[mythtv-users] MythTV vs. Windows Media Center

[Reynolds, Brian]

-----Original Message-----
From: mythtv-users-bounces at mythtv.org [mailto:mythtv-users-bounces at mythtv.org] On Behalf Of Eric Sharkey
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 11:03 PM
To: Discussion about MythTV
Subject: Re: [mythtv-users] MythTV vs. Windows Media Center

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
I have:

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
non-compressed video.

Eric
_______________________________________________

Eric,

1) Yes, I mean analog.  NTSC is a broadcast standard, not a resolution/interlace scheme.  Channels 2-99 are analog on my cable system.  My kids watch this almost exclusively.  There are a few (very few) programs in this space that I am interested in.  Standard-definition digital channels are SD QAM channels, not NTSC.  Right?

In my case, unfortunately, all the available HD channels, except for the sub-channels that I am not interested in, are spread around on different frequencies (according to the "Channels Page" at silicondust.com).  If you want to check, I'm in the US at ZIP code 32935.  So the feature you mention won't help me.

Regarding the network bandwidth... I accept that.  Thanks.

P.S.  Eric, I really appreciate your professionalism.  Thank you.

Brian