SageTV vs. MythTV

[pjpjpjpj]

My neighbor has decided he's going to try out MythTV. He asked me what I knew about it, which is absolutely nothing. Any former (or even current) MythTV users want to give a comparison of MythTV vs. SageTV? If you want to just give a bunch of reasons why he should go with SageTV instead, that's fine too.

He's planning on using it for OTA reception, with a dual-tuner card in a server in his study, and then a client-type setup at his main TV (he has a Dell Zino there now).

[KeithAbbott]

A couple of things that SageTV has going for it:

1) Multiplatform support, MythTV is Linux only.
2) HD100/HD200/HD300 extenders, MythTV would require client PCs for similar functionality

[DevNull]

Originally Posted by KeithAbbott

A couple of things that SageTV has going for it:

1) Multiplatform support, MythTV is Linux only.
2) HD100/HD200/HD300 extenders, MythTV would require client PCs for similar functionality

Just as a FYI, MythTV currently runs on Windows as well as Linux. A friend of mine has been using it in that fashion for a few months now without issue. The preferred topology seems to be a Linux server with a Windows client.

I used MythTV for several years before switching to SageTV primarily due to the extenders. I really got tired of dealing with codecs and video driver issues on the client side. Myth is great if you like to customize and fiddle as just about any configuration is possible. For me, that was my downfall as the WAF took a serious nose dive during my "geeked out fiddle sessions". I guess there's something to be said for the forced stability of a extender.

[wrems]

One big difference I see in this situation is proximity to someone with experience with Sage. If he goes Myth he's alone, if he goes Sage he has you to leverage... Something for him to consider. The cost of Sage vs not having someone personally to troubleshoot with is worth the cost of admission imo.

For a better comparison you should post this query on the Myth forums too. That way you'll get a better cross sampling of both sides. I'm guessing that it will be pretty one sided over here, and probably the same over there, but you may come to interesting conclusions...

[drewg]

Originally Posted by DevNull

Just as a FYI, MythTV currently runs on Windows as well as Linux. A friend of mine has been using it in that fashion for a few months now without issue. The preferred topology seems to be a Linux server with a Windows client.

There is also MacOSX client support.

Originally Posted by DevNull

I used MythTV for several years before switching to SageTV primarily due to the extenders. I really got tired of dealing with codecs and video driver issues on the client side. Myth is great if you like to customize and fiddle as just about any configuration is possible. For me, that was my downfall as the WAF took a serious nose dive during my "geeked out fiddle sessions". I guess there's something to be said for the forced stability of a extender.

Honestly, I think the preferred client these days is a linux box with an Nvidia VDPAU video card.

I also used MythTV for a few years before switching to SageTV. For me, the reason to use SageTV was the HD extenders. There is nothing similar for MythTV.

If the OP's friend is going to run a client/server setup, then he has to be aware that he needs to do updates to the client/server in lockstep. Eg, if he updates from mythtv 0.22 to 0.23 on the server, then he also needs to update the client, as the client/server protocol is not compatible between versions.

All in all, I'd say the advantages for SageTV are:

1) extenders!!!
2) ease of setup of base software
3) ease of setting up things like comskip, metadata, fan art, etc

And for MythTV:

1) more features (like timestrech playback)
2) much more reliable recording than I've had from SageTV

The cost for a single machine setup is about equal. MythTV requires a $20 Schedules Direct subscription (or you can use mc2xml, but good luck getting support; I have mythfilldatabase patches that are required to fix Original Air Dates when using mc2xml). After 4 years, you'll have paid for the $80 SageTV server license. For a client/server setup, Sage is cheaper, unless you've already got the potential client PC sitting idle. An HD300 at $150 will blow any $150 PC out of the water for HD playback quality.

Drew

[pjpjpjpj]

Just as clarification, he has a server PC which is a big monster, that he got either from ebay or his office as a freebie - it's a legit corporate server-type behemoth, makes a ton of noise, and has all sorts of built-in redundancy and such. It's almost laughably oversized for a home machine. He runs linux on it and also on the Zino that he has at the TV. I don't know if he has any plans on having clients at any other TVs in the house or not. Right now their entire system is wireless, but he's not adverse to fishing some network cable if needed to get some HD content on his living room TV. He is a tinkerer, but I sorta suspect he thinks the MythTV installation will just be "set it up and not ever bother with it again" (could it be? Or, like Sage, are there plugins being written and such, and new versions being released?)

