Review: EyeTV 211
I've been using it for a couple of months now. I schedule it to record The Daily Show four nights a week, along with all my Sunday political shows, so I can watch (er, listen to) them as I work. I turn the news on in the middle of the day. I watch hockey games while I am working late. And because I have a big ol' 160GB FireWire hard drive, I can save a lot of programs without worrying about deleting (one hour takes 650MB at standard/VCD quality, and 1.3GB at high quality). And if I have Toast, I can burn VCDs directly from EyeTV for posterity.
The performance is fine. Because the MPEG encoder is in the EyeTV box, most of the performance drag is where it has to be: playing back movie files, and writing them to disk. I keep EyeTV hooked up to my house file/web server (a PowerBook G3/500 which also serves as MP3/CD/DVD player and -- now -- television), and when I go on the road, I merely copy a bunch of programs to my laptop. Warning: watching Trigger Happy TV on the subway can be a bit dangerous; people think the abandoned aluminum foil hat under the bench belongs to you.
To view a recording on another computer, you Save to QuickTime Movie from EyeTV, or you can install another copy of the EyeTV software on another computer, and copy the EyeTV files over.
If you want to copy individual recordings, either bypassing Save to QuickTime Movie (the movies will play just fine in QuickTime Player), or copying selected recordings to your other EyeTV folder (instead of all of them), it can be difficult to locate the right files: the filenames don't really tell you anything about what's inside. So, I wrote a command-line utility to search the recordings.
Also, it is difficult, but not impossible, to edit programs. QuickTime tools don't allow for editing MPEG-1. You can "export to QuickTime", but you won't be able to edit the resulting file. What you'll need to do is demux (I use bbDEMUX) the file into separate audio and video streams, then convert the streams and merge them back together.
I convert the demuxed audio to AIFF with SoundApp (under Classic) and then put that file in the same directory as the demuxed video, one called "movie.aiff" and the other "movie.m1v", and when I open the video in QuickTime Player, it merges them together automatically (a nice time-saver). Then I export it to MPEG-4 format. This process can be very tedious, and is prone to failure for large files, but it can be done.
I did have problems for awhile with EyeTV not saving recordings. I had set my drive to spin down, and EyeTV wouldn't properly spin it up; I changed my Energy Saver prefs to not sleep the disk whenever possible, and the problem was solved. There are some other minor glitches: for instance, the software allows the screen to dim and screen savers to come on during playback, and there is the occasional crash (which happens less with the latest release of the software). Also, as the resolution is 352x240 (regardless of quality setting), I don't want to use it to watch programs that demand high resolution. I'll record those on the DirecTiVo.
But really, the only serious problem I have had with EyeTV is the scheduling. You can use the TitanTV service via a web browser, which is a nice idea, but it is often incredibly slow, such that finding the program and manually adding it can be less frustrating, if not faster, than going through the browser.
The service has improved recently, so maybe it won't be much of an issue anymore for some people, but for me, a better solution is Karelia's Watson, which is similar to Apple's Sherlock, but better in most respects (more and mostly better tools, and faster). The new version of Watson (1.6, released Tuesday) has new buttons in the TV Listings tool, one for "watch," one for "record," and even one for adding the program to iCal. I use Watson to quickly find the program I want, I hit the right button, and EyeTV is ready to go. You can't beat that with a stick, although it will cost you another $29 for the privilege, if for some insane reason you've not yet purchased Watson.
I also use EyeTV to digitize other video sources; you can play back something from your TiVo or VCR and record a copy to take with you on your next trip. I have a Meade telescope with an electronic eyepiece, so I can record the moon. Mmmmmm, moon.
EyeTV isn't perfect; the software could use some improvement, it could be easier to convert to an editable file format, and the resolution could be better (which will require updated hardware, perhaps using FireWire). In the meantime, I could live without EyeTV, but I wouldn't want to. It's a nice device to have.
What about satellite users? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What about satellite users? (Score:5, Informative)
1. buy an ethernet card for your Tivo http://9thtee.com/
2. Install it, and the software that comes with it
3. Add the module noscramble.o (find it on the dealdatabase.com forums)
4. Install TyTool on your computer to extract the mpeg-2 video to your PC(find it on the aforementioned forums)
Re:What about satellite users? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:What about satellite users? (Score:2)
1. buy an ethernet card for your Tivo http://9thtee.com/
2. Install it, and the software that comes with it
3. Add the module noscramble.o (find it on the dealdatabase.com forums)
4. Install TyTool on your computer to extract the mpeg-2 video to your PC(find it on the aforementioned forums)
5. Add a VideoLan [videolan.org] server into the mix to serve up the video to any of your PCs!
Re:What about satellite users? (Score:3, Informative)
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/snapstreammedia/cable
Snapstream is a PC-based DVR. This is their solution to the satellite question. I'm not sure what it does for Mac, but it does show that Satellite users are not left out.
