Future directions of MediaPortal (2 Viewers)

[FlipGer]

Hi,

you always say TV engine 3.0. But it is called: TV engine 3.0 BETA BETA BETA.

As joboehl already said. The TV engine is rewritten from scratch, being away of a release at least 3 months. I am quite sure the DEVs will implement good STB and DVB subtitle support.

So just wait and see.

Flip.

 

[joboehl]

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 !!

TvEngine is build around an open protocol. As of today, you could watch it even on a PocketPC device. The protocol for controling the server is the defined by the .Net specification (again, you could use it on the .netcompact framework and control it from CE devices for example).

But the beauty of it are the server plug-ins. Let's say that you are working on a platform that doesn't support .Net (like XBox) or you can't change (like Hauppauge MediaVP). One could get what protocols they support and implement a bridge using server plug-ins. Of course, they would have to be able to support the stream, but that's another issue. Transcoding, tough possible, is very limited.

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

And I think your points are not only valid, but shared among a lot of people, including devs. The fact is that they are working on making some of this happening and it will eventually happen. When it's ready.

I would not expect anybody to start developing for example a XBOX/MediaVP bridge/streamed before the TVServer enters RC code. A lot of things are still going to change under the hoods to achieve the funcionality and performance expected of it.


BTW: Look at en.wikipedia.com to learn about the protocol used by tvengine (rtsp) and here http://store.snapstream.com/hamediamvp.html to see the protocols supported by mediamvp.

 

[joboehl]

Hi,

you always say TV engine 3.0. But it is called: TV engine 3.0 BETA BETA BETA.

Actually, I think it's called beta 1.

Frodo mentioned sometime ago it wold be releasing a beta 2, but it's not ready AFAIK.

 

[Roberdin]

But it is far from rock solid, which is needed for prime time every day performance and reliability for the rest of the family.

This is fairly true, but it's being worked upon...

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 what? DVB isn't exactly new either. It's been around in public use since 1998, and consequently support for it is fully embedded in MediaPortal. I don't know what more you want, other than subtitles, which are on their way back.

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!!!).

Rubbish. Low cost, quiet and sleek client PCs aren't exactly expensive, and if you don't want them, don't use them. I don't know why you're talking about hypothetical nerds when you are basically complaining about the use of a client/server architecture within an open source media programming project. There's no need to use such terms; no one above the age of nine does. It does not aid your position.

(STB is king nowadays, and 'wife' userperception prior to bits and bites)

Not where I come from. DVB cards replace the STB as far as I'm concerned. But, I wouldn't campaign for the removal of STB support.

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.

Look around you.

 

[janjuul]

Joboehl,
I appreciate your answers to the questions around supported functions, through linking to threads in the discussion forums. But the development team have stated that these functions aren't supported from the outset.
And please note: The apparent STB support is still experimental - playing around with different versions of plugins, which might work depending on what SVN build you got.
Out of curiosity - does it require 2 MCE Receivers/blasters in order to work (1 receiver on the client side and 1 receiver/blaster on the server side) and what if I have it all installed on 1 machine ?

And the subtitle support is, like it is stated, not supported on the client side (and yes I can use VLC or something else but then the idea of MP is sort of lost...)
and I'm still keen to see what standards of subtitles is supported.

These 2 examples highlights my current concern, who and how is the new client/server architecture controlled. Where are the overall design document for the future ?? Already does is looks like we are carrying over the challenges from the past by making different ports of plugins in order to hopefully make it work at the back end. I see a risk of implementing new problems and instability issues if there isn't a clear definition of what and how is the different plugins ported, if at all ported. And how is the communication between a client side and a server side plugin defined and controlled in order to avoid instability introduced by different approaches.

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.

I now hope that you get a better feeling for my concern about the TVengine and stability and feature set. We don't need Client/Server for the sake of it, but we need it to provide new features and functions(which unfortunately is rather unclear), and stability (but only if it isn't killed by plugins that un-intentionally brings the whole thing back to shaky circumstances.

You mention some very good future features as well. Your community metadata thinking is interesting, and it does again raise a question on where should data be stored ? And I would love to see the Itunes way of browsing CDs ....

Let me share with you what I have managed to grasp about the 2nd generation MediaExtenders.
1st generation was primarely simple firmware based players(video, mp3, photo) capable of accessing remove files - all logisk was done in the local extender (a few of them included server software, primarely to help facilitate the communication and access to the relevant files on the PCs).
2nd generation is providing more powerful output features (HDTV, soon BlueRay DVDs, etc.) but most important, they are capable of real 2 way interaction with Server side software. (skins, load plugins, access local media(photo memory) from other extenders, intelligent distribution of configurations, schedule serverside activity, etc).
There is probably more to add, but they are generally providing better performance and dynamic menus, content and functionality.

 

[joboehl]

Joboehl,
And please note: The apparent STB support is still experimental - playing around with different versions of plugins, which might work depending on what SVN build you got.

Janjuul, everything is experimental at this point.

STBs where not supported at the initial release, since the server did not supported plug-ins in the initial SVNs. It has support for that for a while now.

