|
|
|||||||
| SageTV Software Discussion related to the SageTV application produced by SageTV. Questions, issues, problems, suggestions, etc. relating to the SageTV software application should be posted here. (Check the descriptions of the other forums; all hardware related questions go in the Hardware Support forum, etc. And, post in the customizations forum instead if any customizations are active.) |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
12-14-2003, 05:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
My frustration with PVR programs, or "Why can't Frey and SS work together?"
The waiting is killing me. I'm waiting for one company to add all the capabilities and features I want before I purchase. It really sucks!
For more than 2 years I've been looking for a PVR solution. I've tried them all, and for some reason or other, none of them do what I want. The trouble is, all of them together have every feature I'm looking for, but none of them indivdually. Here are some examples.
I guess unless the 2 companies can get together, I'll have to wait and see what Sage 2 brings. Great. More waiting!  -Andy. 
|
|
#2
12-14-2003, 06:30 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Sage will always stay away from items that hinder or reduce image quality so you can forget encoding or re-compressing to MPEG4 as well as internet streaming. Though maybe a user will come up with something.
SmartSkip in SS is unreliable since there is no real way of picking up a commercial start and end - plus the networks keep coming up with ways of defeating it. You can play (or stream to a client) any open standard format including Divx. Only the MS formats don't work I believe. GUI is up to the user. I own and use both for fun and like the Sage UI better overall - though I like the SS OSD better. Sage 2 will have many looks and feels though so hopefully you will find something you like. Web scheduling is supposed to be coming as well but I too am waiting to see how it is implemented. Good luck!
|
|
#3
12-14-2003, 06:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: My frustration with PVR programs, or "Why can't Frey and SS work together?"
Andy,
The short answer as to why the two companies don't work together is that they are competitors (especially when SageTV is cheaper). I know that seems like a snide remark, which it may well be, but it is also the truth. A more accurate question might be "Why doesn't either Sage or SS provide the features that I need?" I am a former TiVo user, so be aware that the following is biased in that direction: Multiple and redundant tuner support: While SageTV does support networked tuners, I wouldn't say that it is indeed redundant. If a networked tuner is not working, it can choose one of the other available ones, but if the main server crashes then there is no way to record. It would be nice if I could have multiple servers running (rather than a client and a server) and have them communicate. Multiple tuner support is why I bought SageTV. Client/Server architecture: I have my SageTV client driving my TV. Concerning the above comment, I have a PVR-350 in that STB which is setup as a network recorder for my SageTV server. SmartSkip: I have modified my FF2 and RW2 buttong to be 30 seconds forward and reverse rather than 2.5 minutes. This allows me to skip commercial breaks quite easily (some are not 2.5 minutes long, especially on cable). I really prefer TiVo's multiple speed FF and RW. Recompression: I don't keep my programs archived, and I use the MPEG2 decoder in the PVR-350 to watch TV so reencoding is not a priority to me. When I have a program that I want to save, I dump it to DVD. I have seen quite a few people asking for this feature. Playing DivX recordings in the FSGUI: I don't know what you mean here. I have used SageTV to play some DivX format Anime that a friend lent me. Much better watching it on the TV than on the PC  .Nice GUI interface: I found this link in the SageTV Software area. The UI looks quite a bit better than the current one. One thing you can do is keep rooting for the features that you think are needed. A company will incorporate those features that it thinks people want. Personally, I have never been disappointed with my SageTV system. In fact, I got rid of my TiVo about a month ago because it was just drawing power and not being used.
|
|
#4
12-14-2003, 07:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I own and use products from SS (2 licenses) and Sage (all three products). I have them setup on 5 computers in my house. I use each of them for their strengths. I lean more on SS so I'll say right up front I'm more biased toward SS (because I know it better).
Personal Oppinion: I think SS is much more advanced these days. They continue to pound out new features in each new release. The software runs in multiple processes so if one piece has a problem it doesn't affect other pieces. Because the software runs in different processes you can use standard windows tools to set the process level (faster/slower recompression, etc). Previously Sage was more stable, but now I'd say it's a toss up. Using a 250 board they are both normally super stable with no problems. SS still gets a bad rap at times because they support way too many capture cards (software encoders). "I find" that SS supports everything "I want" a PVR to do except Support for mutliple tuners, folders for playback and streaming of mpg files (live TV with a PVR-250). The multiple tuners can be handled to a degree by having multiple licenses of SS at present. The next SS beta will support multiple tuners and folders for playback. SS has far more features then Sage overall but Sage 2.0 could change all of that! I'm really looking forward to the 2.0 preview. I just hope it's not a "scriptable snin" environment which I can't help but think this is what it is. For me I don't really care about UI as much as the backend feature set. For example, I want the ability to change the way Sage works behind the scenes for some things. As an example, I can't stand the way Sage saves all Live TV shows to disk as if they were recordings I setup. I know the basic argument that these will get deleted when the space is needed but I've got 2.5+ Terrabytes of show storage and they haven't needed to get deleted. They just "pollute" my recorded listing making it very difficult to find the shows I'm looking for. Try scrolling over a thousand shows to find what you're looking for and it gets tired pretty quick! I also don't like the fact that I can't pick the directory in Sage (like I can in SS) to save my shows to (different shows, different directories/drives). I believe this will be handled in 2.0!In SS I've moved the database off of the machine and onto another machines (actually SQL server) since it's just an ODBC database. I created my own web interface and sceduling routines to support multiple machines (multiple tuners). If I can do this then I'm sure SS will be able to in a much more elaborate manner The SmartSkip/chappers in SS work very well. Much