Talk:Why MythTV Sucks

From MythTV Official Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

It can be argued that this page is also a repository for "broken clue". Dagmar d'Surreal 17:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Come on folks, people work on this project in their spare time and this 'sucks' page is the thanks they get? Sure it could use some improvements as every other bit of software can but there is no way in the world you can ever say it sucks and justify it. Pages like this (and indeed similarly toned threads on mailing lists) only ever seem to attract bitching from people who have never contributed a jot. I'm not saying that MythTV is beyond criticism for one minute but initiatives like this are NOT the way to convince anybody you have an idea worth thinking about. If you really want things to improve, come on - bring your ideas to the table in some form that shows you've at least thought about how you'd do things differently. "I can't code but here's an outline longer than two lines describing how it'll work" or "I can't code but this is a mockup of how it might look in operation" would be a VAST improvement. Not got the time to do that? Oh well I guess you get out what you put in, eh..

  • Sign your stuff, Juski. And would it make you feel better if it said "WHERE MythTV sucks?" Yes, there's a Feature Wishlist page, but who knows if that's watched, and there's a lot of chaff there, mainly people wanting new functionality. I think the "Sucks" page is much more useful as a method of explaining where the UI breaks down. And you're naive if you think there aren't areas of Myth that deserve the "suck" tag. --DirkGecko 20:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It'd be altogether better if people contributed more than just 10 seconds of their time to chip in with their 'I think it sucks too' comments & actually came up with usable ideas instead. --Juski 20:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Been talking on the dev channel about writing concepts with use cases for missing / suboptimal functionality. At least there are people who wouldd read it and provide feedback. (still need to do that for my "Shoutcast/Tuxbox is just another IPTV source" toy project. Even if it's just to get my concepts in order and see what I missed.) --Dekarl 16:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Juski has a point. The fact is that these sorts of pages just aren't helpful. The devs know more about the failings of MythTV than most users and we're working as fast as we can to improve things. We don't need people recycling all the old complaints, we need people prepared to get out of their armchairs and actually start writing code. We have feature request pages and this just strikes me as another one. However it's the name of the page and therefore the attitude it sets which bothers me most, why choose "Why MythTV Sucks" instead of "How can MythTV be improved?" or even better "How can I help improve MythTV?" The present title might be self-deprecating and therefore 'cute' to some people, but it sets the wrong tone and for any visitors who happen to pass by without reading the content, it would seem to suggest that users are generally unsatisfied with MythTV. I'm reminded of the successful Ratner chain of Jewellers (in the UK), the owner Gerald Ratner announced in an interview that his products were crap and overnight his business was destroyed. See Doing a Ratner --GBee 20:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
    Very well said. For quite some time I've been trying to figure out how to verbalize what I felt about this article, especially the title of the page. Something besides "it's needlessly derogatory," or "using the word sucks in the title is completely unnecessary". Thank you. In summary, I agree that the useful/constructive comments need to be moved elsewhere on the wiki, at which point, this page isn't necessary. We don't need "a place for rants."Mrand 17:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


If the ideas/responses are persistent does that mean even if they are later implemented or if the ideas themselves are completely wrong? It's bad enough that the Internet is littered with outdated install guides, reviews and list archives which would give someone who has never used MythTV the wrong impression. Do we really want a page in the official wiki which does the same?--GBee 20:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)