Request for next version of BeyondTV

[hyjylynn]

I have a Hauppauge PVR150 and I have a Pace Digital Cable Box (Sasktel Max). Since Pace and the IR Blaster remote that comes with my tuner card are not compatible, I use the remote that came with my box to change channels using Beyond TV. Because I cannot disable the timeshifting feature of BeyondTV changing channels (built-in guide in box) is painful. There is a 2-3 second delay and with hundreds of channels... I have started using Dscaler (has no time buffer, thus no delay and clearer picture) to watch live tv and BeyondTV to record. I shouldn't have to do this. Can the next version of BeyondTV have to ability to turn off time buffering?

Thank you

[tmar89]

I second the option to turn off Time Shifting (Buffering).

[HomeyFour]

I believe that this is not possible with the design of BTV. There are some forthcoming features that depend on timeshifting to be on at all times. It would be a major design change to turn that off.

[Greg Caulder]

they need to have better folder management, with automatic failover. I honestley think they need to becasue with HD being recorded you wil have to monitor your recording more closley becasue they take up more space. This will be a pain in the neck to manage.


Greg

[Greg Caulder]

Any plan on Beyond TV being able to have the link software go over WAN. if you compress the video enough so it wont crap out cuz of your low uploading bandwith?


Greg

[nanook105]

You can already watch video (recordings and liveTV) over the lan (if it is compressed enough) from Web Admin. How would this be different ?

[mrgrocery]

AFAIK the 2-3 second delay has nothing to do with time shifting, it is the nature of all tuner cards. I have seen this personally in all the cards I have owned right back to my first ATI AIW I got 5-6 years ago up to the PVR250 I am using now.

[Rich A]

I don't know if that is correct. Yes PVR's are designed to first record then display, so there is always a "lag" of at least a second or two. However my old ReplayTV (a TIVO like devise) had a "by-pass" switch which would direct the decoded output of the tuner directly to the display device .. so no recording was being done.

The problem may be (only a non-technical guess on my part) that the current PVR tuner cards have firmware that only displays the tuner's signal after it's been converted to what-ever the on-card firmware is designed to use naively.

Maybe a software decoded TV Tuner card, like the older ATI All In Wonder cards, might be able to display the tuner output without being encoded first since those cards use software encoding only. I have one, and I've never looked into that. Might be something to investigate.

Anyway, I think it would be impossible to "bypass" the on-card internal encoding being done on the hardware based tuner cards like the PVR-x50s and others.

[hyjylynn]

There is a very slight lag with Dscaler:
http://deinterlace.sourceforge.net/
But it is very noticeable with BeyondTV. If it were the nature of the card, why would there be a difference?

[Greg Caulder]

Originally Posted by nanook105

You can already watch video (recordings and liveTV) over the lan (if it is compressed enough) from Web Admin. How would this be different ?

It would be different becasue you wontent have to use the web admin over want naymore. It would be jsut hte Link but at your friends house. The streaming featuer isnt al that impressive over the web admin interface. I would rather kep the beyond TV link instead. I think that would be awsome to do this. It you have a cabin with internet and your city house has all of your shows you can use Beyond TV Link over hte WAN as if you were using the link at home.



Greg

[Rich A]

Originally Posted by hyjylynn

There is a very slight lag with Dscaler:
http://deinterlace.sourceforge.net/
But it is very noticeable with BeyondTV. If it were the nature of the card, why would there be a difference?

If you look at the list of supported capture cards on the link provided, you will see many supported ... BUT of those NOT supported are the PVR-x50 that have built in hardware encoding. They say it's because the chip is not supported.

My guess is that they can't get at the actual tuner output of those cards and would have to use the video as generated by the on-board mpeg encoder.

That's why the delay seems less with that product. It's not getting the video "post encoded" as the cards that are supported most likely have a way to get at the video PRIOR to encoding. Seems logical to me.