better then Tivo did. They also save the chapter information to an XML file so you can use this information with an external program to "chop" out the commercials yourself (I'm sure they will never directly support this as it would be a legal plague for them). SS can also directly archive to DVD for you. For me the many others the UI in SS is fine (could be better but works well as is). SS can be skinned to a degree but most don't bother because the UI is pretty good to begin with. The functionality is good except for the lack of multiple tuners and true directories/folders and the ability to stream live TV in mpg. SS was a major underdog in my eyes when Sage 2.0 was originally announced. However, since then they have come on very stong and have added a lot of features. The next beta release will target the few/couple features Sage has over SS and will give them the lead in almost everything. At current progress of both software packages I'd say (guessing) that SS will have release 3.5 out the door before Sage 2.0 is out. At this point Sage will have a lot of catching up to do. I personally think SS is going to run away with things and no other PVR company will be able keep up. They have a large development staff. They've spent the last couple of releases cleaning up the code. Breaking process out as stand alone. Reworking the code to be better suited to multiple people dev. teams and are working the code to make a nice API for developers. They are doing things in pieces. On the other hand Sage is now tackling a lot of things in one big release. Hopefully it will be really stable and won't require 2 or 3 patch levels to make everything work correctly (bug fixes). BTW, the comment on price is not valid. There is only a couple of bucks difference in price between Sage and SS. Of course if you need to stream your content then Sage is more expensive then SS (unless you're trying to stream mpg in SS which can't be done). The competition is hot and it's a very good thing for the consumer! Carlo
|
|
#5
12-15-2003, 08:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Unfortunately, based on what I see TODAY - I agree. SS is very serious about making their product THE computer based PVR. And they are doing it by accelerating their code stability and feature set very, very quickly.
Of course I have not seen Sage TV 2.0 yet, so my opinion could change quickly. There are only really two features that SS needs to cover what I believe to be 'most' of the Sage TV market - multiple tuners (coming in SS v3.5), and a true client offering (probably coming in SS v3.6). Of course Sage TV has network encoders, which I don't use, but is a very cool feature. I don't think anyone else has plans for THAT! I guess first one to get a true interface for the Media MVP will have an advantage for a while too. What would be best for consumers though is if there is room for both products on the market long term, with both companies being as profitable as they need to be.  Jason Quote:
Last edited by JasonJoel; 12-15-2003 at 08:13 AM.
|
|
#7
12-15-2003, 10:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Not SS but a user has already created a SS style skin for the Media MVP player. It is very nice looking too. While this isn't a client it does tie the two together very well. Carlo
|
|
#8
12-15-2003, 12:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Problem with SnapStream 3.x is that the features will not be stable for at least a version or two after that (unless they set a new precedence) so quoting version numbers is pointless. Sage has had the root PVR stuff pretty much debugged by now since it has been out for so long. I am getting tired of users on both sides comparing the products based on what is coming.
I do sense that SS is becoming more aggressive though, and it is inevitable that the missing items will become stable at some point. I think they are tired of loosing customers to Sage over those missing features. You can definitely feel the pressure and yeah, it is good for us consumers .
|
|
#9
12-15-2003, 01:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
True! Just because a feature is 'implemented' in version X.X doesn't mean it is fully usable. heh.
Come on Sage TV 2.0... Since I don't really use any of the 'SS-only' features (transcoding, remote scheduling/web interface) I think Sage TV 2.0 is going to be EXACTLY right for MY uses. But, we'll see! Jason Quote:
|
|
#10
12-15-2003, 01:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm not sure I follow you on this. Most software has problems to some degree on another and it takes a revision or two to get little things worked out. Don't you think this same thing will happen to Sage 2.0 when it comes out? Considering how much they are adding (almost new software) it's bound to need a couple releases to get things fixed up.
The multituner support in SS has been in the works for a couple of versions now. They have been making the underlying changes to EPG/scheduling and this is already done and released. The support for multiple tuners is for the most part done now and is in the shipping code. When you say Sage already has the root PVR stuff pretty much debugged by now you infer that SS doesn't, which isn't true. From a maturity standpoind they are both very stable in their current releases. Why is quoting version numbers or saying next release pointless? It gives a sense of when a feature is coming out.
|
|
#11
12-15-2003, 01:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have ran BOTH SS and Sage TV for a year now... From my experiences, SS is always less stable than Sage TV has been. Look at how transcoding is a little 'different' every stupid release...
Plus, I'll believe that 'most' of the work for multiple tuners has been implemented when I see it. Honestly, I don't beleive that to be true at all from reading the beta forums over there... We'll see. Anyway, this is getting pretty off-topic now. I'll quit posting now. Jason Quote:
|
|
#12
12-15-2003, 01:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Sage 2.0 will be a major release and will have issues as affecting all new areas. I believe that the core PVR features are not changing and those are the features I refer to (Multi-Tuner, Multi-Source, IR, and such - base PVR stuff). This is part of the real meat of a PVR application and adding them at some point as SS is going to do is a MAJOR overhaul so it is natural that those types of changes will take longer to debug. I would hope that no one would hold anything against them for having issues for awhile with that stuff especially since they will have even more issues since they support software encoders (or will they for multi-tuner?).
I just have little faith in my SS. It stays in the bedroom because I just don’t trust it 100% to record my shows. It has let me down too many times – not constantly, but with these applications one missed show is a failure. Adding new features so quickly is just going to compound this issue.
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Linear Mode
