[Blog] MediaPortal 2 progress report (3 Viewers)

[zicoz]

Personally I'm really looking forward to the evolution into a full client/server setup. So atm I'm not even considdering watching XBMC, there are two contenders for me in the future MP2 and Meedios. Can't wait to see what the developers can bring to the table

 

[Baboonanza]

If I thought all that was wrong with XBMC was a missing PVR I'd be over there right now writing a 4TheRecord plugin (why they haven't done this already I'm not sure, it should be the easiest of TV servers to integrate).

I tested XBMC recently and there were very few things I preferred over my current MediaPortal 1.1 setup. I found video playback worse, with lower IQ (IMO) and artifacts when skipping (on an Atom ION, so I guess this could be GPU related to be fair), and I prefer Moving Pictures and TV Series to the XBMC equivalents. The skins look prettier, but I did find it real PITA to set-up.

 

[Quarter]

I think once MP gets the new skin engine it will have the advantage over xbmc, At this stage they are pretty even when comparing features. I tried xbmc for awhile but it just didn't stick you know what I mean, I found there skins flowed nice but still didn't have a style I liked.

I guess it will come down to who develops the fastest.

 

[infinite.loop]

(...) and I prefer Moving Pictures and TV Series to the XBMC equivalents.

Me too.

MP Moving Pictures and TV Series plugins offer a lot more features than the inbuilt XBMC equivalents.

But that is not necessarily a bad thing, what matters is who your target user group is.
"Inexperienced" users will definitly prefer XBMC just because it is a lot more straight forward to get it up and running than MP1.x But just like with Windows MediaCenters, more experienced or "demanding" users will soon want more than what these offer (which, as it seems, also was the reason for the suggestion made by Livin).

Thats then where MP shines.

But for MP2, we will make the (first time) configuration one hell of a lot easier, while still allowing the advanced users to have all the nifty little options available.
This will take some time - obviously.

 

[msj33]

As you say - Hopefully MP2 will be a lot easier to config.

Why have a codec part to setup at all? Would be a lot nicer not to worry about which codec to use for both audio and video.

And I will guess it would be a lot easier to maintain, regarding to bug reports and such.

Personally I use SAF - But hates, that I need a seperate installation to play all movie content.

My hope:
Codecs should be a integrated non-configurable part of MP - With a possibility to update automatic from repositories!

Alternatively: Make codecs integrated and working out-of-the box

 

[infinite.loop]

Why have a codec part to setup at all? Would be a lot nicer not to worry about which codec to use for both audio and video.
And I will guess it would be a lot easier to maintain, regarding to bug reports and such.

I can understand that from the enduser perspective, but quite the oposite is the case.

If everyone (encoders) would follow the codec definitions, then we would not have any issues at all.
But fact is that for i.e. h.264 there are _many_ different encoders around (commercial and freware/OS). And they all do little things differently.
So you end up with the mess that version X of codec Y is able to play your file flawlessly. But codec B does not play it at all, while codec C has horrible image quality and codec D does not have hardware decoding available for some reason.
But other users, only get "their files" working with codec D, while codec Y does not work at all.
So which codec should we then integrate in MP2 (if there even is a opensource codec available which we are allowed to bundle!)?

This we encounter many times with mpeg2 as well where some broadcasters tinker around with their mpeg streams for some reason....
With mepg4 and all its derivations (xvid, divx, 3ivx, etc.) its much, much worse.

We could ofc. include i.e. ffdshow, preconfigured with settings that "might work for 80% of the users", or have an inbuilt player that comes with its own codecs (like XBMC).
But you still have the issue that this won't work for all the mediafiles out there.
Many users will have major issues (XBMC PC and VLC fail to play a lot of my files correctly as example), and no way to just choose any other codec which can play my files.

It would be possible to have an player which uses inbuilt codecs ad still allow the user to choose some other codec.
But this then means that not only our code would become a lot more complex. We would also have to constantly keep that "player with internal codecs" up to date.
That is simply much more work than we are able to do if you take all the other work we have to do into account.

So yes, it is annoying to find the "right codecs for your setup". But that is the only way to actually find the codecs which do work. Including "some codecs" in MP2 (which will be outdated soon anyway) and hope that they do work is just not the right way for us.
But with Windows 7 and it's inbuilt codecs for h.264, mpeg2 and AC3/DTS, the setup allready got a lot easier for the users.

Personally I use SAF - But hates, that I need a seperate installation to play all movie content.

As a personal note, I don't like it.
I can not count how many times a issue with SAF resulted in a false bugreport.
For me, it is just another codec pack. And these can not work for everyone.

 

[Livin]

While I respect your personal opinion - no opinion is ever wrong, it is clear that much of information you have posted is based on lack of XBMC experience. Let me briefly explain...

