Sage Movie Wall Survey

[PLUCKYHD]

Hey guys just wanted to get some opions of users. Help me determine where my time is better spent.

Cheers and TIA.

[MitchSchaft]

I'm in the category of users that get very slow response and lockups. It's configured properly, brand new sagemc import, etc. I use the latest beta (or try ).

Thanks for the hard work. This thing is too awesome to give up on. I'll be around!

[petereader]

I chose the first option. I'm running the beta and it has been awesome! Already showcased it to a number of friends, a big WOW factor in this house. Girlfriend loves it to, that could be make or break for me, so you can almost count that as a second vote. Between the summer break for most shows and your new movie wall, I find myself watching alot more movies again.

It's certainly come a long ways from the 2 minute wait to get into it from my client. Great work, and if you're planning on implementing any of this on the music section, then I better clean up my music files, because I'll be listening to quite a bit more music as well.

[kingwr]

I like it. However, it doesn't work well in a regular Sage interface; too hard a transition. I would like to see an entire Sage STV built around this theme (like you have nothing better to do).

Of course, I would like to see a Sage STV that was a total rip-off of Windows 7 MC. Too bad Sage doesn't support MCML.

[tmiranda]

I'd also vote for "It looks great, but please make it work on the default STV".

[PLUCKYHD]

Those voting for faster performance I am curious what hardware you have (it does take a more powerful pc for list view and coverflow view)

Also what is your Java Heap Size?

In my testing it is faster than the default Sagemc video library on wall view. Coverflow view is vastly improved in my latest internal build (very fast) and I am working on list view speed improvements.

Definately would like to hear feedback on the speed request.

[Fuzzy]

Better Grouping Options.. perhaps being able to use Next and Prev from within the wall to change folders or something...

Originally Posted by tmiranda

I'd also vote for "It looks great, but please make it work on the default STV".

Oh yeah.. and ^THIS^...

[loomdog32]

My only real complant about SMW is that is only uses posters and not "folder.jpg" files for cover art when in coverflow view...

I get good speed at the server and on clients.. This went 1000 times faster when I ditched my unraid setup and moved my video collection to the sage box.......


Im really lookin forward to the music and picture walls to get that uniform look in Sage..

[MitchSchaft]

PC Specs:

WinXP Pro
Phenom 9500 quad-core (2.2GHz)
3GB ram
Geforce 9500GT 512MB
1GB Java Heap

I'm using your latest beta. Usually it will just completely freeze up and I have to kill Sage through the task manager.

[heffe2001]

Originally Posted by loomdog32

My only real complant about SMW is that is only uses posters and not "folder.jpg" files for cover art when in coverflow view...

I get good speed at the server and on clients.. This went 1000 times faster when I ditched my unraid setup and moved my video collection to the sage box.......


Im really lookin forward to the music and picture walls to get that uniform look in Sage..

I get great speed with the regular SageMC video library once the centralized fanart was set up, and I moved all the images to a drive on my server. I still use the Unraid system for the actual video storage, just don't use the folder.jpg files for each movie that's on there (stored centrally now). The speed up updates on the screen since moving over improved 100-fold. I'd never switch back myself, the slowdown would kill the WAF .

[loomdog32]

Originally Posted by heffe2001

I get great speed with the regular SageMC video library once the centralized fanart was set up, and I moved all the images to a drive on my server. I still use the Unraid system for the actual video storage, just don't use the folder.jpg files for each movie that's on there (stored centrally now). The speed up updates on the screen since moving over improved 100-fold. I'd never switch back myself, the slowdown would kill the WAF .

When using the default SageMC screens, I use "covers" or folder.jpg files in the selection screen (since they are version specific) and "posters" in the info screen.. So 99% of the fanart is located in the info screens. Which is really nice about the new SMW that the info screens are not needed and still get the fanart

The default is actually SLOWER now and SMW is FASTER since ditching unRAID... Im using flexRAID now, so I still have parity protection and am able to do everything I was before.. Except with 1 computer running instead of 2, 24x7

[PLUCKYHD]

Originally Posted by loomdog32

When using the default SageMC screens, I use "covers" or folder.jpg files in the selection screen (since they are version specific) and "posters" in the info screen.. So 99% of the fanart is located in the info screens. Which is really nice about the new SMW that the info screens are not needed and still get the fanart

The default is actually SLOWER now and SMW is FASTER since ditching unRAID... Im using flexRAID now, so I still have parity protection and am able to do everything I was before.. Except with 1 computer running instead of 2, 24x7

This is how performance should be faster than default SageMC video library at least in all my testing. If you are having speed issues 90% of the time they can be resolved by following the steps mentioned in the below post

http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/show...123#post368123

[benjamintm]

I'm using an HD200 connected to a E8400 (3GhZ) Core2 with 3GB of memory running Windows XP Pro 32-bit. I'm using the latest betas of SageTV, SageMC, and (I thought) SMW. My heap is set to 1024, which is overkill, but I had the same sluggishness at 512, so I upped the heap to see if that helped.

One other thing I'd like to see, documentation wise (and I might have missed this) are steps for configuring SMW for each type of display, or at least the screenshots shown. There are a lot of options that I don't fully understand how they tie together.

Ben

Originally Posted by PLUCKYHD

Those voting for faster performance I am curious what hardware you have (it does take a more powerful pc for list view and coverflow view)

Also what is your Java Heap Size?

In my testing it is faster than the default Sagemc video library on wall view. Coverflow view is vastly improved in my latest internal build (very fast) and I am working on list view speed improvements.

Definately would like to hear feedback on the speed request.

[PLUCKYHD]

Originally Posted by benjamintm

I'm using an HD200 connected to a E8400 (3GhZ) Core2 with 3GB of memory running Windows XP Pro 32-bit. I'm using the latest betas of SageTV, SageMC, and (I thought) SMW. My heap is set to 1024, which is overkill, but I had the same sluggishness at 512, so I upped the heap to see if that helped.

One other thing I'd like to see, documentation wise (and I might have missed this) are steps for configuring SMW for each type of display, or at least the screenshots shown. There are a lot of options that I don't fully understand how they tie together.

Ben

Is is running okay for you?

Please post your other question in the main stvi forum for SMW and I will answer over there, It is pretty easy to change views (view/filter option) and then view.

[loomdog32]

Originally Posted by PLUCKYHD

This is how performance should be faster than default SageMC video library at least in all my testing. If you are having speed issues 90% of the time they can be resolved by following the steps mentioned in the below post

http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/show...123#post368123

All my background pics are 1280x720 and folder.jpg are 366x518 (thats the size mymovies uses.. ive kept them at that size since converting).. I dont have any posters.. I am sure of the sizes as I do all my fanart manually

My coments about speed were about moving from having all my media and fanart on a unraid box to the same box with sage.