my bad, you were looking to *build* a link box. Does embedded act exactly as XP would?{/edit}

[clayfree]

I asked some some time ago if BTV was planning support for any of the networked media players. Thisseems like the logical route to me.

IO Data is selling their LinkPlayer for about $250. It plays everything(even .TS files).

I would love to be able to add simple client boxes to access BTV content.

[bshinkle]

Accessing the content is not a problem; there have been devices around for several years that can playback BTV content. I think this thread is talking more about a box that would give a Link-like experience.

[MickP]

It's not exactly open source, is it?

{edit}Oops, my bad, you were looking to *build* a link box. Does embedded act exactly as XP would?{/edit}

XP Embedded has everything that XP Pro does except it's componentised and has tools that help to analyse and incude include only the os code/components required to run your application and support your hardware. This means that you don't end up running (or having) components that you don't need such as RAS support.

According to the faq on the site the minimum image size is ~5mb (kernel only). I haven't finished downloading it yet but expect that around 60mb is more realistic for a link machine.

A cool approach may be to run completely diskless using pxe boot. After all, the link machine's not going to do you much good without a BTV server in place. I'm hoping to get a vmware image together soon to check this out.

Mick.

[bshinkle]

Sounds promising. Offhand the only thing I'd worry about is the video capabilities of the embedded device..

[clayfree]

How about this for hardware.

http://www.chippc.com/products/thinclients/jackpc/index.asp

An in-wall thin client.

[werb]

I was asking about thin clients in different post. Does anyone know if this would work?

http://forums.snapstream.com/vb/showthread.php?t=27433

They say it will be out in three weeks and cost $300. Not sure which version that price point is for but ............

[queonda]

I've been looking at some other options but non are completly there.

Vantec has a hard drive based jukebox which has SD and HD outputs. the only problem it doesn't have is a network connection. http://www.vantecusa.com/



Shoot, this plays just about anything. Here is a review on it. http://www.overclockers.com/articles1267/
I think it would be perfect (for my use), if it had a lan connection. Can attach a USB to lan?
+ wondering if the OS can be modded.

Here's the Manual: http://www.vantecusa.com/products/avox/pdf/avox_manual.pdf

[Rich A]

Someone earlier mentioned FreeBSD? and Wine which would give you a free operating system environment (Linux based) and a free Linux/Windows emulator which would allow you to run most Windows based programs in Linux. (Wine).

Even though the Linux and Wine end of things would be free, you'd still need to install a dual boot environment containing Windows XP with SP2 so that you could INSTALL BTV-Link. Once that's done then you could boot to Linux and use Wine to run BTV-Link. NOTE ... I haven't tried this yet .. mostly because you still have to install Win XP in the first place. There is no way to install BTV-Link in a pure Linux environment with no other "supporting" op. system.

The path to any viable inexpensive device whether an appliance or pc based Link machine is going to be a Linux ported version of SnapStream's BTV-Link. My prediction is that if SS were to provide a Linux version of BTV-link, the floodgates would be open and there would be a ton of supporting hardware developed. As well as people opting for PCs without the expense of an operating system that cost almost as much as the PC.

Just my 2 cents.

[prelude20Si]

1) FreeBSD is not Linux and is not affiliated with Linux at all. All the BSD OSes have a far longer history then Linux. It's unfortunate that people have hopped on the Linux bandwagon and fail to acknowledge FreeBSD, well except for Apple, they managed to get the BSD userland to work with the Mach kernel.....but lest I digress. Outside of Windows I do respect the effort surrounding FreeBSD, I have used FreeBSD and would use it over Linux anyday.

2) Wine runs of several OSes. The Wine page lists Solaris (even though they fail to explicitly mention the x86 version, it will not run under the Sparc version), FreeBSD, and Linux. Unfortunately getting applications to work under Wine is hokey at best. Depending on how much of BTV Link relies on the .Net Framework, probably a good chunk if not all, then running under Wine still would not work as no one has gotten the .Net SDK to load/run under it.

3) It's not a trivial matter to port over to Linux or create a Linux version. Even if Wine were to somehow get the Win32 version of .Net to execute, what type of performance issues would be acceptable?


Snapstream needs to stick with what they are doing and let the Linux world have their Tivo, Freevo, & MythTV.....why add to what's already there?

Streamlining BTV and BTV Link to the point where it would effectively work under XPe would be a To Do item for Snapstream. And then letting Snapstream negotiate the volume licensing of XPe that could be bundled into Beyond would be good, as the end-user does not have the means to 'officially' acquire XPe.

Linksys & HP have effectively created MS Media Center Extenders...somehow piggybacking onto this hardware would be good.

Someone earlier mentioned FreeBSD? and Wine which would give you a free operating system environment (Linux based) and a free Linux/Windows emulator which would allow you to run most Windows based programs in Linux. (Wine).

Even though the Linux and Wine end of things would be free, you'd still need to install a dual boot environment containing Windows XP with SP2 so that you could INSTALL BTV-Link. Once that's done then you could boot to Linux and use Wine to run BTV-Link. NOTE ... I haven't tried this yet .. mostly because you still have to install Win XP in the first place. There is no way to install BTV-Link in a pure Linux environment with no other "supporting" op. system.

