[mythtv-users] tv guide line-up free

Michael T. Dean mtdean at thirdcontact.com
Wed Sep 5 20:53:56 UTC 2007


On 09/05/2007 03:29 PM, Robert Current wrote:
> I tried to stay away from this, but the level of lies and misdirection
> made my stomach turn.
>   
...
>>> The ONLY two legitimate reasons to not try an alternative I know of
>>> are this: not to do it that I see is if it is clearly illegal, which
>>> isn't the case here IMHO (and which hasn't stopped screen scraping
>>> anyway).  Or, second, if no one has time or is willing to work on it…
>>> The second option seems to be the case…  And I'll agree to that…  But
>>> the other excuses seem like FUD to me.
>>>       
>> Or because TitanTV said, "No."
>>     
>
> I have a hard time believing this, especially since so many other PVR
> groups use it.

You're right.  I'm lying to you to propagate FUD.  After all, I'm making
a fortune from the not-for-profit Schedules Direct organization, of
which I am nothing more than a paying subscriber.

>   That might have more to do with the question and how
> it was asked.
>
> I'm sure if someone asked "can we download gobs of data and never use
> your website like it was intended" they might have got a "no."  If
> they have a documented "no" somewhere (which no one has shown), I'm
> betting it was because of how the approached the solution.
>
> Was the question "what would a project have to do to qualify as an
> approved PVR?"  What would users need to do to comply to TitanTV's
> terms?

Yeah, because it's so difficult for enterprising users to work around
terms (especially when terms are adhered to/enforced in open-source
code).  OK.  I guess that would never happen.  No one would ever talk
about or actually scrape web sites whose terms forbid it.  (No specific
accusation here.  No specific examples.  I'm saying that no one would
ever do this.)

>   I'm almost positive that's not the question that was asked.
>   

Perhaps Isaac and the others should have hired you for your diplomacy
skills.  Then we'd all be using TitanTV, I'd be posting about all the
benefits of TitanTV, and you'd be, er, complaining about the FUD I'm
spreading.

> It sure wasn't because TitanTV doesn't want to support more PVRs, I'm
> sure their hardware partners would like to see this "no we won't
> support a PVR using that hardware" answer.  The problem is, no one
> will show this answer, because it doesn't exist.
>
> Simple fact is, other PVR groups have multiple solutions now, MythTV
> doesn't.

Thanks for ignoring all the work that Stuart Morgan did to explicitly
bring a new feature (= not a fix) from trunk to 0.20-fixes (and 0.20.2)
that allows /any/ baseline compliant XMLTV grabber to work with MythTV. 
Write a TitanTV XMLTV grabber and *it works* with MythTV.

Thanks for ignoring the work that Greg Estabrooks did to write the
DishNET EIT-parsing code--which /you/ happen to be using instead of SD.

Thanks for ignoring the work that Daniel Kristjansson, Stuart
Auchterlonie, Janne Grunau, and others did to write support for EIT, in
general.

Oh, and of course, thanks for ignoring Myth's built-in ability to read
in listings from /any/ XMLTV file (regardless of grabber support), that
has existed for years.

(Who's spreading the FUD?)

>   Whenever someone brings something up, MOST of the
> conversation is from the Pro-Schedules-Direct people, who should be
> the LAST ones to comment.
>   

And I, for one, welcome our new listings overlords.  I'd like to  remind
them that as a (not-so) trusted mythtv-users personality, I can be
helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.

> It seems a bit odd how when people ask for alternatives, the
> conversation instantly gets dominated by Pro-Schedules-Direct people
> (including people actively involved in the project with there
> reputation at stake if someone comes up with a better idea).  And then
> those people instantly push the topic to why you should abandon all
> hope other then send in your $15 signup fees.
>
> Yea, I take it personally.  I don't even have a personal need for
> Direct Data.  The lack of working EIT data myth Schedules Direct is
> pushing is just that, a myth, FUD…  And, even though I've got NO
> reason to need it, I have an issue with people who try to squash or
> misdirect conversations about alternatives.  Someone asked an honest
> question, and that question WAS NOT "why is Schedules Direct great."
> That question was not "Is Schedules Direct worth $15."  But that is
> what the people on the Schedules Direct project want you to talk
> about.
>   

But, yet, all people have done in this thread is respond to my one post
that said, "Remember that SD gives you a lot of good things, and I have
no intention of wasting my time (that's worth more than $5/mo to me) to
even research some other solution and verify its legality, let alone
code that solution."  Had people ignored that post (or even read it and
considered it with an open mind--oh, wait, who am I kidding), you all
could have had your thread for discussing other solutions.  It seems,
though, based on the lack of responses that actually provide other
solutions, that no one out there (save Rod Roark, with his DirecTV
solution) is willing to devote the time to come up
with/code/test/maintain/support another solution.  You've even said--in
no uncertain terms--that you won't do the work for a TitanTV solution.

> Look at other PVR forums, see what they have done…  You quickly find
> out Schedules Direct isn't the only game in town.  You see people
> having long, detailed conversations about where other data sources
> are, how one might use them, and even sample implementations.  And
> they don't get constantly interrupted by "Schedules Direct is Better"
> cheerleaders!
>
> But if you try to talk anything but Schedules Direct here, it will
> turn into a Schedules Direct conversation instantly, with the
> martyrs…. "oh, I spent all my time for nothing"  and "oh, I have
> nothing to gain"  and "I don't need to do this" stuff.  Get down off
> the cross and use the wood to build a bridge to get over it!
> Something is CLEARLY at stake, you CLEARLY have motivation… pride,
> recognition, etc…  How many of them would actually do it anonymously?
> Don't bullshit us with the "no personal gain" and "it's a non-profit
> corporation" stuff.
>   

Do you realize that Isaac--for years--paid for all the bandwidth and
hosting of the MythTV servers out of his own pocket (though this has
since changed)?  Do you realize that even when he was approached by
people volunteering--of their own choice and without solicitation--to
donate money to help him cover these costs, he refused.

> This conversation ended it's productivity the minute Schedules Direct
> came up.

I guess I did my job, then.  I can't wait to get this month's bonus check.

>   I've been in discussions since the mid-1990's on the
> internet, and this is the most censored group (mailing list, forum,
> even news-group) I've ever seen.  People intentionally staying silent,
> misdirecting, and trying to quiet any conversations on many topics
> that would seem 100% relevant.  What's sad is how many people know
> that and keep their mouth shut.

Yes.  Censored.  That's why you won't find anything in the archives when
you search for "schedules direct sucks"--we've removed them from the
Internet.  It was a lot "like trying to take pee out of a swimming
pool," but once we perfected the technology, we started to test it
here.  Now, I think, we can expand our control and start to remove all
of these non-SD discussions from the rest of the Internet.

Mike




More information about the mythtv-users mailing list