Media center software comparaison

[stustunz]

thats becuase its really a totally new program started from scratch apart from the recording service the whole front end is different where as the old one had been going for a few years
wait till the next few releases im sure it will be back and better give Sub a chance
its like when a new model of car comes out there are always bugs thats where gbpvr is at the moment
its just at the top of your list you have it as 10016

[tyve]

I know why but the common way to solve this would be to release a stable version 1.0 and then a 1.1 beta version with the rewritten program.

[stustunz]

what exactly is wrong with it apart from not having a few things it works fine
main reason things dont work is cause peoples computers are so screwed up they hardly run in the first place
list the bugs you are talking about please im interested

[pz1]

what exactly is wrong with it apart from not having a few things it works fine

Well, with all due respect for sub's work, and I do respect him, this is the major sinn for a software maker. I know from an organisation that replaced their old information system(mission critical!) with a newer system with less features, and a dreadfull performance. The disaster costed them multi-million dollars and many years to replace it. They are not the only example.
GBPVR is a different ball game. At least that is how I see it. But if you aren't the boss at home the WAF comes in hard

[mvallevand]

The fact that GBPVR.exe is currently still included and working seems to overlooked and in fact it has a few improvements over 99.12. For new MVP users this is a much stabler version, and it does address some issues I had to work around with mvpmc. It's also possible that users outside North America don't see how significant some new features like Schedules Direct and HVR 1600 support really were and I think it is to sub's credit that he kept support for two versions in one release.

Martin

[wtg]

...this is the major sinn for a software maker.

It's no sin at all because this is free software.

Sub derives no benefit from whether you or I use it or not. Not only does he donate his time to develop the software, he donates a tremendous amount of his time to answer questions and provide support. The fact that he does so at all is to be appreciated because it's all time he could be spending with his family or doing whatever else he might enjoy doing. In fact the more people that use it, the more difficult it is for him since that's just more questions to answer.

GBPVR is a different ball game.

That's entirely accurate. It is a different ball game. It's one man working hard on a project he's passionate about and making it freely available to everyone. He makes no promises, he charges nothing and if it doesn't work for someone, they should simply use something else. The fact that he goes out of his way to try and help everyone at such a large personal cost to his time and energy is astounding.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but we have no right to set expectations about how sub's project should be managed, developed or distributed.

[kayak4ever]

It seems to me that was part of what Tipste's fuss was all about. He wanted to be more involved in the decision making about the direction that the program was going. As I recall, on page one of the home page, it says
"Is this project open source? No sorry. GB-PVR supports open interfaces, but the core engine code is not publically available. You are able to develop your own plugins to extend GB-PVR, and there are several examples available to get you started. Plugins can be developed in C#, VB.NET or C++. Visit the forum and the wiki for more information"

That sounds pretty clear to me that this is one person's work and will follow the direction taken by that one person. That sub takes so much time to enhance the features for North Americans and listens to our requests when he doesn't get to benefit from those features is just one more example of why we should appreciate him.

As far as 1.0.16 version goes, I am seeing an improvement in the picture over the earlier versions. Even if there are problems because of the big underlying change, if the underlying change will result in the ability to improve picture quality beyond what was possible under the previous versions, that should be seen as a good thing.

[stustunz]

I know why but the common way to solve this would be to release a stable version 1.0 and then a 1.1 beta version with the rewritten program.

it is freckin stable i havent missed a recording yet
its missing a few extras that does not make it unstable

[tyve]

It was not my intention to disrespect Sub's work. I'm impressed with what he has archived by himself. My talk about versions is common practice and if the current version lacks of features and plug-ins that incompatible it will scare people away from gb-pvr. I think it would be better if it was called beta until all features (from previous versions) where in place.

Also my live-tv and recordings stopped working with version 1.0.8 and 1.0.16. I havn't reported it since I've moved and now I don't have cable (dvb-c).

About the one man decision haven't you read this?: http://www.gbpvr.com/index.php?option=co...3&Itemid=1

Since my last post about Wellton Way was censored I'll not comment that again.

[Jaggy]

It was not my intention to disrespect Sub's work. I'm impressed with what he has archived by himself. My talk about versions is common practice and if the current version lacks of features and plug-ins that incompatible it will scare people away from gb-pvr. I think it would be better if it was called beta until all features (from previous versions) where in place.

I don't normally comment on these sort of things & try to keep my posts as "constructive" as possible but I can't let this go!

In this post http://forums.nextpvr.com/showthread.php?t=27623 you will see

"This new user interface comes as a new executable (PVRX2.exe), which should be treated as a public 'beta' of sorts."

And in this post http://forums.nextpvr.com/showthread.php?t=28626

"1.0.16 is now available. Its primarily a maintenance release, consisting of lots of bug fixes, and a few minor additions. Many of these items have been made available as patches to v1.0.8 in the past."

From the way I read these statements PVRX2 is still a "BETA" or am I reading this wrong??

Having said that I have found 1.0.16 to be very stable & to be honest while I have reported a bug or two (some already fixed by sub) they are minor things & don't really affect things that much.

I have noticed also that most of the so called bugs reported haven't actually been bugs at all but things "we users" have stuffed up at our end!!