Is SageTV Client obsolete?

[coppit]

I bought SageTV Client a while back for watching Sage shows on a different computer. Now with placeshifting support, I'm confused what the differences are. Can someone fill me in? Can I simply not worry about SageTV Client anymore?

[stanger89]

Client is for a LAN and it a bit more configurable (decoders, file support, etc).

Placeshifter is (primarilly) for a WAN (offsite). It has more limited configurability and file support.

Unless you're trying to access offsite, you want to use Client.

[Kimper]

/agree stanger..

But, they need to simply move all licenses to the server and then you only need additional licenses if you have multiple concurrent remote sessions.

[coppit]

Kimper, can you elaborate? My understanding is that the placeshifting has no license restrictions, whereas the client has single-machine limitations. From that point of view, v5 placeshifting is better than client.

stanger89, where I can learn more about the differences? You mention codecs... On a LAN with more bandwidth, high-performance codecs are less of an issue. Configurability is also less of an issue since the other viewing machines would be secondary to the main HTPC. I'm not sure what you mean by file support--recorded MPEG and maybe MP3 would be all that I would want.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by coppit

Kimper, can you elaborate? My understanding is that the placeshifting has no license restrictions, whereas the client has single-machine limitations. From that point of view, v5 placeshifting is better than client.

Exactly, it would be great if the SageClient license model was like the Placeshifter/Extender model, ie simultaneous connections to server vs installs.

stanger89, where I can learn more about the differences? You mention codecs... On a LAN with more bandwidth, high-performance codecs are less of an issue. Configurability is also less of an issue since the other viewing machines would be secondary to the main HTPC. I'm not sure what you mean by file support--recorded MPEG and maybe MP3 would be all that I would want.

The forum is really the best place, but for a more detailed explanation:

Client works just like the server, it basically plays the files directly.
You have control over what decoders and renderers are used for audio and video. Basically client is "the full monty", for use where bandwidth isn't a concern. Oh also the Client runs completely on the PC it's being used on, it only relies on the server for data and access to files (or at least their location). Basically if you'll be running on a machine on the same lan, get SageClient.

The Placeshifter OTOH, is for use where bandwidth is a concern, and/or when you're not on the same LAN (ie if you want to access while you're away from home). The big differences are:

• The UI is drawn on the server and rendered on the client (somewhat like remote desktop).
• All the "code" (STV stuff) runs on the server, not the machine running the placeshifter
• The Placeshifter does not have (or need) direct access to the files it's playing.
• Files may/will be transcoded into mpeg4 (ASP) for streaming in bandwidth constrained situations.
• Some functions that aren't streaming/transcode friendly are disabled, namely DVD playback, but also files that aren't easilly transcoded.

[*]You have no control (AFAIK) over what decoders/renderers are used during playback.

In a nutshell Placeshifter is a stripped down version that's able to be used from anywhere in the world with and internet connection. Of course SageTV has done an amazing job minimizing that which can't be done on a Placeshifter, but it's just not the same.

[lotusvball]

Can I have my License converted from a client into an MVP/Placeshifting license?

[salsbst]

if you don't care about quality then placeshifter could replace client.

However, many of us run the client on HTPCs with decent TVs, etc.... in which case we wouldn't want to switch away to a lower quality solution.

[Kimper]

Originally Posted by coppit

Kimper, can you elaborate? My understanding is that the placeshifting has no license restrictions, whereas the client has single-machine limitations. From that point of view, v5 placeshifting is better than client.

The current licensing setup is:

Placeshifter and Media extender = basically the same license purchased from Frey. You need one license per connection to main Sage server whether that connection originates from a "placeshifted pc" or a media extender. The license(s) resides on the machine that hosts SageTv Server.

Sage Client = The license resides on the remote machine and one is needed for each remote machine seperately.

That is my understanding...

[briands]

Originally Posted by salsbst

if you don't care about quality then placeshifter could replace client.

However, many of us run the client on HTPCs with decent TVs, etc.... in which case we wouldn't want to switch away to a lower quality solution.

There is an option in the placeshifter configuration to bypass transcoding... so there should be no quiality degradation.

[stanger89]

But there's still the lack of control over decoders and renderers, both of which can make a (sometime big) difference.

Plus there's the lack of DVD playback, which would kill me.

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by stanger89

Exactly, it would be great if the SageClient license model was like the Placeshifter/Extender model, ie simultaneous connections to server vs installs.

Maybe this is what you meant, but the Client license model shouldn't just be like the Placeshifter/Extender model, it should be the Placeshifter/Extender model. In other words, if I have a Placeshifter license on the server, I should be able to connect to it using any of the three kinds of client (SageTVClient, Placeshifter, or Extender).

