Sage becoming XBMC?

[S_M_E]

[Brent]

Before this gets any further out of hand - I'm sorry for any misunderstandings. Hope S M E accepts that apology and we can end it right there.

[samgreco]

I avoided this thread until now because I KNEW it was going to devolve into of THOSE threads. I was right.

I think that there is way too much emotion in this discussion.

S.M.E., while I understand your point of view, I disagree completely.

In the stock STV, those stupid icons on the left of the recorded tv view has stopped me from using it. I have a habit of using the left arrow button to get to a previous menu. Those icons always require me to make an extra click. And I can’t make them go away. Silly, but there it is. That's one issue. There are many more.

Now for some empirical data: Everyone that has ever seen my setup has liked it, UNTIL they see the stock STV. So I decided to try showing the system to friends using the stock STV first. Not one person liked it. I've done it a dozen times.

BUT SageMC has it's issues too. I think that navigation can be tedious in many ways. So I use dynamic menus to get it closer.

And that's why so many people don't try Sage. They don't even realize that you can change it to something more suitable.

I know that when I install a demo version of something, I run through the menus, dig a bit into the settings and such. But if I don’t find it immediately comfortable and understandable, or easy to use, I’ll move onto something else. I may come back to it, but if something else is better, I’ll probably never try it again.

And I'd really like to know where you found the data that there are thousands of people using Sage, let alone the stock STV? I really don't think there are as many Sage users as you think.

Finally, there is NO REASON that an upgrade to Sage has to cause any performance hit at all. And in my mind, an upgrade to the Sage UI doesn’t necessarily mean “bling.” It just means clean, easy to navigate menu structure and media management. With program and media info in the right places.

And why not say that along with an upgrade, Sage should include a basic interface for those that feel like you, and another more advanced interface for the rest of us? But all based on the same core.

[korben_dallas]

As a 4+ year SageTV user (remember back when they were called Frey?), I'd like to share why I the UI needs some good improvement and why the current options are not ideal.

SageTV was my first PC "capture" application. I started looking into HTPC-based DVR/PVR at the same time a coworker/friend was looking at Tivo/HDD/DVD-R set top boxes. We compared our notes and ultimately Tivo was still at the top of that side of DVR, while Windows Media Center was at the top of the HTPC options. The subscription fees for Tivo turned me off, and I knew I wanted to go the HTPC route but kept running into forum/comment complaints about DRM in WMC and lack of flexibility with the recorded files. I saw a news release about some new tuners which supported various applications including SageTV, and so I started doing research on it.

The features and flexibility won me over no doubt, but I did have reservations about the UI compared to WMC. And the handful of times I've used WMC/VMC over the last four years, every time I see the UI slickness I say to myself "maybe I should try out Media Center".

I had a lot of hardware problems initially with SageTV, mainly due to the tuners. While not really SageTV's fault, it taught me to change things as little as possible in order to be able to isolate problems. So messing with imports, STV's, plugins, properties files, etc became forbidden activities. And after probably more than a year, getting a very reliable and predictable SageTV server was such an achievement, I had no desire to start fiddling with something that works well.

So here is the problem. The UI is dated, there is really no way one can be intellectually honest and say it is just fine. It needs a modern redesign, flash-type animations/transitions, and probably some easy one-button-on-off skins/themes. Alternate files, imports, and plugins are anathema to those of us who struggled/yearn for stability. I'm all for 3rd-party development for those interested in tinkering/extending their experience, but stability really only comes from the core, and only the SageTV developers can do the needed UI redesign within the core to maintain both stability and performance.

[pknowles]

One thing to keep in mind is that most of the Sage users are using old hardware initially for their servers (some of us still are). I got into SageTV, because I could build something WAY better then a Tivo, that was upgradable, and customizable for less money. I was able to do that because my Sage server is a computer that someone tossed out years ago (1.2 GHz AMD Thunderbird). If I couldn't have made a cheap server I never would have tried Sage. Now that I'm hooked, I'm going to build a much better server and upgrade to HD late next year. I think the UI just needs some reorganization, but it needs to run well on old hardware, because that was what allowed me to try Sage in the first place. Old hardware=low cost of entry for new customers.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by samgreco

In the stock STV, those stupid icons on the left of the recorded tv view has stopped me from using it. I have a habit of using the left arrow button to get to a previous menu. Those icons always require me to make an extra click. And I can’t make them go away. Silly, but there it is. That's one issue. There are many more.

