Sage TV 2.0 Review at Anandtech

[JasonJoel]

Yeah, well, I am certainly no computer dummy.. And have been using SageTV for a year and a half now. And I have YET to ever get VMR to work correctly (or at least with as stable a picture quality as overlay). And this is on 3 different PC's, 3 different video cards.

Im mean it works, but the motion is 'blurry', and/or drops frames. Even with an Nvidia 5900 on an Athlon64 3000+...

So simply saying 'use VMR' is not a fix. Well, it is if your PC can run it well. I've yet to see ANY PC that does, though (at least not with as good a picture quality and motion quality as overlay).

Jason

Originally posted by falchulk
I find myself yelling for them to use VMR9 instead of overlay!

[mbrown3]

Nope, overlay is far better on mine too. And I have pretty good hardware.

[falchulk]

Originally posted by JasonJoel
Yeah, well, I am certainly no computer dummy.. And have been using SageTV for a year and a half now. And I have YET to ever get VMR to work correctly (or at least with as stable a picture quality as overlay). And this is on 3 different PC's, 3 different video cards.

Im mean it works, but the motion is 'blurry', and/or drops frames. Even with an Nvidia 5900 on an Athlon64 3000+...

So simply saying 'use VMR' is not a fix. Well, it is if your PC can run it well. I've yet to see ANY PC that does, though (at least not with as good a picture quality and motion quality as overlay).

Jason

Not what I meant. To get the eye candy he seems to want, vmr is the way to go. BTW, I have NO trouble getting vmr to work. I have used it on 2 seperate PC's without any issue. I am now running it in 800x600 with vsync turned off and have 0 dropped frames. My current system is a athlon 2800+ with geforce4.

[jominor]

It was disappointing. To compare a released product to an unreleased version is usually bad form. In addition, I've yet to read any review of Sage that mentions the IR.

Long story short, Sage needs to get their hype machine going. I've said this before. I do agree that Sage's front-end needs more polish. Apps live and die by the interface. Sage is good, but it now needs the nice to haves.

[mbrown3]

I think there is serious concern about it functioning properly first. I love the software and won't switch any time to anything else, but I have a strange glitchy-playback problem that only occurs on certain files and have yet to receive a solution. Things like that have to be addressed, in my estimation, before tweaking the interface. Of course, if Studio were released, some of the interface issues could be addressed by users...

[stanger89]

Originally posted by mbrown3
I think there is serious concern about it functioning properly first.

Give BTV a try sometime, last time I tried it I crashed it about 6 times the first hour I used it (BTV 3.4 I believe).

Yes there are bugs, but what makes successful software is balancing bugs and features since features get you new customers and bug fixes keep your current ones (oversimplified).

One of Sage's halmarks has been that it's been developed in exactly the manner you suggest, 1.4 wasn't pretty (although I still say very useable) but it worked. It wasn't until it was solid that we got 2.0 and all it's great features. On the other hand, BTV seemed to plop all the features (fancy UI) but without the solid foundation.

[mbrown3]

I make that comment not as it relates to other applications (I have no desire to try BTV because I know it too has its problems), but rather on Sage's own merit. I'm not saying it's any worse or better than anything else, simply saying that it does still have things that need to be worked out. And anyway, my comment was in response to jominor's post that Sage needs to focus on the interface...I'm just saying they need some functional improvement first...regardless of where other apps are in the process.

[JasonJoel]

Along those veins... I would really like to know what Jeff is working on these days.

Is there a Sage TV 2.x in the works? How about a 3.0? What would be in those releases.

At some point Frey has to release SOMETHING if they want continued revenue. Otherwise they go out of business / change business and we are S.O.L...

Jason

[jominor]

Originally posted by stanger89
Give BTV a try sometime, last time I tried it I crashed it about 6 times the first hour I used it (BTV 3.4 I believe).

Yes there are bugs, but what makes successful software is balancing bugs and features since features get you new customers and bug fixes keep your current ones (oversimplified).

One of Sage's halmarks has been that it's been developed in exactly the manner you suggest, 1.4 wasn't pretty (although I still say very useable) but it worked. It wasn't until it was solid that we got 2.0 and all it's great features. On the other hand, BTV seemed to plop all the features (fancy UI) but without the solid foundation.

Indeed. I test drove BTV 3.3 and it worked. However, 3.4 stuttered. It crashed. Sometimes, you couldn't change channels.

Sage 1.4 worked. My point is that Sage has that basics. All software has bugs, but I would say for the most part, Sage is solid. Now, it has to look nice. I has to have those nice too haves that people, ie, non-geeks go "Wow!" over.

Also, they need to market more. When people go, "BTV can stream TV over the web!" and don't mention that you lose timeshifting for this "gift", to me, this is an basically a bias in favor of BTV. Anandtech's offer of a future version of BTV that will have multi-tuner, to me, shows that they just like BTV more.

[JasonJoel]

Well, I agree it is bad form to compare a released product to a beta in a review... BUT.

IF SS 3.5 comes out stable, then it will have almost everything Sage TV has (no skinnable interface - although Sage isn't skinnable right now either, and no IR), and a lot of things it doesn't (Windows Media support, transcoding, web administration, remote scheduling).

I took it as Anandtech saying that Sage is the only 'mainstream' multi-tuner offering out right now, but it won't be for long. And I think that is a good point. I hope Frey has something up their sleeve for a future release (in a reasonable timeframe), or they are going to be in big trouble with future sales (again, IF SS 3.5 is stable... Which is a big IF in my mind.. heh).

