Future directions of MediaPortal (1 Viewer)

[janjuul]

Hi All,
I have been using MP for 8 months with mixed feeling. I really like the overall functionality and features of MP over any other HTPC software.(MP is the most feature rich product out there).
But it is far from rock solid, which is needed for prime time every day performance and reliability for the rest of the family. If you are a nerd that likes to play around with new builds every second day - then this is the dream of your home entertainment.
After getting tired of the shaky 2.2.0 tv-engine, I have been using GBPVR for the last month due to its superior TVengine, quick and very very reliable (never missed a recording in a month, and I did my best to stress it).
MP is my favorite software from an overall perspective, but I find it hard to understand the current development priorities...
DVB is coming all over us big time, but still focus is around building a client server installation (like it is the newest concept brought to the world!!!)
Sorry, but unless you are a nerd that want PCs all over your house with MP clients, this idea looks rather outdated. Just for your knowledge, the GBPVR has had support for the small hauppauge MVP clients for several year without any big Client/server rework. (meaning no PCs in every room, and still individual playback in each room!!!).
My biggest concern is that no one dares to challenge the current directions, and like myself we are all sitting waiting for the great team of developers to get to the points/areas that are of importance to us.
Sorry for being very practical, but my focus is all about the following main areas:
- Functionality (STB is king nowadays, and 'wife' userperception prior to bits and bites)
- Stability and performance (during playback and scheduled recordings)
- Relevance (I need DVB subtitles + STB support more than any other new feature - that simple !! and I do see a lot of people with the same focus).

I have invested heavily in HW and time to setup a serious HTPC, just to find that my wife calls it my "late evening waist of time project".

I'm a big advocate for MediaPortal, and I still believe a lot in the idea behind, but I'm really getting concerned about the current directions.... A lot of people is blessing the new TV-engine but honestly, it got no DVB subtitle support, no STB support, meaning it is close to useless for a lot of people. (99% of the feedback is around the improved channel shifting time, which is getting from poor to average in the market - and people are not blessing your work for their 'a pc client in every room' requirement).
And worst of all: the TVengine Client/Server setup is being positioned af the best thing since sliced bread !!!
Look around guys, multiple wired/wireless multi media extenders, incl. HDTV support, is currently being sold for $150 - $300. Why don't we try to connect/work with these instead of building "the nerd's home entertainment center with PC's in every room."

A long and very hones post from me, and I still believe(and hope) MediaPortal is here to stay, but it seriously needs focus to be in the right areas

Sorry for stepping on any toes of the great dedicated team working on mediaportal, but I do believe that you would receive more positive feedback and traction if you spend your great talent and work on the things that really did matter to people.

Bottom line: "You need to set up a development board (or user community or survey) that will provide you with honest and relevant feedback on that is needed/required.
And client/Server is not the answer .... All this 3.0 hype and talk is irrelevant to me.... I'm still looking for DVB subtitles and 'not loosing' STB support.
Let me translate the current situation to a very similar scenario:
At the Car Dealer: "we have got you a new Diesel car instead of your old octane 95 model, but unfortunately there is no 4th and 5th gear working in your new car .... Congratulation !!!

Best Regards
Jan

PS: I sincerely ask all people to read and understand the intentions of this post. (if in doubt: "I want Mediaportal to be the best HTPC Software around, meaning responding to the requirements and challenges most of us have", and not end up being a great solution waisted on a few people)

 

[f0rmula]

we have got you a new Diesel car instead of your old octane 95 model, but unfortunately there is no 4th and 5th gear working in your new car .... Congratulation !!!

There's no need for the analogy. It's belittling. I share a lot of the opinions you have, but I wouldn't have said them in the way you have.

To address the point, I work as a developer. Writing new features is fun. Thinking about how to do something cleverly is rewarding. Sifting through logs and stepping through code trying to nail a quirky little bug, no-matter how annoying it is, is tedious. And when you find the problem it's likely to be something that requires a less than elegant solution. And not only that, only a few of the bugs that are reported will turn out to be real bugs, and most of the problems found by people will be hard to reproduce.

To summarize, making a 100% stable polished solution requires to spend time doing boring bits. When you're not paid, you are far less likely to do it.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see MediaPortal stable enough for me to use in my lounge. But please don't accuse the developers of not bothering to try to produce a stable system. I'm sure they contribute in whatever way they can, and being barracked for any effort they've put into features wont encourage them.

Sorry, but unless you are a nerd that want PCs all over your house with MP clients, this idea looks rather outdated.

Furthermore, implying that anyone who requires a multi seat solution is a nerd detracts hugely from your very reasonable point about stability.

