MythTV Compared with Windows Media Center

legoburner writes "Tom's Hardware has a nice comparison of MythTV and Windows Media Center Edition, and it seems that they preferred MythTV by quite a margin: 'Enter MythTV, a grand unification of personal digital video recording and home theatre technology, and a magnum opus of modular design, freedom of expression and personal entertainment.'"

what would be really nice

[yagu]

Good news Tom's Hardware picks MythTV over Windows MCE (Media Center Edition), but maybe not so much a surprise. Tom's Hardware's preference isn't going to mean a lick to the general consumers. I can't tell my neighbors MythTV is bitchin' because they're not going to have a clue how do it themselves, and I'm running out of support hours and don't have time to set up everyone with MythTV, let alone support it afterwards.

What would be really cool is if some company pulled a Red Hat, or Suse, etc., with MythTV whereby they offer their "version" of a MythTV distribution bundled with hardware and all. With minor standardization, it's a product that could spark consumer interest. This would offer an alternative to the always present MS MCE, and an interesting competition (potentially) with TiVo.

Tivo still wins on user interface

[queenb**ch]

I've used just about everything on the planet and the one thing I keep going back to is my Tivo. The user interface on it is simple, intuitive and it just plain works. The add ons like photos, music, and even movies from other PC's in the house is super simple to work out.

My only complaint is that because of the way the remote is shaped, it's easy to pick up backward in the dark. That's really saying something when that's the only bad thing I can come up with. Their support has always been awesome and the devices have gotten so darn cheap, there's no reason not to have a real Tivo. I've seen them on sale here for $49.99.

2 cents,

QueenB

PS: No, I don't work for Tivo. I just really like mine.

MythTV could be great.

[Jedi1USA]

....but it is not because it is too difficult to install and set up. I am not trying to start a flame war, but I have been using Linux for years (so I am not a total noob) and decided to Give MythTV a try. After months of work and changing TV tuner cards 3 times I gave up. MythTV will never be any competition to Windows MCE until you can just put in a disk, answer a few yes or no questions and then start using it.

Huh?

[kamapuaa]

But what is it...good for? Like a lot of people here (I imagine), I have a PC that outputs to a TV and a stereo. If I click on the movie a movie starts playing. If I click on the album the music starts playing. I've already learned the interfaces to these programs, I don't see a need for a suite of programs to accomplish something that any modern OS can already do anyway.

Everything else seems pointless. Installing modules to give weather reports? Like a lot of people, I can just click "home" in firefox. This is a solution in search of a problem.

This is a great opportunity for open source

[Chris Pimlott]

This is a chance to get the message out about open source to a wider crowd. Firefox was a good start, but watching TV is something that gets almost everyone interested, not just computer users. And open source has a strong tactical position - while all the companies have a vested interested in pushing their formats and restricting you with their DRM, open source has no reason not to support as many file formats as possible and giving the user complete control.

This is a great opportunity to make some inroads into the consciousness of the average consumer.

answer: when you can get it in the high street

[rs232]

"I have been using Linux for years (so I am not a total noob) and decided to Give MythTV a try. After months of work and changing TV tuner cards 3 times I gave up."

You know something, you're the third experienced Linux enthusiast on slashdot that can't get their hardware working under nix. What make of cards and OS version? Were the support forums of any help

MythTV will never be any competition to Windows MCE until you can just put in a disk, answer a few yes or no questions and then start using it.

How difficult would the average Windows user have in installing WinCME from scratch.

was Re:MythTV could be great.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[DevStar]

I have to agree that it is too hard to install. I've run multiple Linux desktops and setup a couple of servers, but setting up MythTV was too much for me. Admittedly, this was about 4 years ago, but I check the webpage to see if the description is easier, and it doesn't appear to be much easier. The feature set for MythTV is incredible. If they could make it a simply "click and install" process, it would own the media center market in a way that other open source products would envy.

If I was running the project I'd make this next year all about ease of install.

Customer Support != Community Support

[ScentCone]

Has the MythTV community thought about developing a community-based real, physical product? E.g., a cheap system with a decent hard drive, decent tuner card, and comes with everything already installed?

I don't think the "MythTV community" wants to get a phone call from a drunken frat pledge 10 minutes before Super Bowl XXMXVIIC comes on, wondering which connector goes where. You can say RTFM on the phone to your community, but you can't say it to your customers.

Re:what would be really nice

[RonnyJ]

They didn't even choose which is better. The only mention in the article of MCE 2004 is on the last page, where they list a few differences, but there's nothing there to say that they prefer MythTV, let alone by "quite a margin".

http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/09/08/the_mythtv_co nvergence_uk/page4.html [tomshardware.co.uk]

It's a horrendously misleading article summary, and it shouldn't have been posted. I can only surmise that the editor didn't look at the submission, either that or they don't care that it's so misleading.