Now for some empirical data: Everyone that has ever seen my setup has liked it, UNTIL they see the stock STV. So I decided to try showing the system to friends using the stock STV first. Not one person liked it. I've done it a dozen times.

BUT SageMC has it's issues too. I think that navigation can be tedious in many ways. So I use dynamic menus to get it closer.

And that's why so many people don't try Sage. They don't even realize that you can change it to something more suitable.

So, you use SageTV (with SageMC I assume) but you don't think others will?

And I'd really like to know where you found the data that there are thousands of people using Sage, let alone the stock STV? I really don't think there are as many Sage users as you think.

"SageTV Community Statistics
Threads: 35,018, Posts: 320,695, Members: 12,498, Active Members: 1,558"
That's JUST those on these forums, while you can think that everyone that uses Sage also uses the forums, I seriously doubt that. It's also likely that most users just use the stock STV. Either way there are thousands (at least) of Sage users but only the Sage staff have actual sales numbers.

Finally, there is NO REASON that an upgrade to Sage has to cause any performance hit at all. And in my mind, an upgrade to the Sage UI doesn’t necessarily mean “bling.”

Except people in *this* thread *are* talking about "bling" like animations, skins, slick, snazzy, effects, "Bling Bling" factor, etc. which would have a performance hit. I've already said that I'm not against features, like comskip, being added to the core and I've said, multiple times, that I wouldn't care if SageTV added SageMC to the installer as an option but I would prefer the SageTV team spent their development time on things other than bling.

And why not say that along with an upgrade, Sage should include a basic interface for those that feel like you, and another more advanced interface for the rest of us? But all based on the same core.

Why not say that users that want a different/advanced UI can use SageMC? As I keep saying, I'd rather the SageTV team use their "finite resources" on adding features and fixing bugs than developing bling that already exists in SageMC.

[evilpenguin]

I used to have a job where I was hired to write low level C/C++, drivers, and DSP. Then one day they asked me to design/implement the GUI to go along with my backend code and, let me tell you, it was an absolute disaster. Sure I had exposed all the of functionality of the code to the UI, but it was also ugly, unintuitive, and our users were constantly complaining about it. But hey, what did they expect? *I don't do UI's*.

And that's what I recognize in Sage's default UI: a design laid out by someone who doesn't do UI's. Which, in this day and age, is just plain crazy because the market is absolutely flooded with people with graphic design majors who took entire classes about "look and feel" rather than "Algorithms and Data Structures".

Also, its not really fair to ask someone to say what they think would be a good UI (unless, of coarse, they *are* a design major ). To misquote a Supreme Court Justice, "I can't define a good UI, but I know it when I see it".

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by korben_dallas

The UI is dated, there is really no way one can be intellectually honest and say it is just fine.

I can...

Originally Posted by evilpenguin

Also, its not really fair to ask someone to say what they think would be a good UI (unless, of coarse, they *are* a design major ). To misquote a Supreme Court Justice, "I can't define a good UI, but I know it when I see it".

You also have to accept that "good" is subjective. I don't think bling is "good," others do. In the end, I think that SageTV supporting plugins is the way to go because there can be any number of "good" UIs for anyone that wants to make one and Sage doesn't have to spend thousands of hours supporting more than one.

[evilpenguin]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

I can...

Man, you're just trolling now. You disagree, *we get it*.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by evilpenguin

Man, you're just trolling now. You disagree, *we get it*.

Why is it, according to you, that I'm the one trolling and not the guy that implies that those of us that are OK with the stock STV aren't intellectually honest?

Perhaps you're the one trolling because I disagree?

[VikingCrown]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

Why is it, according to you, that I'm the one trolling and not the guy that implies that those of us that are OK with the stock STV aren't intellectually honest?

Perhaps you're the one trolling because I disagree?

You're the only one here espousing the virtues of the Stock look here, we understand you don't like it. Everyone else is entitled to put out their views without you saying the exact same thing "I hate Bling" in different ways all day long. Can we just move on already?

[samgreco]

Why do these threads have to get this way! Gees. Can't we have a discussion. None of us will actually make these decisions anyway. It's all academic.

The idea is to discuss. SME, I get it. You like it the way it is and you want everyone to leave it the hell alone. Got it.

BUT, I guarantee you, Sage will NOT leave it alone. Eventually they will do something about it. All we are asking is for our voices to be heard. And ours and yours are now being heard. Maybe they will give you what you want, maybe what we want, or maybe both. I still think it can be both.