Or to turn it around, I should be able to install both SageTVClient and Placeshifter on my laptop, and then choose which client to run depending on my connection speed, without having to buy a separate license for SageTVClient.

[stanger89]

That would definitely be great

[Humanzee]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

I should be able to install both SageTVClient and Placeshifter on my laptop, and then choose which client to run depending on my connection speed, without having to buy a separate license for SageTVClient.

What makes this worse is those people who already have an extender license get a freebee. Those who just have client get bilked. Not cool, Sage, Not cool.

So I think they should either make a single server side concurent connection license type or an individual license for each client type. (Client, Extender, Placeshifter)

Submit a bug report, at least then the'll know how you feel.

[AndyS]

Originally Posted by Humanzee

What makes this worse is those people who already have an extender license get a freebee. Those who just have client get bilked. Not cool, Sage, Not cool.

One way to look at this is that people who use an extender can't concurrently use that same license for placeshifting. Unless you power down the extender that license is tied up.

Andy.

[Humanzee]

Originally Posted by AndyS

One way to look at this is that people who use an extender can't concurrently use that same license for placeshifting. Unless you power down the extender that license is tied up.

Andy.

Ok, I don't know exactly how the extender works, but I figured that would be a requisite. Regardless, if I power down the extender and go to work, or on vacation then I get the benefits of placeshifter for no extra cash? That's my point, its not like I would be using the client software or the extender while I'm at work. So, my only consolation is that the extender owner might occationally get screwed when they forget to turn off their equipment before going out.

So here I am thinking about building a new HTPC to put in the bedroom and I have to decide if I want "client" which supports more features over LAN (HDTV, DVD, Decoder settings), or "extender/placeshifter" which supports Placeshifter. Oh, I guess I get to buy both. It just makes sence to only have 2 license types. Server and Connection. If I want to connect 2 devices to the server at once, then I need to buy 2 connection licenses. 3=3 etc.

OTOH, I would have no problem buying both if there were three different client license types. At least then I would know if I was buying an apple, an orange, or a peach. Not some contrived oraneach blend. So instead I am putting it all off, and feeling dejected.

[Narflex]

Ideally we would do it the way you're all talking about here; but there's security reasons why it's not done that way.

Think of SageTVClient more like a peer version of SageTV (it's basically the same app with some networked internals).

The fact that extender license buyers also get to use the placeshifter is because the security system allows for it. We could have made placeshifter and extender licenses different so no one got any freebies; maybe that would have avoided all of these complaints.

[DFA]

I don't begrudge(sp) Sage additional money for additional licensing. Sage has been good to me (us) with free major version upgrades. Most every other major vendor gets some cash for whole number software increments; discounted if owning a previous version. I have not spent any more money with Sage since my original purchase.

Yes Jeff, you guys should have segragated and charged separately for the PS and MVP licenses. Mo money for sage, less carping about the short comings of the client license. As I recall, there was a limited one-time offering for those with client licenses could convert for free to MVP/PS licenses or maybe the other way around. Also darn considerate of Frey.

Thirty bucks? Please.... Can't hardly do anything for that anymore including filling up the tank of your car.

DFA

[Juncti]

I'd have to agree. Sage certainly gives a lot to it's users and also is willing to add the flexibility of user created addons. They could keep it all secret, not allow any modifications, and charge for even the most basic of updates.

So lets enjoy what they give, rather than nitpick what little might be less than perfect.

[Para]

Originally Posted by Narflex

Think of SageTVClient more like a peer version of SageTV (it's basically the same app with some networked internals).

Everyone with a full client needs to remember, with that license, they get another location to use Studio. Extender licenses don't provide that option. So maybe the inclusion of placeshifter useage with the Extender license should be considered a balancing of benefits. I originally traded in my client license for an extenter license when they came out and it was a great decision. But recently, I have gone back and purchased another full client in order to easily access Studio. Hmm..I spent 46 bucks on gas today, I wish it provided a fraction of the satisfaction that my SageTV expendatures have given me.

We could have made placeshifter and extender licenses different so no one got any freebies; maybe that would have avoided all of these complaints.

No thanks. I believe you did the right thing. Besides, you can never eliminate complaints.

[robk]

Originally Posted by Para

I originally traded in my client license for an extenter license when they came out and it was a great decision.

Is it still possible to do this? I bought a client license, but the performance is terrible on a wireless connection. The Placeshifting works great on a 902.11b and g connection, when you manually set the streaming bit rate. I never would have bought the client license if the Placeshifting had existed back then! I only ocassionally use a laptop to view Sage.
Thanks,
Rob