Another issue you seem to have is that you also seem to think that everyone wants to use MediaPortal in exactly the way that you do. Single seat, and requiring subtitles. That's quite naieve. I'm gagging for a stable release of the TV server, as I'm stuck with mythtv (rather clunky) until then. Not everyone wants exactly the same solution as you.

PS: I sincerely ask all people to read and understand the intentions of this post. (if in doubt: "I want Mediaportal to be the best HTPC Software around, meaning responding to the requirements and challenges most of us have", and not end up being a great solution waisted on a few people)

I understand the intention of your post. That being to encourage the developers to focus on the issues that you see as important. I just don't agree with what you see as important or the way you've chosen to express your point.

James

 

[joboehl]

janjuul,

I think you missed the point on the new TvEngine. It's not called Client-Server Engine. Is called NEW TvEngine. It's made to overcome most of the limitations of the old engine.

If you whant to used single-seat. Great!!!! Probably most people will use it that way. If you whant to have multiple computers, even better !!!! You can do that too. If you whant to use cheap and limited media extenders, this move is necessary if one day someone whant to make them work with MP. Apparently you are confused about the client-server software architechture and a network environment with a client machine and a server machine. Those are two different things. MCE for example always had a client-server architecture, but you never had the option of using it with more than one computer.

Re-read the post's about the new tv-engine and what it brings to the table. I think you completly missed the point on it. It's being rewritten so features like DVB subtitles, DVB-S2, recording without MP being active, stability and etc can be achieved in a better way. Not only for you to put a computer in the kitchen, altough it allows you to do it if you want.


Most of your complaints are inacurrate:

- STBs are supported for quite some time now. Using it since the beginning.
- DVB subtitles are supported. Don't know if the plug-ins is already showing, but the server handles then for quite some time now.
- Comparing GBPVR with MP is almost pointless at this point. A stable 2+ years released product versus a -6months old beta1 version. Devs already made clear that no stable version should be expecter in less than 3-4 months. Do you expect rock solid lightning fast software on a beta1 stage? People are just starting to hit the problems for them to fix. How can it be ready? You mentioned channel changing time. That's one example. People are bringing it up, devs are fixing. That's the process. Don't whant to be a beta tester, whant rock solid stability? TvEngine is not for you (yet).
- We all whant stability. But the software must be complete before it becomes stable. devs already mentioned that you should not exepct a stable version in less than 3 months. The last stable version of MP is 0.2.0.4. If you whant stability, this is the release recommended.

So, in fact. Everything you are complaining about is why devs decided to rewrite the engine the way they are doing !!!! You are asking for the engine and all that it brings to the table. You just don't whant to wait for it to be ready. You went to a shop to buy a car, saw a prototype with some engineers working on it and is complaining that you can't do a coast-to-coast trip because.... it's a prototype!!!!! Wait for the car to be ready !!!! if you can't wait, buy the other more limited one. That's a matter of timing.

And as a side note. I find your post offensive when you mention so many times the "nerd environment". The beauty about Open source and this project is that people build the software for what they need. I live in a country where I can't buy those little media extenders that you mentioned and a XBOX cost's about US$ 1.500!!!! God yes, I whan't to be able to have an option to build a PC and used it in other room. I want to be able to check on the news when I'am at the office working without having another device+tv thing.

And also, your post was not constructive:

- You asked features already supported (STB, subtitles)
- You ask for things that would only be supported by changes that are being implemented by the new engine (different front-ends).
- You ask for stability and performance of a beta code without posting your problems and how you use it and where is it broken or slow.
- You compare a 2+year old product with a 6+months old beta1 code.

And concluding. If you use MP for more than 8 months (longer than me), how come you have only one post? You should post more, ask more, help more. For a first post, this was not a good one. Maybe if you posted more, you would be using your STB for quite some time now.

cheers.

 

[Nightmare77]

here here, i agree with joboehl no offence to the original poster

 

[ariyanto]

MP is great and for a system that is free in a world that we live in is something special even though it has its problems as it grows, well i love MP and i am in the process of building a new computer system of which my old system will be placed in the lounge as the client as i want all the function of MP.

There a simple answer to the problem of the writer of the post

If you dont like MP don't use it there are thousands of us that do and will always i think your comments are not courteous or polite to the people who delvelop Mp for free.

 

[joboehl]

here here, i agree with joboehl no offence to the original poster

Oops, it was offensive? if it was, I'am sorry. it was not ment to be.

 

[janjuul]

I take no offence, and I re-iterate again: I have no intentions of offencing any members of the great team building this software.