But I will also guarantee you that if they DON'T do something, the "thousands" will not hang around. Because someone will come along that will do both. Happens all the time. I really like Sage and the people running it and would like them to stick around. So I will tell them what I think they need to do that. And I don't have to think the same as you.

Maybe it's time for a poll....

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by VikingCrown

You're the only one here espousing the virtues of the Stock look here

I suggest you re-read the thread, I'm not the only one. I'm just the most vocal.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

Why is it, according to you, that I'm the one trolling and not the guy that implies that those of us that are OK with the stock STV aren't intellectually honest?

Because you don't seem able to accept that there's a large group of potential customers out there that don't consider Sage based solely on the UI. Nobody here is saying that you can't like the UI, or that sane people can't like the UI. FWIW, I'm with you, for my use the stock UI is great, and better than the alternatives. But Spend some time on the AVS or TGB forums, or any of the other forums/review sites out there.

What you'll find is that the UI holds lots of people back. There are tons of people with VMC over SageTV just because of the UI.

Look I've spent a quite a few posts arguing in favor of the stock UI, and I still like it. I still agree with you that it's "not bad". But the simple reality is the current UI is a negative on the SageTV feature list for a good number of people. And if SageTV updated the UI (without sacrificing the functionality you and I enjoy) they wouldn't lose any customers (I doubt anybody chooses Sage for the UI), but they'd probably gain a good number.

I mean I'm quite happy with SageTV 6.5, it works great, blows the competition away on features. But I think it would be great if SageTV 7 was a "reinvention" of Sage in the look-and-feel department, something to get Sage in the press, in a good way.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by samgreco

SME, I get it. You like it the way it is and you want everyone to leave it the hell alone. Got it.

Clearly, you don't "get it" because I'm not saying that "everyone" should leave the UI alone. I'm suggesting that SageTV leave the *additional* UIs to 3rd party devs like SageMC.

BUT, I guarantee you, Sage will NOT leave it alone. Eventually they will do something about it. All we are asking is for our voices to be heard. And ours and yours are now being heard. Maybe they will give you what you want, maybe what we want, or maybe both. I still think it can be both.

There's no doubt that Sage will eventually change, I don't think that change has to include a bunch of "bling."

But I will also guarantee you that if they DON'T do something, the "thousands" will not hang around.

I think that's your own bias not reality. People are still switching TO Sage, we see those threads here and as I pointed out, not all Sage users frequent the forum.

Maybe it's time for a poll....

You can make a poll but that would only determine what the people that vote in the poll think, not the community as a whole. I didn't vote in the lifehacker poll does that mean I don't use/support Sage? Of course not. It just means I wasn't willing to register to vote there.

[jaminben]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

You can make a poll but that would only determine what the people that vote in the poll think, not the community as a whole. I didn't vote in the lifehacker poll does that mean I don't use/support Sage? Of course not. It just means I wasn't willing to register to vote there.

Your just arguing for the sake of it now, how do you think polls in the real would take place? Do they take a sample selection of the population or do they poll the whole population?

Perhaps it time to close this thread.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by jaminben

Your just arguing for the sake of it now, how do you think polls in the real would take place? Do they take a sample selection of the population or do they poll the whole population?

Perhaps it time to close this thread.

You don't have to like that I don't agree with you but I have the right to disagree...

A forum poll isn't taking a sample of the Sage community, as a whole, just those that are on the forums during polling. I'd rather see how many SageTV licenses they've sold each year for the last 4-5 years but we'll never see that data...

[sainswor99]

Now that both camps seem to have settled into their respective corners (and it looks like we're about to enter the "you're wrong, I'm right" phase), here's my .02 on it.

1. I use the stock UI because I use Placeshifter for 90% of my watching. SageMC just doesn't feel mouse-friendly; it looks great on my TV, but I'd prefer to have one consistent interface to navigate. I also don't use the hidden features as a matter of principle; I feel like Sage ought to make a decision about whether or not to use them (instead of hiding them).

2. The stock interface looks dated. It's very cluttered, and focuses more on function than form. This is not necessarily a "close the window and never look at it again" thing, but I can see how easy it is to overlook something when it's not as pretty as other pieces of software.

