Netherlands
By the way, I understood some port of the MythTV frontend for Windows existed. Maybe we can contact those guys and start working on a MP(client side, equivalent to the new TV client plugin) plugin for Myth servers?
Porting the TV server to Linux (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter leo212
- Start date
- Status
- Thread starter
- #32
That's the best idea I heard so far. it will be great if we can use the great MP gui on windows using the mythtv tv server on linux.
I would love to start/join a mini-project like that.
There is something called WinMyth. That may be what your talking about.
http://winmyth.sourceforge.net/
The last time I tried it, I couldn't get it to work. Maybe it's time to try it again.
Paul
http://winmyth.sourceforge.net/
The last time I tried it, I couldn't get it to work. Maybe it's time to try it again.
Paul
if you use "clone"for the 2nd display -> no problem
if you use "expand" -> secondary display will not be able to use hardwareacceleration = problem (caused by directX)
why?
why would anyone run a MythTV-Server and connect with the MediaPortal client?
i tried more than one time to setup mythTV. its my personal setup nightmare.
as linux is in general.
everyone should keep in mind that MediaPortal is meant to be installed/used by the ordinary end-user.
the majority of the users will not even be able to install/maintain/use Linux.
supporting Linux as OS offers also no pros for MediaPortal.
its not better than Windows, it will even raise much more problems and limitations or the end-users. (i.e. availability of drivers)
- June 20, 2006
- 19
- 0
Interestingly you say Linux "is not better than windows" when a couple of lines above you confess that linux is not your strong point.
Not having a go but to be fair you would at least have to be as competant in both to offer such judgement.
I'm not surprised that this topic comes up on a regular basis. Whether you like it or not the open source nature of MP does lend itself well to the philosophy of Linux.
Linux does have it's advantages also, in terms of performance, ability to make the most out of older hardware (not contiually chasing the next bug fix in DirectX etc).
It also has it's downsides (driver support for DVB-T etc) and setup etc though things are much better than they used to be.
You also can't judge linux as hard or cumbersome because you are used to Windows. Invest as much time in Linux as you have in learning windows over the years and you'd be a master.
Yes, it's different, but those differences have their advantages.
We shouldn't also forget that the more people that begin using linux the simpler and better supported it will become.
I'm all for the idea really only for 2 reasons:
1. No reliance on MS or MS dominated hardware marketeering.
2. Full access to all source, including the underlying OS.
Many of the stability problems with DirectX based code are not the fault of the developers that are forced to use MS's API's (just look at the DVB-T fixes that were released for MCE but not for XP). If the devs had access to the core of the API's they are forced to use then the MP team would have no trouble fixing any issue.. At present all they can do is try to find workarounds in MS's less than well documented mess they call Directshow.
Not to mention prorietary formats etc. MS tightly control a devs access to a windows box and that (in my opinion), stunts creativity.
As for installation nightmares etc I'm certain that it could be gotten down to a simple setup.exe type installer with time and effort.
At any rate. MP isn't something that can just be ported to Linux. But it would be interesting to see some modular code that could allow for a linux backend/frontend. It would require a lot of work and many API layers to be written for Linux to allow the windows calls to function but it isn't impossible.
Cheers,
Arkay.
Not having a go but to be fair you would at least have to be as competant in both to offer such judgement.
I'm not surprised that this topic comes up on a regular basis. Whether you like it or not the open source nature of MP does lend itself well to the philosophy of Linux.
Linux does have it's advantages also, in terms of performance, ability to make the most out of older hardware (not contiually chasing the next bug fix in DirectX etc).
It also has it's downsides (driver support for DVB-T etc) and setup etc though things are much better than they used to be.
You also can't judge linux as hard or cumbersome because you are used to Windows. Invest as much time in Linux as you have in learning windows over the years and you'd be a master.
Yes, it's different, but those differences have their advantages.
We shouldn't also forget that the more people that begin using linux the simpler and better supported it will become.
