linux support?

[phenixdragon]

I didn't read everything here but a efw months back SageTV on Linux to the public was only a beta hardware bundle which was I think $1,000. I only know that the linux designs were special for companies who wanted it as a custom app or what not.

I would plan on seeing it fully for the public at some point but not any time soon because the public customer base is Windows, not Linux.

PS: Linux is crap and has no need for the home. But I wouldn't mind using it for a media server or any type of server as long as the support is there and it has answers within in a short amount of time.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by dbfresh23

I've used both Windows and FreeBSD extensively. If you can honestly say that you don't see a difference, then you aren't as experienced in Unix/Linux as you think.

They are very different.

I would also take the windows machine needing to be rebooted every couple days as a complaint.

My server's been up for 2 months strait, and I took it down on purpose when it was down. Likewise with my HTPC, it's on 24/7 without issue. And those are running Server 2003 and XP Pro respectively. The idea that Windows requires you to reboot regularly is just silly anymore.

I think the fact that the *nix platform is much more powerful is just undisputable.

Oh, it's disputeable, just depends on what you're talking about. On the programming, server, dev side of it, probably. But on the media side, Windows, or more correctly the stuff available for Windows, absolutely kills anything on *nix.

Also, if you look in the MR6000 thread you will see Wayne indicated that he has smooth ff/rw which is also attributed to the fact that he's running a linux machine.

Probably has more to do with the fact that it's using a dedicated Sigma hardware decoder than the the OS it runs on. There's nothing stopping the same thing from being done on Windows.

ReplayTV and Tivo are both run on *nix platforms, I wonder why they didn't choose windows ce or xpe....

Because it's free probably. *nix is ideally suited to embedded platforms, that's one of several places where it's probably better than Windows.

[jominor]

Originally Posted by dbfresh23

I've used both Windows and FreeBSD extensively. If you can honestly say that you don't see a difference, then you aren't as experienced in Unix/Linux as you think. I would also take the windows machine needing to be rebooted every couple days as a complaint. I think the fact that the *nix platform is much more powerful is just undisputable. Also, if you look in the MR6000 thread you will see Wayne indicated that he has smooth ff/rw which is also attributed to the fact that he's running a linux machine. ReplayTV and Tivo are both run on *nix platforms, I wonder why they didn't choose windows ce or xpe....

Right. I'm not experienced. I've only been writing and deploying server side appliacations for telecoms, miilitary, and credit card companies for a little over ten years on both Unix and Window servers.

None of our customers have EVER had to rebooting their servers every couple of days. Just because some inexperienced people can't manage to keep a system up doesn't mean that that others cannot.

Unix simply isn't MUCH more powerful. They both have strengths and weakness. If you don't know that perhaps you are not as experienced as you think.

BTW, the reason ReplayTV and Tivo choose Linux is because it is free.

People think that experience individuals wouldn't choose Windows. That kind of thinking puts you out of business.

[phenixdragon]

I wonder when people will realize that Windows only ever had problems because it supports so much. The reason behind it is so that we can have a choice of what hardware we want and not to be stuck with a limitation of hardware, such as you are with Linux, MacOS, and other systems. And on top of that, software based hardware was cheaper then hardware, today it's not always the case but it was so that we coudl save money.

So basically the downside to having uber support for hardware/software is that it might be unstable. Linux and the MacOS are becoming more and more prolific to the same issues that Windows is known for.

[phenixdragon]

Originally Posted by jominor

Right. I'm not experienced. I've only been writing and deploying server side appliacations for telecoms, miilitary, and credit card companies for a little over ten years on both Unix and Window servers.

None of our customers have EVER had to rebooting their servers every couple of days. Just because some inexperienced people can't manage to keep a system up doesn't mean that that others cannot.

Unix simply isn't MUCH more powerful. They both have strengths and weakness. If you don't know that perhaps you are not as experienced as you think.

BTW, the reason ReplayTV and Tivo choose Linux is because it is free.

You know, it seems you are talking about enterprise setups. They do not have the same problems as occur in home use. Yesterday I was thinking about how at work our XP machines on our desks never run into issues you see at home. I never have to reboot everyday because of usage (but I do o course anyway), I never had currupt software, basically I never have any issues at work because I am in a controlled enterprise enviroment.

But either way, Windows and Linux/Unix do have the pros and cons.

[jominor]

Originally Posted by phenixdragon

You know, it seems you are talking about enterprise setups. They do not have the same problems as occur in home use. Yesterday I was thinking about how at work our XP machines on our desks never run into issues you see at home. I never have to reboot everyday because of usage (but I do o course anyway), I never had currupt software, basically I never have any issues at work because I am in a controlled enterprise enviroment.

But either way, Windows and Linux/Unix do have the pros and cons.

I run both at home, actually. That's why I'm so adamant about this point. My development box, XP, runs for weeks at a time. Ditto for my home machines. I restart because I've installed some patch.

XP is simply as stable as Linux. Now, if you want security, that's a different story. If you want to do things like delete a file that's open, that's a different story. If you want massive scalability, that's a different story. But there are places where the two perform comparably with comparable uptime.

