[mythtv-users] MythTV vs. Windows Media Center
eric at lisaneric.org
Sat Feb 12 04:02:36 UTC 2011
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Reynolds, Brian
<Brian.Reynolds at fiserv.com> wrote:
> 1) I see your point. However, many of the channels on my local cable are still in NTSC. I don't watch them much (but sometimes I do), but my kids do pretty frequently. The HDHR doesn't appear to handle NTSC.
Do you mean analog? NTSC is often used to indicate a resolution (e.g.
480i), which can be encoded in a digital signal. The HDHR handles
NTSC digital channels just fine, but it doesn't do analog cable.
> Can you further explain "multirec" mode?
> Are you saying that I can somehow simultaneously record FIVE channels with TWO tuners?
Yes. Considerably more, actually.
If you look at the channel listings on the Silicon Dust web site,
you'll see that every channel is given a two part number. In my case
71-1031 10.2 WCAUDT2 704x480i 4:3
71-1036 10.3 WCAUDT3 704x480i 4:3
71-1140 10.1 WCAUDT 1920x1080p 1920x1080i 16:9
71-1141 16 WPSGDT 1920x1080i 16:9
72-1084 23 WNJSDT 1920x1080i 16:9
72-1143 3.1 KYWDT 1920x1080i 16:9
72-1867 52.2 WNJSDT2 720x480i 4:3
A tuner tunes a physical channel (say 71) and then that one tuner on
the HDHR can record all channels multiplexed on the same frequency.
One dual tuner HDHR can record all 7 channels in the list above.
> 3) The key phrase here is "yet to be released". While I realize that the Ceton card takes a while to get, it is actually released hardware. Many people are actually using it. When will the Hauppauge solution be released?
When Cable Labs gives them the green light. My understanding is they
went into mass production last December, but they still don't have
certification from Cable Labs.
> Also, I am leery of a network-connected solution like the HDHR. The reason I am leaning toward internal tuners is to take advantage of the full bandwidth of those cards.
This doesn't make any sense. There's more than enough bandwith on a
100Mb/s network to carry the full output of all multiplexes of two
digital channels, and gigabit switches are cheap.
> I would prefer to be able to record HD sources without any additional compression, if possible.
The HDHR does not recompress anything. It doesn't have the horsepower
to do that.
> I realize that the cable company compresses what I record on my DVR, but if I can get OTA ATSC for my local channels, I would prefer to record those. Disc space is relatively cheap. Non-compressed video is attractive to me.
Again, this doesn't make much sense. Cable companies don't provide
More information about the mythtv-users