home
products
contribute
download
documentation
forum
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
All posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
MediaPortal 1
Development
Improvement Suggestions
TV Server
Contact us
RSS
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="samuel337" data-source="post: 6691" data-attributes="member: 10347"><p>I'm not sure if you guys have seen the Intel Remote IO demo or not, but would that be a better solution rather than the mediarenderer/mediaserver solution?</p><p></p><p>The difference between the two is that Remote IO is simply where the server loads an instance of an application and sends it over to the Remote IO client. All keystrokes and mouse movements on the client are sent back to the server which updates the display and sends it back to the client. In other words, its like using Terminal Services.</p><p></p><p>mediarenderer/mediaserver on the other hand, involves installing an application on the client which communicates with the server using various calls.</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure about either solution though - I just thought about the two after viewing the intel demo videos - see the remoteIO one with this link: <a href="http://mfile.akamai.com/2478/asf/ihc.download.akamai.com/2478/upnp/remote_io_upnp.asx" target="_blank">http://mfile.akamai.com/2478/asf/ihc.download.akamai.com/2478/upnp/remote_io_upnp.asx</a></p><p></p><p>BTW, just thinking aloud, either of these solutions would require changes to MediaPortal, especially with the mediarenderer/mediaserver solution because a server and client version would be required. If the client version wasn't supported by frodo, every time a version changes, you would need to add the upnp code back in and change other bits then recompile it for the client.</p><p></p><p>Of course, all these problems are solved if MP was split into a backend/frontend system... In that case, you could have the backend running on the server, and the client on the other computers - if you wanted to use the server as a client as well, you would just run it on that as well, like MythTV.</p><p></p><p>Am I completely off track? What does everyone else think?</p><p></p><p>Sam</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="samuel337, post: 6691, member: 10347"] I'm not sure if you guys have seen the Intel Remote IO demo or not, but would that be a better solution rather than the mediarenderer/mediaserver solution? The difference between the two is that Remote IO is simply where the server loads an instance of an application and sends it over to the Remote IO client. All keystrokes and mouse movements on the client are sent back to the server which updates the display and sends it back to the client. In other words, its like using Terminal Services. mediarenderer/mediaserver on the other hand, involves installing an application on the client which communicates with the server using various calls. I'm not sure about either solution though - I just thought about the two after viewing the intel demo videos - see the remoteIO one with this link: [url]http://mfile.akamai.com/2478/asf/ihc.download.akamai.com/2478/upnp/remote_io_upnp.asx[/url] BTW, just thinking aloud, either of these solutions would require changes to MediaPortal, especially with the mediarenderer/mediaserver solution because a server and client version would be required. If the client version wasn't supported by frodo, every time a version changes, you would need to add the upnp code back in and change other bits then recompile it for the client. Of course, all these problems are solved if MP was split into a backend/frontend system... In that case, you could have the backend running on the server, and the client on the other computers - if you wanted to use the server as a client as well, you would just run it on that as well, like MythTV. Am I completely off track? What does everyone else think? Sam [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
MediaPortal 1
Development
Improvement Suggestions
TV Server
Contact us
RSS
Top
Bottom