Joboehll: STB is correctly supported today in 2.2.0, but not in 3.0 (one of my points about the 4th gear missing, as I with 3.0 have to give up using my STB which is providing 90% of all my channels). Further there is no DVB subtitle (not teletext) support available, unless you have some internal tweaks and features.
And I'm not getting the network environment and the client server environment messed up, that thing I can assure you. The 3.0 is a client/server setup (as described by the team themselves) and the fact that you can put the server and the client on the same machine is a 'standard' feature of most client/server solutions.
Just for your knowledge: GBPVR is developed by ONE single guy in New Zeeland.

F0rmula: you brought up a good point about my use of Nerds and PCs in every room. That was not to offend anyone, but to bring the point home about the dependence on PCs to run the client portion, and I'm quite sure that my wife will call me a 'Nerd' if I need to setup a PC in my bedroom in order to watch a recording from the new TV-engine !!!
Regarding Media Extenders: GBPVR has had it for years + a large number of commercial products are now all pushing dedicated high spec media extenders that can front their software, and it would be really nice to see Media Portal go that direction as well. Not to produce extenders, but define a protocol that they will support (just like GBPVR, SAGE plus others have done). It would have been great if the protocol between the new client and the new TV engine was compatible with some of the extender out there. (what a bonus that would have been !!)

However, I find it quite interesting to see that this thread is in danger of going the standard path of many forums "If you raise critics, then just leave the community, we didn't ask you to use the software !!"
Now I have tried that too . . .

I was hoping to raise a general discussion about how the future directions of this great software is directed, and thanks for those of you who have decided to engage in this from the constructive side, and that some of you are sharing some of my views, and others are immediately starting to defend the work done up till now.

I'm not concerned about the past, as I can't change it. My focus is on the future, and a lot of things are currently happening in the HTPC industry (HDTV, DVB, NetRadio, 2nd generation MediaExtenders etc).
But I am very interested in understanding how and what is driving the future directions of this product. And I'm not asking the team to only focus on what I want or need, but would like to find a way where everyone can provide input.
We have all different wishes for the future direction of the product, but I'm quite sure that not many of us was looking for a PC based Client / Server solution.

 

[f0rmula]

However, I find it quite interesting to see that this thread is in danger of going the standard path of many forums "If you raise critics, then just leave the community, we didn't ask you to use the software !!"
Now I have tried that too . . .

If you contribute a little, and help out on a the forum a little I'm sure you'll find the community a lot more receiving of your opinions. A first post in a condescending tone, so full of criticism, is never going to be well received.

And worst of all: the TVengine Client/Server setup is being positioned af the best thing since sliced bread !!!
Look around guys, multiple wired/wireless multi media extenders, incl. HDTV support, is currently being sold for $150 - $300. Why don't we try to connect/work with these instead of building "the nerd's home entertainment center with PC's in every room.

Rather than saying how you can't see the point in what the developers are doing, try just starting a thread about media extenders. See what other people think, suggest some the developers might like to look at, and maybe do a little research for them. Perhaps see if there are some frequently used APIs MediaPortal could support etc.

By posting such a lengthy non-combative reply, it's obvious that you have good intentions. However, it doesn't matter if you say you don't mean to offend only to then continue to say things in an manner which is likely to upset people. Instead of telling people how crazy you think they are for doing what they're doing, move towards constructive comments and try to contribute where you can.

I'm also a self confessed nerd, so I'm not really used to giving advice on politics, psychology and general forum etiquette.

James

 

[janjuul]

Hi James,

By posting such a lengthy non-combative reply, it's obvious that you have good intentions. However, it doesn't matter if you say you don't mean to offend only to then continue to say things in an manner which is likely to upset people. Instead of telling people how crazy you think they are for doing what they're doing, move towards constructive comments and try to contribute where you can.

I'm pleased that you can see that I have good intentions. And I'm not telling anyone that they are crazy... neither am I giving any individuals critics.

To me this is part of an open conversation in an open world (and I'm not trying to discuss politics).
But let me rephrase my questions around mediaextenders:
- Is there a reason why 'MediaExtenders' hasn't been thought into the current big rework/development ?
I would hate to see that the team would have to build a new protocol again, in order to support mediaextenders, or even have to decide not to support mediaextenders as it will require too much rework !!

But sadly my questioning around some of the current directions is automatically seen as me being destructive.
I might not be a polished politician, who bless every initiative as long as it makes me popular, but doesn't really care at the end of the day.
I do actually care, and think that I'm raising some key questions about where and how the future direction of Mediaportal is determined.