I think once MP gets the new skin engine it will have the advantage over xbmc, At this stage they are pretty even when comparing features. I tried xbmc for awhile but it just didn't stick you know what I mean, I found there skins flowed nice but still didn't have a style I liked.

I guess it will come down to who develops the fastest.

Both points you make here are interesting...

a. Not sure how many skins you tried but many of the skins "flow" very differently than others. There are very few skins that are clones (only changing gfx) - unlike MP where most of the skins are simply the same template and change GFX

b. XBMC has been flying past MP on development speed. More devs, more skinners, more users, more scripters, etc.

(...) and I prefer Moving Pictures and TV Series to the XBMC equivalents.

Me too.

MP Moving Pictures and TV Series plugins offer a lot more features than the inbuilt XBMC equivalents.

But that is not necessarily a bad thing, what matters is who your target user group is.
"Inexperienced" users will definitly prefer XBMC just because it is a lot more straight forward to get it up and running than MP1.x But just like with Windows MediaCenters, more experienced or "demanding" users will soon want more than what these offer (which, as it seems, also was the reason for the suggestion made by Livin).

Another 2 interesting points...

Thats then where MP shines.

But for MP2, we will make the (first time) configuration one hell of a lot easier, while still allowing the advanced users to have all the nifty little options available.
This will take some time - obviously.

a. MP's Moving Pictures is already built-into XBMC. It is up to each skinner on if/how they want to implement the features. They can pick and choose and change the look'n'feel anyway they want. So in reality... XBMC is far more flexible in this area since it is built-into the core code, it can be extended and/or customized by the skinner.

b. I think new users have an advantage with MP based on the Config app, which XBMC does not have. There are less things to install/config with XBMC so from that perspective it is easier but a basic config is easier on MP.

Why have a codec part to setup at all? Would be a lot nicer not to worry about which codec to use for both audio and video.
And I will guess it would be a lot easier to maintain, regarding to bug reports and such.

I can understand that from the enduser perspective, but quite the oposite is the case.

If everyone (encoders) would follow the codec definitions, then we would not have any issues at all.
But fact is that for i.e. h.264 there are _many_ different encoders around (commercial and freware/OS). And they all do little things differently.
So you end up with the mess that version X of codec Y is able to play your file flawlessly. But codec B does not play it at all, while codec C has horrible image quality and codec D does not have hardware decoding available for some reason.
But other users, only get "their files" working with codec D, while codec Y does not work at all.
So which codec should we then integrate in MP2 (if there even is a opensource codec available which we are allowed to bundle!)?

This we encounter many times with mpeg2 as well where some broadcasters tinker around with their mpeg streams for some reason....
With mepg4 and all its derivations (xvid, divx, 3ivx, etc.) its much, much worse.

We could ofc. include i.e. ffdshow, preconfigured with settings that "might work for 80% of the users", or have an inbuilt player that comes with its own codecs (like XBMC).
But you still have the issue that this won't work for all the mediafiles out there.
Many users will have major issues (XBMC PC and VLC fail to play a lot of my files correctly as example), and no way to just choose any other codec which can play my files.

It would be possible to have an player which uses inbuilt codecs ad still allow the user to choose some other codec.
But this then means that not only our code would become a lot more complex. We would also have to constantly keep that "player with internal codecs" up to date.
That is simply much more work than we are able to do if you take all the other work we have to do into account.

So yes, it is annoying to find the "right codecs for your setup". But that is the only way to actually find the codecs which do work. Including "some codecs" in MP2 (which will be outdated soon anyway) and hope that they do work is just not the right way for us.
But with Windows 7 and it's inbuilt codecs for h.264, mpeg2 and AC3/DTS, the setup allready got a lot easier for the users.

Personally I use SAF - But hates, that I need a seperate installation to play all movie content.

As a personal note, I don't like it.
I can not count how many times a issue with SAF resulted in a false bugreport.
For me, it is just another codec pack. And these can not work for everyone.

I know not a single person that has a problem playing content on XBMC... it has properly played ALL content I have used, including content packed in ISO, spread across multiple RARs (without extracting), etc... which MP simply cannot do without a 3rd party add-on. XBMC uses FFDshow is a a great and VLC is highly regarded... so if you have problems playing content on XBMC the problem is your content, not XBMC or VLC's issue.

 

[infinite.loop]

MP's Moving Pictures is already built-into XBMC. It is up to each skinner on if/how they want to implement the features. They can pick and choose and change the look'n'feel anyway they want. So in reality... XBMC is far more flexible in this area since it is built-into the core code, it can be extended and/or customized by the skinner.