The path to any viable inexpensive device whether an appliance or pc based Link machine is going to be a Linux ported version of SnapStream's BTV-Link. My prediction is that if SS were to provide a Linux version of BTV-link, the floodgates would be open and there would be a ton of supporting hardware developed. As well as people opting for PCs without the expense of an operating system that cost almost as much as the PC.

Just my 2 cents.

[Rich A]

Oh oh .. sorry about that. I "meant" to say Unix when I typed Linux. But I still think a Linux version of Beyond TV link (programming difficulties not-withstanding) would be very well accepted.

Like others, I got all "caught up" in the Linux end of this discussion. I should have known better. Many years ago, I did some corporate work in SCO Xenix. :winkwink: Thanks for the clarification.

[sdonovan]

Hey Everyone,

Has anyone seen the australian z500 product? (http://www.z500series.com)

I has just about everything people have asked for here, except the upnp media renderer (ala BTV link) and looking at the forums the zensonic people sound as if it is possible if they get enough interest!

http://www.z500series.com/forum/

Might be worth looking at. I will be getting one (hopefully for christmas, but maybe later as aparently the stocks are low).

Cheers,
A former Beyond Tv user
(DVB SUPPORT PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE)

[bosjt]

Yes, SageTV sells a compact extender for $99. I'm not sure it would work with BeyondTV but it proves the market is there. Though its not wireless (its only CAT5 LAN) its cheap and small and probably reliable (because its not wireless).

I just bought a D-LINK Media Lounge DSM-320 for net $149 at Best Buy. I'm using its wireless-G mode now in my basement where the excersize bike is. It's wireless G features are limited and I had to downgrade my home's wireless encryption to WEP from WPA (but who cares really).

I'm not sure how well I like this combo because while I can watch BeyondTV recorded MPEG-2 shows the Fast Forward button on the D-LINK remote is terribly unreliable. When it works and I hit Play to stop the FF, it goes back to the beginning of the show.

I'm experimenting with the BTV Show Squeeze option and then using D-LINK to play the WMV format shows. THis seems better but testing is incomplete.

The D-LINK is still too big and pricey for me to want to buy two more to fit onto my Family Room and BedRoom TVs. A small LAN-based unit that is cheap would be ideal.

One day, it would be really ideal if there was a unit you could buy for Beyond TV that would broadcast the stream onto the Cable TV wire (really a bus) in my home on channel 99 or something. Then I could broadcast a recorded show to any TV in my house with no additional hardware required.

[opilion]

Has anyone considered developing a custom MVP server that would replace the Hauppage software for better performance and render the BTV GUI from the server side? This is how the free gbpvr (http://gbpvr.com/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Manual/MVP) PVR implements MVP support. This approach sounds like it would require much less modification to the MVP.

[mrbojingle]

I'm looking at buying a new TV... a nice Philips LCD one.

These TVs come with built in uPnP to run using their media software. It would be great if I could stream BeyondTV straight from my computer to the TV via uPnP rather than have to have client computer connected to it... seems a bit redundent when the TV has built in wiFi and LAN connections?

Has anyone had any experience setting this sort of thing up? Is this the sort of thing I could do with TwonkyVision?

Cheers...

[Couch Potato]

What model TV is it?

Back in 3.x, BTV supported upnp:

http://www.snapstream.com/press/PR-2003-09-16.asp

Maybe they still do?

[mrbojingle]

The TV is a Philips 42PF9831D/10 (http://www.consumer.philips.com/consumer/catalog/catalog.jsp?fhquery=fh_secondid%3D42pf9831d_10_gb_ consumer%26fh_location%3D%2F%2Fconsumer%2Fen_GB%2F categories%3Ccatalog_gb_consumer%2Fcategories%3Ctv _gr_gb_consumer%2Ffh_att_ce_use%3E%7BFH_TV_USE_HOM ET%7D%26&productId=42PF9831D_10_GB_CONSUMER&activeCategory=TV_GR_GB_CONSUMER&fredhopperpage=detail.jsp&language=en&country=GB&catalogType=CONSUMER&proxybuster=S3DHKNIQ5JBMTJ0RMRCSHQNHKFSESI5P).

I should say that it's aspirational though, since not sure if the missus will let me spend that much on a TV. So might get a smaller model... still with uPnP though.

The reason why I'm keen to go down the uPnP route is that the alternative is to run S/PDIF and HDMI cables from the computer to the TV. But I don't want a PC sat next to the TV, which means spending a fortune on 5m length cables.

Obviously, running a CAT5 cable is going to be much cheaper... or alternatively no cable at all using the TVs built in WiFi! That would be pure minimalism... just a TV connected to a power socket, yet capable of watching TV channels, movies, music etc... without even the need for a cable antena connection!

That's what I'm after...

Cheers...

[jasahl]

I'm planning a major upgrade in our household AV in the next year or two. Hopefully they get on the ball with this (or at least provide complete BTV functionality with the MediaMVP).

If they don't, I'll be all over SageTV - they have media extenders AND you can purchase licenses for use with MediaMVP if you already have one of those.