With no knowledge (as I stated in the OP) of MythTV, I told him that I suspected that the thing he might have the most difficulty with is video codecs. He does a lot of torrent stuff and thus I suspect he sees all sorts of video types.

[ybrew]

When I was reviewing DVR / whole house video solutions years ago, the extenders won me over. I still have 4 original Hauppauge MVPs (originally had 5).

The extenders just keep getting better.

[drewg]

Originally Posted by pjpjpjpj

He is a tinkerer, but I sorta suspect he thinks the MythTV installation will just be "set it up and not ever bother with it again" (could it be? Or, like Sage, are there plugins being written and such, and new versions being released?)

There's a new mythtv version every 6 to 18 months, and they're always re-writing things. Most of the plugin type things that we have for SageTV are available as part of MythTv (comskip, alternate GUI's, metadata, fanart, etc).

If he really never touches it, he'll be fine. But if he installs mythtv on his server via some package system, and then a year later, he updates the distro on his server, he's going to be forced to also update the client, since MythTV changes its database schema frequently, and an older client cannot talk to a newer server.

It sounds like he'd really be better off using XBMC on his client (there is some kind of MythTV plugin/script). Its more flexible than a MythTV client in that it will talk to multiple MythTv server versions.

I think we're getting WAAAY OT here.. Just tell him to run Sage, and get an HD300

Drew

[oddjob]

Mythtv is nolonger free ( you pay yearly for scheduling) .
Thats why I went with Sagetv. Plus Sagetv is available on linux. Perfect for setting up friends and family with a tivo like device. No more virus upgrades. Easy to install and No Maintenance.

[crusing]

I have given MythTV 3-4 tries over the last several years. The most recent was about 2 months ago before I moved to SageTV. The WAF is very, very low with MythTV. There is always something broken or needing improvement. The final straw for me was MythTV crashing on over the air channels that had lost their signal on my HD HomeRun's. MythTV frontend will then refuse to start, because it sets the startup channel to the one that caused the problem. You then had to run the backend configuration tool to change the default startup channel to get the front end running again. Very sad that a product this old is still dealing with these types of issues. I very much want to love MythTV since I have been a Linux enthusiast for over 10 years.

Don't get me started on codec issues........

I have tried everything out there and the closest I have come to media center nirvana is Sage 7 and the HD 300.

crusing
SageTV's newest fan boy.

[mikejaner]

It really sucked when you had to download and compile the thing just to make it work. I am not a big fan of compiling code. Which leads to my comment on the Windows client. I took a look at the page you pointed to for the Windows client that is a lot of work when you can just boot a linux client with a live CD or boot and install it with a few clicks using linux.
I too ran MythTV over the years on and off. My latest stint was about a year ago. It seems to me that over the years MythTV has actually become more unstable and pretty bloated. I remember about seven years ago, when I was evaluating all DVR solutions for PC's, I set up a MythTV system and ran it for weeks with no crashes. It just recorded TV using a couple of Hauppauge PVR 250's with no issues. Over the years as they added more stuff and updated the code, and it seemed to get random crashes for no reason when watching stuff etc... Hardly a scientific approach, but just what I observed.
The nice thing about MythTV right now is that you have an entire distribution devoted to it "Mythbuntu"

[ericscottf]

Call me crazy, but a price comparison:

Myth tv:
Server - $X
software - $0
clients $y*tvs

Sage:
Server - $X
Software - $80
Clients $z*tvs

Server cost will be approximately the same.
Software difference is less than a hundred bucks
Client cost difference -- where i really think sage shines
$150 HD300 * tvs - comes with everything, including cables and remote
$300 small form factor pc + remote + cables = probably $400+ per tv

Sure, there's more to it than just cost, but i think sage shines in those areas too (like not having to reconcile dependencies on install
I want to like myth, I really do. but the difference in ease of install and the clients really seals the deal.

