extender vs full client

[Tikker]

Aside from power issues (where extender wins)

what are the benefits of going with an extender vs a full blown PC client?


or deficits as it may be

I'm semi tempted to pick up an extender, and repurpose the HTPC into a different case and use it as the sage server

unless of course you give up a bunch things with an extender

[Djc208]

There have been other discussions on this but most boil down to

Benefits:

• Low power consumption (already listed)
• No/limited debugging
• Low maintenance (just a firmware update every once in a while)
• Small and quiet (no moving parts)
• No additional software to buy or maintain
• Dedicated video hardware = nearly perfect playback all the time

Deficites:

• Limited functionality (no web browsing, games, or outside programs)
• Does not support BD menus or HD audio formats.
• Limited input and control options (no mouse or keyboard support)

I'm sure other's will have more or more specific examples. But basically you trade the reliability and ease of use of a CE-type device (like your DVD player or MP3 player) for the flexability of a computer.

In addition, by moving Sage to a dedicated machine that is only required to handle recording (and maybe comskip) you reduce the number of programs you have to set up on the server and minimize the chance of having conflicts, bugs, and instability.

Extenders are really the best way to watch SageTV, as long as that's all you need to do at a given TV, it's the best bang for your dollar.

[stanger89]

The HD200 supports a keyboard now.

[reggie14]

Limited support for online video is another drawback for extenders. With PlayOn and evilpenguin's plugin we now have some support for Netflix, Hulu, and some others, on the extenders, but there are additional quality and reliability issues on the extender compared to a "full client".

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by reggie14

...but there are additional quality and reliability issues on the extender compared to a "full client".

The reverse is also true. This is the reason why so many of us run extenders. For stuff that's directly supported, extenders are far more reliable than "full" clients.

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by stanger89

The reverse is also true. This is the reason why so many of us run extenders. For stuff that's directly supported, extenders are far more reliable than "full" clients.

Definitely when it comes to everything else. I was talking solely about the PlayOn workaround for online video. Recordings and imported media have worked much better (higher quality, more reliably) on the extenders than full clients (at least for me).

That being said, there's a tradeoff there too. The extender might work "better" than a full client 90% of the time (those numbers are made up just for illustrative purposes), then remaining 10% of the time you're entirely at the mercy of Sage. You might run into 10 times as many problems with a full client, but sometimes you can make your own workarounds for issues. I got sick of tweaking things constantly a long time ago, so I think the extenders make the most sense, but there are some benefits to full clients.

[SWKerr]

With an extender you will still need a PC as a server. Although you can use the server PC as a dedicated client the most reliable setup would be to have a dedicated server even if you have a HTPC as you primary client. If you buy into this argument then the Extender is definitely the cheaper of the two options. It will cost $300-$500 for a HTPC depending on your build.

The argument for an HTPC is really the flexibility. You are not locked into sage forever and you can also use other software in conjunction with Sage. In the end you still have a PC to use for whatever purpose. The main benefit in real world use is online content like Hulu and Netflix. The PC will be able to do it an Extender may or may not. Until Sage get a relationship with the distributor I would not count on it being accessible in the extender. (There may be hacks that work but they will likely be somewhat unreliable.) For now Extenders don't support BluRay menus and you have to rip them first.

For an evaluation I would consider setting up a PC as both a sever and client and make sure it is what you want before you purchase. A HTPC is more difficult to setup but it will in the end work the same as an extender. Getting perfect playback may be a challenge but getting something good is almost never a problem with relatively recent hardware. A good Video Card makes all the difference here. (Not expensive but good.) ONce you know Sage is what you want the extender may make a lot of sense depending on how important the Online content is to you.

If I was starting fresh today I would want a Windows Home Server setup with one HTPC on my main TV. I would use the Extenders for everything else. If you are not the kind of individual that is comfortable with tinkering with a PC then the Extender is probably the better solution.

[Clift]

You don't have to rip Blu-rays first. The extender can play directly from the disc. With an extender you can watch your WAF go up. This is pretty typical, I think. It certainly was that way for me.

[babgvant]

IMO, I think that if you want something that "just works", and can live with the limitations of the device, the HD200 is a better option.

Where the PC client is better suited to those who are willing/able to deal with additional complexity for more advanced features in and outside of Sage.

