[mythtv-users] What if...?

[Thomas Mashos]

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Jay Foster <jayfoster at roadrunner.com> wrote:
> On 9/20/2012 8:53 AM, mythtv-users-request at mythtv.org wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Stefan D <raptorjr08 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >  What if MythTV should be a backend only project?
>>> >
>>> >  Yes i know it is maybe a stupid question, but think about it. If you
>>> > do
>>> >  something shouldn't it be done better than everybody else? I think
>>> > that on
>>> >  the backend side MythTV still is one of the best solutions you could
>>> > have,
>>> >  but others is closing in fast and in some areas they have already
>>> > passed
>>> >  MythTV.(I tried tvheadend and scanning for channels. I never thought
>>> > it
>>> >  could be that easy to setup a backend pvr service, totally amazing.
>>> > What if
>>> >  the MythTV backend could be that easy?)
>>> >
>>> >  I know all about the comments when you "criticize" open source, all
>>> > the
>>> >  "if you want it do it yourself", "we do this on our free time", "we
>>> > don't
>>> >  get paid for doing this", and i understand all of those comments. But
>>> >  please don't answer this if you have any of those comments. Think more
>>> > of
>>> >  how it would benefit MythTV if the few developer resources could be
>>> > more
>>> >  concentrated on making the backend the best and leave all other far
>>> > behind?
>>> >
>>> >  I have used MythTV for almost 8 years now and it have been fun. I have
>>> >  always used the master version since i want to try the latest and help
>>> > to
>>> >  find bugs if i can. Even though there have been progress in many
>>> > areas, and
>>> >  i don't want to put down any ones work, but the frontend software is
>>> > pretty
>>> >  far behind many other solutions, maybe even years behind. And finding
>>> >  developers with the time and skill is always hard. Is it really worth
>>> > their
>>> >  precious time to try to make the frontend better? When it probably
>>> > never
>>> >  will be the best, only good enough? Wouldn't it be better to make the
>>> > best
>>> >  backend? Easy to setup, everything done through a browser, scheduling,
>>> > epg,
>>> >  and so on. And then have a killer interface that other clients could
>>> > use to
>>> >  controll the backend. Either for streaming or scheduling recordings or
>>> >  whatever the backend can offer.
>>> >
>>> >  I recently got tired of the limited amount of features of the
>>> > frontend,
>>> >  and even though there is some really nice looking themes, the frontend
>>> >  feels old. So i started looking around for other solutions, but since
>>> > i
>>> >  knew that MythTV backend does a fantastic job i wanted some other
>>> > client to
>>> >  integrate with the backend. I could probably be beaten up by saying
>>> > this,
>>> >  but i started to look at XBMC. It is very advanced, good looking, many
>>> >  addons, skins and services you could install, it feels like what you
>>> > always
>>> >  wanted mythfrontend to be. And it seems to be a lot more developers so
>>> > you
>>> >  have many more things to choose from and can customize the client
>>> > exactly
>>> >  how you want it to be. In recent development version they are adding a
>>> > PVR
>>> >  interface, making it possible for developers to make plugins to
>>> > backend
>>> >  services, like MythTV.
>>> >
>>> >  That was when i thought about my original question. What if MythTV was
>>> >  only a backend project? It could be the best combination ever, and the
>>> >  developers time would really be used efficiently. Yes i know, XBMC is
>>> > not
>>> >  perfect in every way either, but it is close.
>>> >
>>> >  I know people do this because they think it is fun so it is not like a
>>> >  commercial project where you just rearrange the resources and tell
>>> > them to
>>> >  concentrate on something else. But isn't it more fun to be the best,
>>> > making
>>> >  the best backend in the Linux world? I know all the hard work that has
>>> > been
>>> >  put down in MythTV, but maybe it is time to think a little different?
>>> >
>>> >  There is some great developers in this project, putting down a lot of
>>> >  time, and i really appreciate all the work they do. So don't take this
>>> > as
>>> >  criticism against all those people.
>>> >
>>> >  If you have anything non constructive to say, please don't. Then just
>>> >  forget this mail and move on.
>>> >
>>> >  /Stefan
>>> >
>>> >  I'm one of the biggest advocates of "opening up" Myth's content to
>>> > other
>>
>> media players... I use Plex, XBMC, Orb, and who knows what else all in an
>> effort to have my media available wherever I want, whenever I want. But
>> when I'm at home, nothing beats the usability of the Myth FE. Sure it can
>> be buggy, and maybe kludgy at times, but it's by far the best way to
>> browse
>> and play all of my recordings.
>
> I've tried XBMC, but prefer the MythTV frontend.  Sure, XBMC has more eye
> candy, but it just doesn't work very well.  It will only play back about
> half of my HDHR recordings.  The rest, I just get a black screen or it dies
> part way through.  XBMC is also VERY buggy.  It hangs quite often requiring
> me to kill it from another terminal.  It does do commercial skipping, but
> always in the wrong place, which is worse than not doing it.  XBMC may have
> a place, but not as my PVR frontend.
>
> Jay
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

I agree with everyone else that removing the frontend wouldn't
necessarily help the backend.

The issue that other 3rd party frontends have is that prior to 0.25,
they had to keep up with a moving target (the myth protocol). The
issue they have now with the services API is that it doesn't offer all
of the functionality that the myth protocol offers.

What I would like to see is the myth protocol be deprecated and
mythfrontend transition to using the services API only. This would
force the API to mature to a point that it offers all of the
functionality that the myth protocol offers currently, and that 3rd
party frontends could be developed and have the same functionality.

Thanks,

Thomas Mashos