Certainly, a Sage server is one of those places.

That's one of the reasons why I enjoy Java so much. It pretty much pulls the OS out of the equation, at least for server side apps where I reside.

[Kanati]

My sage box has been rebooted a handful of times and all but one time it was me either adding hardware or sage blew up with no fault of the OS. One time, windows xp went off on a tear and just required a reboot. Otherwise it goes for months without a reboot.

My work machine that I develop on and run TONS of crap on a daily basis gets rebooted once every couple of months...

My daily home machine where I play games (notorious for creating instabilities with winders) and do just about EVERYTHING with... Has been up for 93 days currently.

Linux fanatics that think windows needs a reboot every day or two are still living in 1994 and comparing linux to windows 3.11 (which is a more fair comparison). Linux, as stated above by others, is great in a controlled server environment where the hardware all has linux drivers and you set up the software and leave it. You can go a couple years without a reboot. It's likewise, CRAP for the home desktop where it's no more stable (and in some cases highly unstable) if you are installing software regularly, uninstalling, fiddling, tweaking, etc. I've seen linux crash just hitting the "start" menu in KDE or Gnome (can't remember which) right after a fresh cold boot. I've seen lilo take out EVERYTHING for no apparent reason after a clean install. Which also brings up the "bloated windows" argument. The last two or three installs of linux I've done have been from multi-disc sets and if you just let it install the default crap you wind up with two different GUI desktops, 18 different pieces of software you never need or want... Tux racer game... Linux, in an effort to become just as user-friendly and feature-rich is doing the exact same thing.

Linux fanatics need to get over their elitest attitude and admit that windows has it's place right along with linux.

[RedR]

Well I for one would go running to a Linux version of SageTV. I think for a DIY community that basically already knows the in's and out's of a PC as well their OS I do not see this being a major problem. Many folks will stay with a Windows version because it works to their needs. MythTV folks on the other hand will have an option. Many of those folks already know the OS and getting SageTV to work wouldn't be an issue at all. Either way all this is hype or guessing until it happens.
Again, I'd love go make the switch from Windows to Linux myself and as soon as it’s an option I'll be there.

Enjoy,
RedR

[samgreco]

I have been running Sage Server on Windows XP (as a service) for over a year now. I have never had to reboot because of a problem, unless I was upgrading something. So the argument that Linux is inherently more stable is not a good one. I think that if you build a system carefully, you can make it very stable. And I have mine loaded with a PVR250, a PVR250MCE, an Avermedia A180 and an M-Audio Delta 100LT.

I have stripped the OS of any unnecessary services of course. Windows may be bloated, but that oesn't mean you have to run it that way.

To me the decision of which OS to use is solely based on purpose and availbilty of tools.

And SageTV is my "tool" of choice. It runs reliably on Windows. I'm OK with that.

[teknubic]

Andy will probably delete this post but oh, well...
I don't know what the Mediaready EULA says, but if someone really wants SageTV on Linux, they could spend some time reverse-engineering it.
I have a Rio Advanced Digital Audio Center, which runs a very busted down version of Linux. Several others (not me) have successfully dissected the HSX-109 and made it their own. Much of the hardware, however, is limiting meaning that the hardware is proprietary and the software interfacing it is specially built. I suspect the same goes for the Mediaready.

[cmaffia]

Not to put down Linux... and I have a love/hate relationship with Microsoft as well.... but to be real honest.. FOR ME... SageTV with Windows XP (and that is all the OS does) runs 24/7 no crashes.. no reboots...nothing but 24/7 flawless function (Unless I mess with upgrades, etc....) I know I am not the only one with this sucess... so please Linux supporters.. how does one improve on this? I too would love to try building a Linux/SageTV system however I do see the lack of official driver support for alot of hardware a major setback. Based on my experience with superior reliablity with SageTV and WinXP together, I can't buy the Linux is better/more stable argument.

Originally Posted by dbfresh23

I've used both Windows and FreeBSD extensively. If you can honestly say that you don't see a difference, then you aren't as experienced in Unix/Linux as you think. I would also take the windows machine needing to be rebooted every couple days as a complaint. I think the fact that the *nix platform is much more powerful is just undisputable. Also, if you look in the MR6000 thread you will see Wayne indicated that he has smooth ff/rw which is also attributed to the fact that he's running a linux machine. ReplayTV and Tivo are both run on *nix platforms, I wonder why they didn't choose windows ce or xpe....

[salsbst]

Let's get back on topic...

I want SageTV for Linux. I'm clearly not alone. The prevailing wisdom suggests that support is the problem.

I don't belive this for a moment. Release it as unsupported. Done.

Next?

[stanger89]

Firstly, a Linux version would be great, even though I'm to the point where I wounldn't have much use for it, I would definitely look at it for future extenders.

Originally Posted by RedR

MythTV folks on the other hand will have an option.

Let me ask, honestly, how many Myth users would actaully pay $79 for SageTV?

[blade]

Originally Posted by dbfresh23

I would also take the windows machine needing to be rebooted every couple days as a complaint.