[gibsonpa]

When I first started using Sage (around Feb08)....I bought 4 HD100's. I was in the camp of less hassle due to the fear of a low WAF.

Now 20 months later...I can say they have been awesome. They just plain work. The kids are on 1 or 2 tv's....the wife and I on another tv or two....and they all playback great. On occasion I will get a lockup on an extender and have to power off/on...but that is rare...and only affects the one extender.

Maybe most folks are this way, but my Sage server is also our main PC...so my wife is doing web design, kids are playing games, etc....and you forget that Sage is running in the background (as a service) recording tons of shows. Quite remarkable in my opinion.

Just my .02 worth....I don't have much experience with a full client.

[Tikker]

Just for the record, my current setup is:


Big File server, 2.5TB of video. all it does is hold the files, and serve them up. does no transcoding, or recording

2x HTPC's (dedicated) both have capture cards, and currently XP MCE.
currently, limited by MCE 2x SD capture cards (pvr 150)

2x laptops (1 vista 1 xp) both access the fileserver, but obviously not the capture cards directly. the kludge fix for live tv is sony locationfree player (slingbox basically)



prior to MCE I used Media Portal for a couple years, but hated it's tv recordings. MCE has honestly been great, except it's lack of HD recording

[chrisc983]

I've been using SageTV for several years now and I would like to say that my most stable set up so far is using WHS and extenders.

And yes you can probably do more things with a client PC but a lot of those things can't be controlled with just a remote control which makes it a lot more user friendly for the wife and kids. And for the most part I don't have to worry about someone changing a setting and causing problems with the extender as much as with the client PC.

[babgvant]

Originally Posted by chrisc983

And yes you can probably do more things with a client PC but a lot of those things can't be controlled with just a remote control which makes it a lot more user friendly for the wife and kids.

Everything you can do w/ the extender using a remote you can do on a PC. The things on the PC can't be controlled using the remote are the type of thing that you wouldn't want to use a remote for anyway.

The biggest thing going for the PC is that you own it. If you want it to change, a little bit of custom software goes a long way.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by babgvant

Everything you can do w/ the extender using a remote you can do on a PC. The things on the PC can't be controlled using the remote are the type of thing that you wouldn't want to use a remote for anyway.

I think the point chrisc was trying to make was that non-remote operations aren't the sort of things you'd want to do in an HT/living room, on a TV. At least that's how I feel. Personally if I can't access it through a nice 10' UI with a remote, it's not the sort of experience I'm interested in having in my HT.

I think I used Netflix watch now once in my HT when I had my HTPC and had to use a mouse. I've used it a number of times since it's been supported by my 360 (and thus controllable with my MX880).

The biggest thing going for the PC is that you own it. If you want it to change, a little bit of custom software goes a long way.

I hear that basic argument a lot, but you know I think it's largely flawed. While what you say is absolutely true, "a little bit of custom software" is well beyond most people's capabilities, and beyond the ambition of probably most others.

You know I've generally bought the "If an extender is broke you're at the mercy of the developer, but with a PC you can probably fix it" but the last couple of comments have made me rethink that.

Granted, if an extender is broke, you are at the mercy of the developer, but what about the PC/software side? Well if say SageTV Client isn't working, can you fix it? No, you have to wait for SageTV to fix it.

You'll say, "But wait, you can change decoders, renderers, drivers, etc, etc... to fix it." But the "problem" with that is those are exactly the issues that an extender eliminates. So yeah, you can probably fix a setup/configuration issue on a PC, but that's an issue you wouldn't have had with an extender.

Of course there's still codec support differences (very small differences these days) and online content really that are the key differences between extender and PC.

[Tikker]

in terms of watching back live tv, and standard content that I've got on my fileserver, there's no real difference?

[Fuzzy]

For me, the main things keeping me from an extender are:

Cost: My server works fine as my primary client
Full BD support: Menus + HD Audio
3D Games: Obviously not going to work on the Extender
3D Movies: Also... not support on the Extender.

Obviously most here don't care about the 3rd and 4th... and for those starting out, #1 wouldn't be an issue (it's cheaper to build a low power server and an extender, than it is to build a powerful server/client). *2 really depends on your habits. If you liek just jumping to the main movie, than it is not an issue. I happen to really like DB Menus.

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by stanger89

Granted, if an extender is broke, you are at the mercy of the developer, but what about the PC/software side? Well if say SageTV Client isn't working, can you fix it? No, you have to wait for SageTV to fix it.