I'm all for the idea really only for 2 reasons:
1. No reliance on MS or MS dominated hardware marketeering.
2. Full access to all source, including the underlying OS.
Many of the stability problems with DirectX based code are not the fault of the developers that are forced to use MS's API's (just look at the DVB-T fixes that were released for MCE but not for XP). If the devs had access to the core of the API's they are forced to use then the MP team would have no trouble fixing any issue.. At present all they can do is try to find workarounds in MS's less than well documented mess they call Directshow.
Not to mention prorietary formats etc. MS tightly control a devs access to a windows box and that (in my opinion), stunts creativity.
As for installation nightmares etc I'm certain that it could be gotten down to a simple setup.exe type installer with time and effort.
At any rate. MP isn't something that can just be ported to Linux. But it would be interesting to see some modular code that could allow for a linux backend/frontend. It would require a lot of work and many API layers to be written for Linux to allow the windows calls to function but it isn't impossible.
Cheers,
Arkay.
Well Arkay, this is actually what I'm trying to prevent. My analysis of the problem would break down to the following points:
-A (fully developed) client server architecture will logically imply that the server is sometimes on another PC than the client (duh...)
-This might mean that end users would be happy to see their server on another OS than their client. (I'm only talking Linux and XP now, lets wait *a little bit longer* before we discuss other exotic OS'es)
-Now, for both Linux as Windows a pretty good client-server solution (starts to) exists as far as TV is concerned.
-This means it would be a total waste of energy to develop a new MP-Linux server, just as it would be senseless to develop a Myth-XP server. Not "a total waste" for MP as such or MythTV as such, both for the combined open source community.
-So, the most efficient solution I can imagine is no porting whatsoever, but just (well, just, just, it might still be a shitload of work, so it won't be soon) creating plugins for interoperability.
The bottom line is that, IMHO, we shouldn't think in lines of "Linux/MS is much better" but like "how can we (the complete open source comunity) create a maximum of happy users"
-A (fully developed) client server architecture will logically imply that the server is sometimes on another PC than the client (duh...)
-This might mean that end users would be happy to see their server on another OS than their client. (I'm only talking Linux and XP now, lets wait *a little bit longer* before we discuss other exotic OS'es)
-Now, for both Linux as Windows a pretty good client-server solution (starts to) exists as far as TV is concerned.
-This means it would be a total waste of energy to develop a new MP-Linux server, just as it would be senseless to develop a Myth-XP server. Not "a total waste" for MP as such or MythTV as such, both for the combined open source community.
-So, the most efficient solution I can imagine is no porting whatsoever, but just (well, just, just, it might still be a shitload of work, so it won't be soon) creating plugins for interoperability.
The bottom line is that, IMHO, we shouldn't think in lines of "Linux/MS is much better" but like "how can we (the complete open source comunity) create a maximum of happy users"
Are the common interfaces for DVB cards supported, or can you only watch unencrypted TV?
- June 20, 2006
- 19
- 0
Well Arkay, this is actually what I'm trying to prevent. My analysis of the problem would break down to the following points:
-A (fully developed) client server architecture will logically imply that the server is sometimes on another PC than the client (duh...)
-This might mean that end users would be happy to see their server on another OS than their client. (I'm only talking Linux and XP now, lets wait *a little bit longer* before we discuss other exotic OS'es)
-Now, for both Linux as Windows a pretty good client-server solution (starts to) exists as far as TV is concerned.
-This means it would be a total waste of energy to develop a new MP-Linux server, just as it would be senseless to develop a Myth-XP server. Not "a total waste" for MP as such or MythTV as such, both for the combined open source community.
-So, the most efficient solution I can imagine is no porting whatsoever, but just (well, just, just, it might still be a shitload of work, so it won't be soon) creating plugins for interoperability.
The bottom line is that, IMHO, we shouldn't think in lines of "Linux/MS is much better" but like "how can we (the complete open source comunity) create a maximum of happy users"
I agree and contrary to what I wrote above you more eloquenty just stated what I was trying to say
The happy users and open source quote above says it all
Cheers,
Arkay.
- Status