Re:MythTV could be great.

[femtoguy]

Let me speak on both sides. I have been running Linux since 1994, and am not a noob by any stretch of the imagination. I just built a mythtv box, and things are bother better and worse that you might expect. First I chose to buy a PVR-150 card, and to use ubuntu as a base. Both decisions made the process much easier than it would have been otherwise. Most of the set-up was just adding the correct repositories and typing apt-get install. EXCEPT for getting the ivtv drivers running. I have no idea why there is no pre-compiled driver for ivtv for ubuntu. The instructions on the howto pages are detailed about which version of the ivtv driver to use, and how to compile it, so why not just have it available as a pre-compiled module. (I know why don't I pre-compile them and make them available) If the compiled ivtv module was available it would have taken less than 30 minutes to have everything up and running.

Overall I think that the thing that will hold Linux back from becoming really widely deployed is the lack of automation for simple tasks. I wanted to burn a DVD from a show that I recorded in mythtv. I can find several good recipes, including in the mythtv documentation, about how to do it. If it is so easy to write a detailed list of how to do something, then why not automate it.

Re:what would be really nice

[repruhsent]

Most Linux users say that this allows the system to be more customizable, but I call that a bunch of crap. All of these apps could detect reasonable defaults (like you suggest) and then allow the same configuration that they do now, to customize to the advanced user's tastes.

The entire Linux mentality, that is, that the user knows what they're doing, is a good thing - forcing people to become more educated never hurt anyone, and helps to keep the idiots out. However, it shouldn't come at the price of convenience - because, like you said, the computer should work for you, not against you.

Strange comparison...

[Jugalator]

Why did they compare to Windows Media Center 2004 and not 2005 at least?
And in a month or two, the version after that will be released as part of Vista.

Hmmm...

Re:what would be really nice

[smittyoneeach]

Free software goes on out the window, when some figures out that they actually get what they pay for.

Beyond that realization is another one. Consider http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ [linuxfromscratch.org]. You're not getting a mole of water; you're getting a mole of oxygen and two of hydrogen. If you've the fortitude to work through it, you'll know how to manage your thirst yourself.
Free software isn't about paying, it's about investing. While we need not condescend to those who can't/won't see this, we can note that they will indeed become skilled at paying.

Re:Article in a nutshell

[Cal Paterson]

Please figure out what you're talking about before you go ahead a speak on the matter.

Only a benefit if you're cheap or poor, or a programmer.

Not at all. Open Source benefits the users directly. Case in point: MCE can't write to MPEG4, because MS will never care about writing the feature. Obviously, someone around MythTV wanted this (honestly, essential) feature and wrote it in. MCE only has support for DRM formats. Open Source in this instance basically means you can play the movie you recorded on any computer. Obviously a benefit. A big one.

That just sounds like buzzwords.

Well, they aren't. Hardware encoding requires a powerful capture card that outputs in a compressed format (normally, either MPEG2 or MPEG4). Software uses the CPU to do the encode with something like transcode on mencoder. This is important because encoding hardware is expensive, and, if use of the machine in intended to be light, then money can be saved by doing the encode via the cpu and buying an el cheapo brand capture card.

If you use Windows (where your hardware actually works)

The linux and *BSD kernels have excellent support for hardware (as tend to support old and exotic hardware far better than windows), and are far more reliable than a windows machine. Some capture cards actually are linux/*BSD only (a good example is the one on the systm mythtv episode). Linux, I would say, has support for most of the best capture cards, and both Linux and *BSD have much better drivers than windows (meaning decreased load on the machine, which is useful when you want to do more than one thing at once).

I don't know what that means. Is it relevent to anyone other than hardcore nerds?

Well, until you do know what it means, maybe it's best you reserve judgement? You're obviously poorly informed about this subject. (For the record, it's a feature which lets you play your recorded tv, on, you know, more than one machine. Kinda useful.)

Re:Article in a nutshell

[Cal Paterson]

Responses like yours are part of the reason that many people (outside the slashdot crowd) don't like, trust, or care about "open" software. They see the people pushing open source as snobby, pushy fanboys who look down on everyone they don't see as an "equal". Until the open source community is more welcoming to noobs, and drop the damned holier-than-thou attitudes, you're not going to make much progress.

Responses like mine? I was responding to a poorly informed, idiotic statement by someone who didn't actually know what he was talking about. As soon as people in the Free Software movement stand up and say You're wrong, and have no idea what you're talking about closed software apologists quickly jump in and say that With that attitude, you'll always be alienating users like drsquare.

Well, boy, if I'm ever cut up about that.

If people want to spout wrong infomation and mistaken viewpoints on issues they obviously know little to nothing about, then any community (be it football, or literature) will treat them with unpleasantness. We're not "elite" or "snobby", we just have a certain preference for the facts.