[mikejaner]

Dont forget...
MythTV
Yearly Guide Subscription: $20

[Grant.Edwards]

Originally Posted by drewg

I also used MythTV for a few years before switching to SageTV. For
me, the reason to use SageTV was the HD extenders. There is nothing
similar for MythTV.

That's pretty much my story. For a couple years I tried to find a
small, cheap, low-power, _silent_, no-moving-parts Myth frontend. I
always came up empty.

So, the HD200 was _the_ reason I switched.

My last Myth client was a Mac Mini booting MiniMyth from a USB thumb
drive, and I ran Gentoo's ebuild of the Myth server on my "general
use" desktop machine. It mostly worked but wasn't really optimal -- I
never got DVI output on the Mac to work. Instead of a "normal" remote
control, I had an IR keyboard that I didn't much like. I could have
set up and configured a universal remote, but that's would have taken
a couple evenings work.

Upgrades were also a lot of work.

I'm pretty much equally happy with the server end of things, though I
think SageTv does need more RAM than Myth's server. OTOH, even a
headless Myth server needs X11 and Qt installed -- which is rather
annoying.

If you're going to run a dedicated front-end/back-end box, then it's a
coin toss. There are pre-packaged Myth distros that are dead-simple
to install. If you want to split front/back ends, and you don't mind
having a PC sitting next to your TV, then it's still pretty much a
coin-toss.

If you _don't_ want a PC sitting next to your TV, then the HD300
trumps everything in Myth's hand.

--
Grant

[drewg]

Originally Posted by mikejaner

Dont forget...
MythTV
Yearly Guide Subscription: $20

Or free: http://mc2xml.yourfreehosting.net/

Drew

[plawlor]

I bought a new server about 4 years ago and attempted a Linux and MythTV setup. I consider myself pretty technical. I used to be a Network Admin before progressing up to BA and PM, so I've got some hands on experience. I spent nearly three solid days trying to get the system up and operational before scrapping it all and going back to XP and Sage. Within an hour (Windows install included), I had the base setup going.

4 years later, I just recently upgraded the server again -- see the beast I've got running now in my profile -- and moved to v7. I'm never moving. I've got 2 HD200's for my TVs and a Windows client for my office PC. Life with v7, my HDPVRs (which are running fairly solid), Comskip, and PlayOn couldn't be sweeter!

[wildgoose]

I tried MythTV recently before I purchased my HD300. While comparing MythTV and SageTV, I noticed an interesting difference in the recorded video. When playing back the MythTV recording, my WDTV Live showed a lot of interlancing artifacts on a SD OTA-ATSC recordings. When there are some motions, such as flames or camera panning, I would see a lot of horizontal lines in the video.

The same channel recorded using SageTV and played back from the same WDTV Live did not show these artifact. My theory is Sage is recording the actual video from the tuner without any modifications, while MythTV applied some processing to it.

[Grant.Edwards]

Originally Posted by wildgoose

[...]When playing back the MythTV recording, my WDTV Live showed a lot
of interlancing artifacts on a SD OTA-ATSC recordings. [...]The same
channel recorded using SageTV and played back from the same WDTV Live
did not show these artifact.[...]

That is indeed very odd.

My theory is Sage is recording the actual video from the tuner without
any modifications, while MythTV applied some processing to it.

According to all the info I could find back when I was running Myth,
recording ATSC consisted of reading the datastream from the tuner and
writing it unchanged to the file.

I'm pretty sure that's correct, because I used to have no problems
recording ATSC on a box that didn't have anywhere close to enough CPU
power to decode the stream.

--
Grant

[mayamaniac]

Not with just MythTV, but these SageTV advantages are true to other competing products too (BeyondTV, Win7MC, Tivo, etc.

- Extenders: affordable, reliable, silent, and just awesome at playing almost every file format out there.

- Customizations: plugins, themes, add-ons, there are a lot of talented developers here.

- User forum: the best user forum on the Internet. You can gets answers to problems almost immediately, faster than official tech support sometimes.

[valnar]

Originally Posted by drewg

And for MythTV:

2) much more reliable recording than I've had from SageTV

I can't speak for MythTV, but let the record show I've never had a problem recording since Sage version 3.

Having reliable hardware helps (Intel based, 7200rpm quality drives, formatted correctly, reliable tuners, etc.)