Jan

 

[joboehl]

Joboehll: STB is correctly supported today in 2.2.0, but not in 3.0 (one of my points about the 4th gear missing, as I with 3.0 have to give up using my STB which is providing 90% of all my channels). Further there is no DVB subtitle (not teletext) support available, unless you have some internal tweaks and features.

Janjull, I'am only taking about V3. Everything I mentioned as supported is supported in V3. STB IS supported and I use it as mentioned (https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/...ox_and-t12236p7.html?highlight=serverblaster). Using serverblaster myself. I pratically never used v2 tvengine.

As for DVB substitles, take a look at this thread: https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/new_tv_engine_and_dvb_subtitles-t10445p2.html?highlight=subtitles. You wil notice that the server already supports the subtitles. Working is being done at the client, but keep in mind that TvEngine is not done. That's why it's beta. Just because it's not done yet doesn't mean is not going to happen.

And I'm not getting the network environment and the client server environment messed up, that thing I can assure you. The 3.0 is a client/server setup (as described by the team themselves) and the fact that you can put the server and the client on the same machine is a 'standard' feature of most client/server solutions.

Good. Seems to be in the right direction then right?

Just for your knowledge: GBPVR is developed by ONE single guy in New Zeeland.

Almost like the new TVEngine. But keep the timing in mind. How long is this guy developing GBPVR? TvEngine first beta drop is less then 6 months. You can't compare the stability and performance of both at this point in time.

Regarding Media Extenders: GBPVR has had it for years + a large number of commercial products are now all pushing dedicated high spec media extenders that can front their software, and it would be really nice to see Media Portal go that direction as well. Not to produce extenders, but define a protocol that they will support (just like GBPVR, SAGE plus others have done). It would have been great if the protocol between the new client and the new TV engine was compatible with some of the extender out there. (what a bonus that would have been !!)

Janjull, in orther to support this kind of devices, the first thing you have to do is allow something external to the product to access the data (in this case, the TV stream). In other words, create the server. I haven't seem anybody here saying that TvEnginev3 is only going to be used with MP and PCs. It can be used with anything. It's extensible (plug-ins) and open source. But it need to be done first!!!! MP v2 engine could not allow anything external to MP to access the tv data. That's why it needs to be done.

The reason I find it most important about the new tvengine is exactly all the possibilities it brings. People over meedio forums are discussing if they can use it. People over XBMC forums are discussing this too. It's just a matter of time before someone starts coding bridges/services/plug-ins to allow other devices/sw to interact with the TVEngine. Withtout it, it's impossible.

So I say again, the reasons you complain about tvengine are the reasons why it's needed. That's why It's being developed. Can't understand why you are complaining.

I was hoping to raise a general discussion about how the future directions of this great software is directed, and thanks for those of you who have decided to engage in this from the constructive side, and that some of you are sharing some of my views, and others are immediately starting to defend the work done up till now.

I think is a valid think to start a discussion about the future directions. I was thinking about doing it myself actually. But your post was much more about attacking and complaining then raising future directions discussion.

The points you brought (like extenders, DVB, STB) are valid and nobody is refusing to discuss then. But there are ways to approach them.

But rest assured, if someone want's to make a HauppaugeMVP work with MP, TVEngine needs to be done first.

I'm not concerned about the past, as I can't change it. My focus is on the future, and a lot of things are currently happening in the HTPC industry (HDTV, DVB, NetRadio, 2nd generation MediaExtenders etc).
But I am very interested in understanding how and what is driving the future directions of this product. And I'm not asking the team to only focus on what I want or need, but would like to find a way where everyone can provide input.
We have all different wishes for the future direction of the product, but I'm quite sure that not many of us was looking for a PC based Client / Server solution.

Three out of 4 of your points (HDTV, DVB and external access to media) are being addressed in the new TV engine. (music, fotos and videos are usually addressed directly trough other protocols like UPnP and Windows Connect). So I would say they are on the right track with it.

I' am also interested in knowing where the product is moving after the TVEngine and in other areas (like music and pictures). I would like to see more community metadata in the lines the music plug-in works in the now playing screen, troughout the entire MP experience. Like viewing an review of a tv show before watching. Or only recording something if the communitty rating is about a certain level. I would also like to see a newer GUI, more responsive and attractive, in the lines of MS did with Vista. Imagine browsing your CD library like you can do with iTunes. Sure enough I would like to see XBMC and MP integration.

A forum might be needed to discuss this kind of things, but it has nothing to do with doing or not the TvEngine and it's current stability and feature set.

What I can say is that without the TvEngine, much of this things you complain about MP will not be possible.

Out of curiosity - What do you mean about second generation extenders? This term is widely used by MS to identify devices designed to work with Vista MCE. I really don't think those devices are going to work with anything other than Vista.