I've been running my Sage server for almost a year now and have never had to reboot it. The only time it ever gets restarted is when there is a power failure or I install updates that require a restart. I restart my client maybe once every couple of months. A need usually arises when I've been doing other things on the PC other than running Sage.

I agree linux is a great platform, but it's not very userfriendly and it's easy to see how support would be a nightmare. It would be nice to have the option of a linux version though.

[PGPfan]

Originally Posted by dbfresh23

I've used both Windows and FreeBSD extensively. If you can honestly say that you don't see a difference, then you aren't as experienced in Unix/Linux as you think. I would also take the windows machine needing to be rebooted every couple days as a complaint. I think the fact that the *nix platform is much more powerful is just undisputable. Also, if you look in the MR6000 thread you will see Wayne indicated that he has smooth ff/rw which is also attributed to the fact that he's running a linux machine. ReplayTV and Tivo are both run on *nix platforms, I wonder why they didn't choose windows ce or xpe....

They likely chose Linux solely for cost reasons. WinCE would be a poor choice due to limited multimedia support. In the MR5000 thread you mention, you basically answered yourself as to why the Linux is doing smooth ff/rw. All it HAS to do is just what it was built for (the severly LIMITED hardware on board) so of course it can do that easily. Same with Replay and TIVO.
Again, Linux isn't the BEST, but it CAN BE when used solely for single purpose devices-just like XPe.

-PGPfan

[dbfresh23]

I think that most people that are saying that Linux/Unix isn't more powerful then Windows have probably dabbled with Red Hat or another crappy version of Linux, where you may as well be running Windows.

Linux requres less power to do the same things as a Windows pc. I don't care what people want to say here, I'd like to see a single person here with a Windows box that has EVER gotten an uptime of over 500 days. Linux is also MUCH more flexable then Windows in terms of what you want installed and what you don't. I'm not just trying to bash Windows because it obviously does have it's place. We call that the desktop or entry level server. When Bill Gate will even admit that in the Enterprise with clustering and such, Windows cannot hold it's own, I can't really see the people here being correct. When we talk about stability and performance, I'm not sure Windows could even hold it's own against Netware! Only reason to install a Windows server is for Active Directory - a feature that really even *nix can do better...

Also I'd like to know how many people here have pretty good *nix skills and had a box rooted or hit with a virus? Oh did I forget that *nix is just plain out and out more secure?

[HairBear]

I would pay $79 for SageTV for Linux! Heck! I paid $700 for it! I love it! Give me SageTV for Mac OS X which, by the way, uses a unix core much like linux and soon will sport the new Intel P4's. I would have bought a mac mini a while ago if I could only find that perfect PVR software that I'm willing to pay $79 for. The thing is though, I will probably will never see this happen if I don't do it myself.

[heffe2001]

Originally Posted by dbfresh23

I don't care what people want to say here, I'd like to see a single person here with a Windows box that has EVER gotten an uptime of over 500 days.

Our old domain server at work had an uninterupted uptime of a bit over 3 years when I replaced it with a newer 2003 domain server last year. It was running NT Server 4.0, handled logins and printing for about 20 users. Was running on a Pentium 2 400, with a whopping 128mb of ram, and one 9g SCSI drive. A properly configured Windows machine can have just as long of an uptime as a properly configured Linux box. I'm by far not a Windows fanboi either, our main accounting package runs on Redhat Enterprise. With all the kernel updates & such that Redhat releases, I've had to restart that machine just as much as our 2k3 server. We also run a Fedora Core 2 box (yeah, it's a bit outdated now ) as a mail server, and another machine running Centos 4.0 as basically a shunt for outside web-mail access for that fedora box. Of late I've had MORE trouble out of the Core 2 box getting kernal panics than any of our windows boxes (it's not hardware related, replaced almost everything in the machine, think it's a malformed email or attachment doing it).

I'd also like to see you use the majority of the tuner cards out there (PVR150, PVR500, almost any of the newer HD cards) with Linux. Driver support just isn't there yet...

[SprDtyF350]

Originally Posted by HairBear

I would pay $79 for SageTV for Linux! Heck! I paid $700 for it! I love it! Give me SageTV for Mac OS X which, by the way, uses a unix core much like linux and soon will sport the new Intel P4's. I would have bought a mac mini a while ago if I could only find that perfect PVR software that I'm willing to pay $79 for. The thing is though, I will probably will never see this happen if I don't do it myself.

I would second the Mac OS X idea. The little Mac mini would be fun..

[waynedunham]

Originally Posted by HairBear

I would pay $79 for SageTV for Linux! Heck! I paid $700 for it!

Well then, go to VWBINC.COM and order a MediaREADY 5000 then. You not only Get SageTV for Linux, but they'll throw in a case, cpu, hd, dvdRW,PVR-150, wireless keyboard and wireless handheld remote and more in a running system.

It comes ready to run as a server, but I wanted it to be a client to my Windows Sage machine with 4 tuners and my library on 1/2 terabyte of storage. Guess what, it can be done. I've been running the MediaREADY 5000 as a Sage Client to my Windows machine for several weeks now.