You'll say, "But wait, you can change decoders, renderers, drivers, etc, etc... to fix it." But the "problem" with that is those are exactly the issues that an extender eliminates. So yeah, you can probably fix a setup/configuration issue on a PC, but that's an issue you wouldn't have had with an extender.

That's what the extender is supposed to fix. And it does eliminate nearly all of the playback problems people have with PC clients. But not all of them. Here's one example that I ran into. Both the HD100 and HD200, in their respective early days, had problems with DVDs and aspect ratios. I had similar problems with DVDs and Client software before that, and was basically able to mess around with settings in my decoders to do workarounds for the problem (at least, until Sage either fixed it, or someone wrote a plugin as a workaround).

Also in its days, I ran into some files that the HD100 either wouldn't play, or wouldn't play smoothly. But, PCs played them back fine. Sure, I sometimes had to switch decoders, but my client would play them back. Personally,I decided I'd much rather use an extender where things play back better 95% of the time, and be at the mercy of Sage for the remaining 5%, but people out there that actually like to constantly tweak their systems might like the flexibility of the PC client.

[babgvant]

Originally Posted by stanger89

I think the point chrisc was trying to make was that non-remote operations aren't the sort of things you'd want to do in an HT/living room, on a TV. At least that's how I feel. Personally if I can't access it through a nice 10' UI with a remote, it's not the sort of experience I'm interested in having in my HT.

For the most part I agree; but what I was driving at is that you're no worse off. Everything that's 10' enabled on the extender is 10' enabled on the PC.

Originally Posted by stanger89

I hear that basic argument a lot, but you know I think it's largely flawed. While what you say is absolutely true, "a little bit of custom software" is well beyond most people's capabilities, and beyond the ambition of probably most others.

That would be true if no one shared. Everyone here can benefit from the "little bits of custom code" that I and others provide.

Originally Posted by stanger89

You know I've generally bought the "If an extender is broke you're at the mercy of the developer, but with a PC you can probably fix it" but the last couple of comments have made me rethink that.

Granted, if an extender is broke, you are at the mercy of the developer, but what about the PC/software side? Well if say SageTV Client isn't working, can you fix it? No, you have to wait for SageTV to fix it.

While I can't fix SageTV (directly), I also don't have to use it if it's broken.

Let's say hypothetically that there was a time when h.264 acceleration and DVD menu's didn't work properly in SageTV on Vista. An enterprising developer could have written their own 10' EVR based player that hooked into Sage's database via the webserver and "fixed" all that while Sage added support.

While of course that is beyond the skill and/or desire of most users, as long as our hypothetical developer shares everyone could benefit.

Originally Posted by stanger89

You'll say, "But wait, you can change decoders, renderers, drivers, etc, etc... to fix it." But the "problem" with that is those are exactly the issues that an extender eliminates. So yeah, you can probably fix a setup/configuration issue on a PC, but that's an issue you wouldn't have had with an extender.

This is true, and that's where the ease-of-use v. flexibility trade-off comes in.

Originally Posted by stanger89

Of course there's still codec support differences (very small differences these days) and online content really that are the key differences between extender and PC.

Anything multi-channel that can't be bitstreamed and lossless audio aren't small differences.

No DTS w/o an AVR isn't a small difference either.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by Tikker

in terms of watching back live tv, and standard content that I've got on my fileserver, there's no real difference?

Functionaly, no, though IMO the extenders work easier and produce a better result.

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

For me, the main things keeping me from an extender are:

Cost: My server works fine as my primary client
Full BD support: Menus + HD Audio
3D Games: Obviously not going to work on the Extender
3D Movies: Also... not support on the Extender.

Obviously most here don't care about the 3rd and 4th... and for those starting out, #1 wouldn't be an issue (it's cheaper to build a low power server and an extender, than it is to build a powerful server/client). *2 really depends on your habits. If you liek just jumping to the main movie, than it is not an issue. I happen to really like DB Menus.

Yeah, I care about 3 and (sorta 4), but I've got an Xbox 360 for 3. As far as 4, what 3D movies are there for the PC, and how do they fail to work on an extender? As far as 2, menus (DVD or BD) have always been little less than a neusance to me and BD ones haven't impressed me yet. And IMO HD Audio is overrated (or the difference between it and the legacy core is).