Out of curiosity - does it require 2 MCE Receivers/blasters in order to work (1 receiver on the client side and 1 receiver/blaster on the server side) and what if I have it all installed on 1 machine ?

Single-seat - One blaster/remote receiver.
Multi-seat - On blaster at the server, one receiver in each client. At the client you can use whatever you whant as a remote.

And the subtitle support is, like it is stated, not supported on the client side (and yes I can use VLC or something else but then the idea of MP is sort of lost...)
and I'm still keen to see what standards of subtitles is supported.

Being worked on. Not something that is not going to happen or not considered important. Just not ready. The first step was for the tvengine to embbed the subtitle in the stream. That's done. look for tourretes post's about that. He just released an update a cople of days ago.

These 2 examples highlights my current concern, who and how is the new client/server architecture controlled. Where are the overall design document for the future ?? Already does is looks like we are carrying over the challenges from the past by making different ports of plugins in order to hopefully make it work at the back end. I see a risk of implementing new problems and instability issues if there isn't a clear definition of what and how is the different plugins ported, if at all ported. And how is the communication between a client side and a server side plugin defined and controlled in order to avoid instability introduced by different approaches.

Actually, separating the engine from the presentation should bring even more stability. With the new arquitecture, if you are watching a DVD and recording a show, if the DVD player hangs there goes your recording. The same for plug-ins. An errand client plug-in will not affect the server, and vice-versa.

Most of what is defined is in the wiki. The plug-in infrastructure is in the wiki for example. Just to make clear: the server plug-in interacts with the server, not the with the client. There is no communication from the client to the plug-in. It only communicates with the server. So, if you change a channel in the client, the server receives a request to change a channel. It then broadcast internally a message saying it's about to change a channel. Plug-ins can subscribe to the message and do whaetver they want: blast, send an e-mail, log the change so you audit what your kids are doing. But the plug-in interacts with the server, not the client. It's really simple actually.

I now hope that you get a better feeling for my concern about the TVengine and stability and feature set. We don't need Client/Server for the sake of it, but we need it to provide new features and functions(which unfortunately is rather unclear), and stability (but only if it isn't killed by plugins that un-intentionally brings the whole thing back to shaky circumstances.

Take a look at the wiki and the news frodo posts about the engine. Theres a lot of information about features and implementation.

You mention some very good future features as well. Your community metadata thinking is interesting, and it does again raise a question on where should data be stored ? And I would love to see the Itunes way of browsing CDs ....

I think the new GUI is going to happen only after the engine. It needs a major revamp at the client side. About the other features, they should be posted at the feature requests forum. When a new release cycle begins, devs usually ask forum members witch fatures are most important. Thats how tvengine was born for example.

And also, tvenginev3 and MP v0.3 are two different things. They evolve in separate. If you have a request/idea for MP appart from the TVEngine, go ahead and suggeest it. I know there is a lot of planning on improving the music part of MP.

Let me share with you what I have managed to grasp about the 2nd generation MediaExtenders.

Interesting. I saw some of that information as part of the evolution of MCE extenders. It would be nice if those kind of devices could be programmable or worked with open standards (like rtsp). But if they for whatever reason look like MCE v1 extenders, it would be difficult to make anything work with them.

But like I posted before, solutions like Hauppauge MVP already work with open protocols. Maybe they can work with MP in the future. And if they release new versions with more functionality (like a built in dvd player and things like that) it might become very interesting.

 

[janjuul]

Roberdin,

Just to comment on your view. DVB isn't new, totally agree. But most european broadcasters has announced the end of their analog transmissions to happen within the next couple of years - thats why DVB is coming big time.
The analogue cards will be useless, unless used for composite in or similar.

Are you capable of seeing Sky via a DVB card ?
I need a STB because my provider is linking the card with the actual receiver (no option of using a DVB card to replace my Sat-box).

You can call my point about extenders rubbish, but I see no reason to buy and maintain a stack of media PCs, just to have local playback from MP.
And the cost is more than HW, it is also spending $ on the SW, and maintaining them, incl. Antivirus etc.

 

[tourettes]

...about the DVB subtitles

https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/showpost.php?p=84465&postcount=34
https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/help_needed_dvb_subtitles-t5152.html?t=5152

I have received only couple of test streams, so looks like there isn't that big need for the DVB subtitles omong the MP users

 

[FlipGer]

Hi again,

what I really do not understand at your posts:

You are demanding features. The TV3 is at beta stage. The purpose of a beta software is to get the basics stable. IMHO basics are:
- Watching TV
- Recording TV
- Timeshifting

If these basics are stable its time to implement features. For me STB and DVB subtitles are unnecessary features, which the team can concentrate on, if the basics are stable.

Flip.

 

[hot_dog_friend]

folks, you really don't get it.

people are getting dissatisfied with the relation of MP quality to features.
I'm fed up too, that my wife can't operate MP without calling me an computer idiot daily...however, I'm in IT business since 20 years...

MP is fancy, but only on top due to lack of competition.


ask the people...make an an online anonymus survey!
I'm sure will get surprised about the real answers.

mfg Martin
By the way, I have diffent users, since the forum lost someof my users, This is number 3...