Did you take a look at all the options MovingPictures offers?
Because to me it seems that you did not look into its configuration.
It allows the user to change a lot (like creating sections - one for kids movies, one for partents, etc), and these options are not tied to any specific skin.

I know not a single person that has a problem playing content on XBMC...

No offence, but now you do.

I have quite a large collection of sample material to test mediaplayback.
These are samples created directly by devices from vairous brands such as (HD) camcorders, digi-cams, dvb-receivers, other TV-applications as well as official movie trailers from the web and"handmade" files using a _lot_ of different codecs/encoders.

With some of these I can trigger small issues like corrupted video as well as major issues like missing audio, multipe audio streams played at once and even application crashes.

I use these samples when testing MP versions before release, and when testing new codecs.

My previous post was not meant to imply that XBMC has a bad player included.

What I want to show is that there is no such thing like a "flawless codecpack / player".
There will always be media where the (included) codec in use does not work.
For that you can now blame the filter used to play the media, or the encoder.
At the end, the user does not care. He wants that his media plays.
If you use a player which has the filters inbuilt, then this is great for users because they do not have to care about which filters to install. But once the media from a user does not play.... he has a major issue.

so if you have problems playing content on XBMC the problem is your content, not XBMC or VLC's issue.

Imagine what our users would think if we told them that its not the fault of MP, but of the TV providers that TV is not working for them.
Even though it is the truth because the broadcaster does not follow the mpeg2 standart completelly, it would be simply ridiculous if we would say that to the users.

Same with all mediaplayback. Unless the stream is "broken", it is the "fault" of the filters used to play the media, if playback fails.

spread across multiple RARs (without extracting), etc... which MP simply cannot do without a 3rd party add-on

We all know what the source of that "media" is. and the team was simply not interested to support that.
but as you said yourselfe. someone in our great community created a extension to make it possible.
Extensions are a strong part of MediaPortal. And in MP2 they will continue to be that.

 

[msj33]

Thanks infinite.loop for you fulfilling answers.

Well.......SAF 5.0 already uses FFDshow - So why not implement it in MP2 like XBMC?

Maybe only 80% movies work, but thats a lot better than today.

Regarding the updating - This could be done through autoupdate feature(if that will come to MP2?).

But the codec part is only a small thing in the whole configuration setup.

I am personally hoping to see a more simple a intuitive way of configurating MP.

What attracts a lot of users to XBMC is the ease of installation, setup, maintaining & stability.

Where MP is way in front, is on the community driven plugin & forums section. This has become quite large and very featurefilled.

Things that could help MP2 with achieving more users and a better package overall as I see it could be :

- Out of the box solution=Almost no config needed--->more attractive for new/unexperienced users - > larger community -> more people -contributing (much improvement already has been done)
- Config from within MP2(TV, Movies, Pictures, Music)
- Plugin catalog from within MP2 (instead of browing through the website for newer versions - Myextensions plugin is actually doing it)
- Autoupdate feature (including plugins) (instead of browing through the forums for newer versions - Myextensions plugin is actually doing it)
- Automatic online bug reporting (when Mp2 or plugins crash)
- Automatic setup of Tv-cards based on country/postal code/provider for both analog/DVB-X(already in progress)
- TOTALLY simple TV-viewer(Win+linux!) for connecting other computers to TV-server just for TV-viewing(fullscreen/windows mode)
- Webserver for playback of music, pictures & TV + recording & such.

Maybe some of the above features could help generating community ressources to MP2/plugin development instead of bug reporting/confirming/discussing.(especially the auto-update section), Auto update would ensure that every user is running the latest version of MP2, and updates for MP2 or plugins can be "pushed" to the users, to solve bugs ASAP.

Just my 5 cents

 

[infinite.loop]

- Out of the box solution=Almost no config needed--->more attractive for new/unexperienced users - > larger community -> more people -contributing (much improvement already has been done)
- Config from within MP2(TV, Movies, Pictures, Music)
- Plugin catalog from within MP2 (instead of browing through the website for newer versions - Myextensions plugin is actually doing it)
- Autoupdate feature (including plugins) (instead of browing through the forums for newer versions - Myextensions plugin is actually doing it)
- Automatic setup of Tv-cards based on country/postal code/provider for both analog/DVB-X(already in progress)
- Webserver for playback of music, pictures & TV + recording & such.

these are all points the team has in mind. but only a few things will be in the first release(s).

- Automatic online bug reporting (when Mp2 or plugins crash)

Definitly not.
Nothing can replace a decent bugreport thread, where the developers then can talk to the user who encounters the issue.

- TOTALLY simple TV-viewer(Win+linux!) for connecting other computers to TV-server just for TV-viewing(fullscreen/windows mode)

Definitly not.
We will not work on linux applications.
Neither do we have any plans for such small "tv-apps". Thats something for the community.