Originally Posted by babgvant

For the most part I agree; but what I was driving at is that you're no worse off. Everything that's 10' enabled on the extender is 10' enabled on the PC.

Yeah, I guess I just look at it from the other angle, ie that that is a reason to use an extender (given the extenders benefits).

That would be true if no one shared. Everyone here can benefit from the "little bits of custom code" that I and others provide.

But that's still a 3rd party. If my video decoders (to borrow an example above) don't handle aspect ratio right, I can't fix it. If I'm using dScaler (open source) maybe I could, but I don't have the skills or inclination to, and I'd say the vast majority of users fall into that same category, and thus we have to rely on the dScaler devs to fix their decoder.

Little different than SageTV having to fix a bug on the extender. Granted of course, given the wider range of softwares, it's easier, or maybe I should say "more likely" that you can find a workaround on a PC.

While I can't fix SageTV (directly), I also don't have to use it if it's broken.

Let's say hypothetically that there was a time when h.264 acceleration and DVD menu's didn't work properly in SageTV on Vista. An enterprising developer could have written their own 10' EVR based player that hooked into Sage's database via the webserver and "fixed" all that while Sage added support.

While of course that is beyond the skill and/or desire of most users, as long as our hypothetical developer shares everyone could benefit.

Like I said, you're more likely to be able to find workaround, but you're still at the mercy of the original devs to fix the actual problem.

IMO that benefit is at least cancelled by the reduction in issues in the first place.

This is true, and that's where the ease-of-use v. flexibility trade-off comes in.

Yup.

Anything multi-channel that can't be bitstreamed and lossless audio aren't small differences.

No DTS w/o an AVR isn't a small difference either.

Well that's a matter of opinion . Having a standalone BD player with HBR decoding feeding my SSP, and having run it both S/PDIF/core audio and HBR decoded analog, I can say that at least for me the difference between lossless and core is small to nonexistant.

And never run into anything where DTS was a problem but I guess I don't watch DVDs on my TV, only in my HT where my SSP decodes it.

[babgvant]

Originally Posted by stanger89

But that's still a 3rd party. If my video decoders (to borrow an example above) don't handle aspect ratio right, I can't fix it. If I'm using dScaler (open source) maybe I could, but I don't have the skills or inclination to, and I'd say the vast majority of users fall into that same category, and thus we have to rely on the dScaler devs to fix their decoder.

Little different than SageTV having to fix a bug on the extender. Granted of course, given the wider range of softwares, it's easier, or maybe I should say "more likely" that you can find a workaround on a PC.

Like I said, you're more likely to be able to find workaround, but you're still at the mercy of the original devs to fix the actual problem.

IMO that benefit is at least cancelled by the reduction in issues in the first place.

Let's say I have a file that doesn't play right on the HD 200 (like a WMV HD file w/ VC-1 and WMAPro audio). If it doesn't play correctly, I wait until it becomes a priority fix. Which, in this case could mean forever because the effected audience is very small and there are more important things to do.

Or let's say that I have a file with DTS-MA audio where the core crashes the HD200's decoder requiring a trip to the back of device to make it work again. Because it's a HW issue, there is no fix.

Both classes of file work fine on my PC, but if they didn't I could do something about it besides wait.

I see choice as a feature. If the decoder you're using doesn't work right on the PC you can change it; sure you're at the mercy of another dev (unless you are the dev), but that's not any different than being at Sage's mercy except that statistically you're more likely to find a workaround (which you note).

It is my preference to not be powerless, to have choice, and the freedom to exercise it if necessary; that's why I started using a HTPC in the first place. For those w/ different preferences (valuing ease-of-use over flexibility/features for e.g.) I completely understand why the outcome would be different.

Originally Posted by stanger89

Well that's a matter of opinion . Having a standalone BD player with HBR decoding feeding my SSP, and having run it both S/PDIF/core audio and HBR decoded analog, I can say that at least for me the difference between lossless and core is small to nonexistant.

Even if you can't hear the [admittedly small] difference b/w lossless and core, you should be able to hear the difference b/w multi-channel and stereo.

Originally Posted by stanger89

And never run into anything where DTS was a problem but I guess I don't watch DVDs on my TV, only in my HT where my SSP decodes it.

It is an issue for those w/ different setups and use cases.