Re:What about satellite users? (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate the idea of having to pony up $8 per TV for tuners. It'd be great if they could be integrated into the device directly.
I don't know how practical this would be -- I'd imagine that there are multiple digital cable standards out there (Motorola, Scientific Atlanta, etc) and probably little desire for a common standard.
I'm also curious about the economics to the cable company. While I'm sure my SA2100 box wasn't $500 in bulk to the CATV company, I can't see them making a profit off the box @ $8 per month for at least a year, maybe two.
If I could take a few weeks off work and had a few thousand to spend, I could do a decent job of rewiring my house and get a couple of TVs per CATV tuner box, centralized Tivo, etc, but not now.
Re:What about satellite users? (Score:2)
Now, MPEG-2 is standard, but not terribly 'open', as it encumbered with patents. If you want to sell someone an MPEG-2 decoder, you need to pay licence fees to the patent holders. That's been one of the problems with releasing free MPEG-2 decoders for Quicktime, since Apple would have to pay royalties per player.
The STBs are made in Taiwan, in the millions. Economy of scale, heavy automation, and very low wages, combine to ensure that your STB cost the CATV company less than $200. I'd say that even so, at $8/month, it takes them at least 13 months to make any money off you.
Re:What about satellite users? (Score:2)
The standardization I was talking about was the layer 2/3/4 communication that enables authorization, pay-per-view, guide data, and so on.
It'd be kind of cool if the major vendors had decided that the boxes themselves would just be java machines with a standard boot protocol, and everything else that ran on them was downloaded to the box from the headend, instead of hardcoded into the box. Make it easier for TV, PVR, and third parties to make boxes that fit the standard. The major vendors could then still make money to cable co's selling headend systems and software, instead of closed hardware/software systems!
Re:What about satellite users? (Score:2)
There are a very few CA systems. Moto have their own, nearly every one else uses one of two other vendors. This is the Smart Card stuff. It's 'standard', but they are very paranoid about revealing how it works, as if it is broken it costs tens of millions of $ to fix.
The other bit is middleware. Rather than write for every processor in every model of every STB, most manufacturers now use one of two or three middleware systems. At least one of these is Java based, but most are not (although they will run Java). MS tried to own this space with WinCE but so far has been laughed at.
So, what you want is what is already in place, but the target system isn't quite what you expect maybe. BTW, the OS on most of these STBs is VxWorks from Wind River [windriver.com].
I was going to build (Score:2)
Re:I was going to build (Score:2, Informative)
and use standard hardware instead of one particular brand
You don't need it. (Score:3, Offtopic)
CPU usage was about 50% on one cpu (800 MHz P3 (box is dual) filesize is 374.5MB (using default VBR mp3 and a vbitrate of 800 (default)) it can be reencoded to a lower bitrate and nearly the same quality if you turn vhq on (Very High Quality) in mencoder (note this is without commercials taken out (57 minutes, most shows are about 43 mins with them out so: about 280 MB with commercials edited out.
Box used: dual P3 800
256MB RAM
ATI TV Wonder VE (~$30 when I got it)
mplayer/encoder 0.90pre10
redhat 7.3
Command line used (or one that has been used, not sure this is the EXACT one I used for smallville):T SC:outfmt=rgb32:freq=83.250 -oac mp3lame -ovc lavc -lavcopts vcodec=mpeg4 -o test6.avi
mencoder -tv on:driver=v4l:width=320:height=240:input=0:norm=N
This comes with a disclaimer though, there isn't a nice frontend to recording to mplayer. freevo (freevo.sourceforge.net) is working on easy recording though.
Windows support is coming... (Score:2)
Naming question (Score:5, Funny)
This product can also be used to record full length motion pictures, which is piracy as far as certain industry groups are concerned.
Thus, shouldn't this product be called "iEyeTV"?
Re:Naming question (Score:4, Funny)
The bartender brings this to the pirate's attention.
The pirate replies: "AArghh! It's driving me nuts!"
Re:Naming question (Score:2)
Re:Naming question (Score:2)
Re:Naming question (Score:2)
But that would lead to too much pirating...