Just my take on it. Until then, here's to Frey and Sage TV!

Jason

Originally posted by jominor
Indeed. I test drove BTV 3.3 and it worked. However, 3.4 stuttered. It crashed. Sometimes, you couldn't change channels.

Sage 1.4 worked. My point is that Sage has that basics. All software has bugs, but I would say for the most part, Sage is solid. Now, it has to look nice. I has to have those nice too haves that people, ie, non-geeks go "Wow!" over.

Also, they need to market more. When people go, "BTV can stream TV over the web!" and don't mention that you lose timeshifting for this "gift", to me, this is an basically a bias in favor of BTV. Anandtech's offer of a future version of BTV that will have multi-tuner, to me, shows that they just like BTV more.

[Opus4]

Amazingly enough, the review seems to have been updated. (Either that, or I missed some things the first time I read it.)

- Andy

[fidget]

Originally posted by Opus4
Amazingly enough, the review seems to have been updated. (Either that, or I missed quite a bit the first time I read it.)

- Andy

Its length hasn't changed (20 pages), but I haven't bothered to reread it.

[Opus4]

Heh... you quoted me before I changed my text a little bit. I noticed that it now mentions Intelligent Recording & the ability to change how the Recording Schedule list is displayed. I don't think there are major changes; just additional comments here & there.

- Andy

[jominor]

Originally posted by mbrown3
I make that comment not as it relates to other applications (I have no desire to try BTV because I know it too has its problems), but rather on Sage's own merit. I'm not saying it's any worse or better than anything else, simply saying that it does still have things that need to be worked out. And anyway, my comment was in response to jominor's post that Sage needs to focus on the interface...I'm just saying they need some functional improvement first...regardless of where other apps are in the process.

UI changes would encompass that. I don't mean better bitmaps necessarily. But things like enhanced sorting functions, better grouping functions, moving functionality around a bit.

I write software for a living and I can tell you that applications live and die by the front-end. You can have the most robust, most feature rich, fastest, most stable application in its class, but if the interface is lacking(which is not saying that Sage is), no one will care.

The face has to be both beautiful and functional. The reason why BTV originally got the most press, IMO, was because it looked better than Sage. People translated that into more professional. I would say that they did this with good reason, for an unfortunate characteristic of software development is that UI goes somewhere behind security and configuration.

It gets tacked on.

If you have few resources, those items fall first.

I remember doing a big project for a telecom, a java, web-based project. After the second release, the users stood up and applauded because of the front-end changes that made the app easier to use. In there case two main items, 1) the color changes for sets of data that met certain criteria and two, the ability to auto-generate reports. Go figure. Users want what they want.

It is those little "nice to haves" that attracts the mainstream and that's the target that Frey has to hit.

In fact, thinking about it as I type, Frey could do worst than to push off Studio and directly attact the features that seems to get the most attention. The web based, for example, configuration and perhaps considering lowering the client price(or at least a software bundle).

Only the most hardcore of the hardcore will use Studio and hardcore makes for a lousy long term market.

[ErsatzTom]

I'd have to disagree about pushing off studio. We have already seen a large number of new features that have long been on peoples must have list from only a very small number of contributors. Once Frey has worked out modularization issues and releases this to the masses, I think the payoff will be tremendous. One of Sage's strengths is the size, talent, and enthusiasm of its user base. While directing that energy toward end user support has worked out great, I think it can produce even greater benefits in non-core feature development. Just my $0.02.

t

[DFranch]

Why does everybody rank on the interface of Sage? I think it looks as good as my TiVo. In fact with Malore's STV, I can do much more in terms of upcoming recordings/history.

ErsatzTom:

I agree with you about Studio. I think once Studio is available, Sage development will start to look kind of like Medio. People will be able to write plugins and users will be able to download the plugins they want, like mlbdude's weather module.

[mlbdude]

I think the only "problem" with the interface is that there is TOO much to it at times and can be simplified. A Tivo user is not expecting to see all the bells and whistles in Sage at first and can get overwhelmed.

Like this review, the user complained that he did not like the Upcoming Recordings list since it was not a simple list. It should have been more obvious that there was another view OR the user should have been directed through some kind of setup where they were asked what default view they wanted with info on how to change it later.

[mikesm]

JasonJoel is right. Sage 2.0 is a good product today, but other well capitalized companies and open sources efforts are moving ahead in this sector with great gusto, and will leave Sage behind at the current pace of progress.

We need HD support, 1394 tuners, studio released to allow user GUI's to be developed (and hopefully picked up by Sage!), Sage or user integrated commercial skip and DVD ripping, thin client support, etc...

Opening up an SDK would allow the user community to integrate code for these functions, or maybe talking the whole thing open source. Frey has too little resources to compete effectively against others in this arena. They need to concentrate on the core architecture and allow a plethora of plugins to flourish.

Barring some large investment in Frey, if something like the above doesn't happen, long term Sage will go the way of BETAMAX.

Thanks,
Mike

[falchulk]

Originally posted by mikesm


Barring some large investment in Frey, if something like the above doesn't happen, long term Sage will go the way of BETAMAX.

I completely disagree. Lets just say my current setup (using sage as the front end and PVR) does EVERYTHING I would want an htpc to do. My whole family can use it to do everything I designed it for. While all the features may not come bult into sage, they are integrated very well.