[mythtv-users] Thoughts on the upcoming Boxee Box as a possible frontend?

Matt Emmott memmott at gmail.com
Sat Sep 25 14:06:43 UTC 2010


On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Thomas Mashos <tgm4883 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Raymond Wagner <raymond at wagnerrp.com>wrote:
>
>>  On 9/24/2010 19:28, Matt Emmott wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not very familiar with the CE4100 and most searches turned up more
>>> articles on the Boxee Box, but I believe I saw on Engadget that it supports
>>> VAAPI, which I see is in preliminary support in .24. Wow that was a run-on
>>> sentence. Is anybody familiar with this chip and its feasibility with Myth?
>>> If it's an Atom then it's x86 code, which should IMHO make it Myth-friendly.
>>>
>>
>> It's an Atom, and only single core and 1.2GHz at that, so it's a piece of
>> junk performance wise.  It's paired with the same PowerVR graphics found in
>> the GMA500, and you're going to be relying on that for anything you might
>> want to do.  Assuming you've got clean, error free content, in a codec with
>> settings compatible with the chip, it will work great.  If you've got
>> something else, you've got nothing to fall back on, just like any other
>> underpowered system.
>>
>> That's assuming this thing has enough memory.  I've not see that statistic
>> printed anywhere.  512MB is a bare minimum for a frontend at HD resolutions,
>> 1GB would be better.
>>
>>
>>  A) What OS is it running
>>>
>>
>> Windows.  Netflix streaming requires Silverlight, which requires Windows.
>>  Unless they've signed some deal with Netflix which provides them a custom
>> interface, that's the only option.
>>
>> In the end, you just have an ugly, glossy black and green cube-like thing,
>> that doesn't fit in with any of your other equipment.  The least they could
>> have done was make it rectangular and thin like the Apple kit, such that it
>> could be strapped onto the back of a TV and forgotten about.
>> _______________________________________________
>> mythtv-users mailing list
>> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
>> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>>
>
> I have to agree with Raymond here. For not much more you can get a Zotac
> with a dual core atom, nvidia ion graphics, and you can mount it to the back
> of your TV. The Boxee Box seems like an overpriced, under powered, piece of
> equipment. IMHO it's to little to late.
>
>
Why does the CPU matter? If it's an FE only it's not going to be doing any
commflagging or transcoding or anything intensive, it's just going to be
playing back videos. And if the GPU can handle what they claim it can
handle, isn't that enough? Obviously the question of VAAPI support in Myth
is a factor but I don't see how the CPU matters anymore.

Some more research turned up all anecdotal evidence but it does appear that
the box is running Linux, and they have an agreement with Netflix.

As for the Zotac, the best I could find for a Zotac Zbox dual-core Atom was
$209 for a barebones kit with no memory or hard drive. Aesthetics aside, the
Boxee box comes with a running OS (albeit no hard drive that I'm aware of)
and a really sweet bluetooth remote. I don't disagree that the Zotac has
more options and may be more powerful, but once you add ram/hdd/remote it's
going to cost roughly $100 more than the Boxee Box, and if Boxee can run a
MythTV frontend with a $15 SDHC card, I don't see the advantage of the
Zotac.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20100925/3a5ee915/attachment.htm>


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list