3 My biggest complaint about the stock UI is not so much that its appearance is simple, but that it's not very click-friendly. I think someone pointed out earlier that the little icons on the left added an extra user click (when using a remote). When using a mouse, if I select a group of recordings, I have to click one more time to start playing the first one; why can't it just start playing it? It seems as if the decision to make little-used options more easily accessible overrode the decision to simplify navigation.

Of course, not all navigation options are shown. Why do I have to navigate up the hierarchy and then into a setup menu to get to setup features that are specific to my original starting point (the same with help)? Why can I turn "off" the advanced dialog associated with groups of recordings, but can't turn it back on without going to Setup? Why can't I manage favorites from my list of recordings? Why does the Media Center look so different from the recording screen? All of these are UI issues, but not necessarily related to "bling".

4. Claiming that adding "bling" adds a large performance hit is a bit of a strawman argument; while there is truth in the fact that animation does require some CPU/GPU resources, it obviously can be managed or you wouldn't see alternate UI's like SageMC or competitors emphasizing the "cuteness factor".



I stole the above image from GhostLobster's review of MediaPortal on GeekTonic. Note that the image above is both pretty, and yet shouldn't consume anymore resources than the standard stock UI (unless the little dude busts out in some fly dance moves if you wait too long to make a choice). I think performance concerns can be managed.

5. The big underlying question, however, is at what point should Sage make the business decision to invest resources in revamping the UI versus adding new features? There was a large influx of former BTV users this year because of SnapStream's decision to change business focus, so it's probably very difficult for Sage to make an accurate estimate as to how many potential sales are gained/lost by the UI versus the feature set. And, as long as the user community is willing to keep adding features to SageMC, there's no rush for Sage to make such a decision; it is, however, aggravating to those of us who love the product and dislike the stock UI to have to keep saying things like "I know it doesn't look as good as MediaPortal/XBMC/etc, but you can add this UI called SageMC to it...." But, in the end, it's an aggravation that we have no control over.

Stu

[evilpenguin]

I actually like this discussion, so if no one minds, I'm going to try and get it back on the rails.

not sure what the typical profile of a Lifehacker pollster is, but it's interesting to see the Lifehacker poll in the first post only had 3% votes for SageTV and 68% votes for XBMC/Boxee

At first I thought that poll was pretty interesting, but the more I dug into the results the more it seemed like it was just the result of Boxee getting a lot of good press lately rather than hoards of satisfied users.

I think its easy to read this thread and think that Sage users are starting to hate Sage, but that's really not the case. In fact, I'd say, that the problem being shown in this here is that we love Sage's hardware computability and PVR reliability (read: backend) too much to abandon it for the its flashy new competitors, but we're starting to get frustrated wondering why we can't have both. Do people agree?

Edit: NM, sainswor99 got it on track better

2. The stock interface looks dated. It's very cluttered, and focuses more on function than form. This is not necessarily a "close the window and never look at it again" thing, but I can see how easy it is to overlook something when it's not as pretty as other pieces of software.

I agree, but, in addition to looking dated the default UI is also literally dated. If you were to turn off core animations, I think a lot of people would be pretty hard pressed to tell the difference between the latest STV and the one that shipped with v3.0 almost 4 years ago. You could call it "If it isn't broke, don't fix it", but you could also just as easily call it being stagnant.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by sainswor99

4. Claiming that adding "bling" adds a large performance hit is a bit of a strawman argument

That would depend on how much bling was added but you admit that it does have a hit (which is more than some are willing to admit) whether or not it's managed is another story.

And, as long as the user community is willing to keep adding features to SageMC, there's no rush for Sage to make such a decision; it is, however, aggravating to those of us who love the product and dislike the stock UI to have to keep saying things like "I know it doesn't look as good as MediaPortal/XBMC/etc, but you can add this UI called SageMC to it...." But, in the end, it's an aggravation that we have no control over.

The SageTV team are the ones that will make the decisions. Narflex might want to make the most bling-blang-blingiest UI ever conceived and that's his right. I'm not "telling" SageTV what to do, I'm just posting my opinion...

Originally Posted by evilpenguin

I think its easy to read this thread and think that Sage users are starting to hate Sage, but that's really not the case. In fact, I'd say, that the problem being shown in this here is that we love Sage's hardware computability and PVR reliability (read: backend) too much to abandon it for the its flashy new competitors, but we're starting to get frustrated wondering why we can't have both. Do people agree?

I agree with your statement, that we all love Sage for it's features and some people want a new look, I'm just saying that a new UI can be provided by 3rd parties instead of SageTV who can then spend their time on the backend we all love.