(rimshot)
Great, except I don't want to make a Mac (Score:1)
Maybe when Apple comes out with a small form computer (other than that silly cube) that looks like a generic A/V peripheral and costs $300 I will consider this.
Re:Great, except I don't want to make a Mac (Score:2)
Re:Great, except I don't want to make a Mac (Score:3, Funny)
See, thats why the Mac would be the focal point.
Re:Great, except I don't want to make a Mac (Score:2)
Re:Great, except I don't want to make a Mac (Score:1)
>computer (other than that silly cube) that looks
>like a generic A/V peripheral and costs $300 I
>will consider this.
Why? Are you too much of a wimp to put
the board in a different case? I have
my beige G3 in a custom box that looks
great with my equipment, and controls
the CD changer [slink-e] and plays mpegs
and DVDs, all with an obviously better
interface and no $$ to microsoft.
-milo
Re:Great, except I don't want to make a Mac QWZX (Score:1)
Also, you can use any usb keyboard, mouse with your apple. I use a microsoft mouse with my iBook, the wireless intellimouse explorer. It's very nice, except for the battery consumption.
Some other owner comments (Score:5, Informative)
The general feeing is that the drivers aren't up to snuff yet, but it's a neat idea and a relatively nice to work with.
BBK
Re:Some other owner comments (Score:4, Insightful)
All the cool stuff is for Mac. (Score:2)
This Eye thing seems pretty cool. I've really been wanting something that would allow me to easily record video and then edit it. It would just be stupid silly stuff like me sticking a picture of my head into a still of some episode of Seinfield or something but it would still be fun.
Are there any plans to make a version of this for PC's or is there something similar already avail for PC's?
Re:All the cool stuff is for Mac. (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:All the cool stuff is for Mac. (Score:1, Informative)
cheaper too
all the cool stuff is for macs? by one or 2 vendors. for the pc there are 20-30 vendors making the sutff
WinTV PVR is like this, but... (Score:1)
This works pretty well for watching recordings on the PC that you don't intend to keep. Forget it for making permanent copies to VCD or DVD though. High quality MPEG encoding can't be done in real time. You need to capture to some other format (MJPEG or Huffyuv) then convert to MPEG afterwards. MPEG compression for a two hour movie in VCD format can take almost 24 hours. Compressing to DivX is much faster and takes half the disk space, but cannot be played on most current DVD players.
In any case, VCDs created from MPEG captures using this card look OK on the computer, but really awful on a real TV. If VCDs for your TV is what you want get a cheaper card without MPEG encoding and use Virtual Dub, TMPGenc, etc. as described at vcdhelp.com.
Re:WinTV PVR is like this, but... (Score:2)
Yes it can, and it has been done for a few years on a regular basis. Perhaps you mean it can't be done on a home system, and that's true. Don't say it can't be done, though, because I've got several machines converting video to 50Mbps MPEG in realtime in the room with me at this very moment.
USB 1.1 (Score:3, Interesting)
I would like to see a firewire or USB 2.0 device that is platform independent. That way I would never miss another episode of Smallville again.
To "store?" (Score:4, Informative)
The answer is yes. More than enough for NTSC size and resolution. WinTV USB just sucks, and AFIAK it transmits uncompressed video.
A better question is exactly how much is done on the hardware before its transmitted to the computer. Its likely that the device merely does mjpeg encoding, which is then enhanced to full mpeg using software (because the motion component requires knowledge of several frames - more frames in memory means much higher cost for the device). If mjpeg is all it does, then this means that hacking it to Linux might require more work than otherwise (because you can do mjpeg more than one way since its just an intermediate step on the road to mpeg encoding, and not necessarily following a standard).
Re:USB 1.1 (Score:1, Informative)
and why mpeg1? why not divx?
Re:USB 1.1 (Score:2)
If you want to convert it to a low resolution MPEG-1, sure. But why?
Agreed - good stuff (Score:5, Informative)
I've only used it to record VHS video tapes. I generally don't watch TV at all, and don't care much to know what the current schlock on TV is. But I do want to save the VHS video tapes onto a more permanent medium. A good thing is that it even records tapes that are Macrovision encoded.
The quality isn't superb, but the price is right.
Formac (http://www.formac.com) has a box that claims higher quality, similar features, and connects via Firewire. It has a higher price too.
- David
Freevo! (Score:1, Interesting)
Freevo! steals icons? (Score:1)
Hello Shitty Quality (Score:1)
USB1.1 does not have the bandwidth to capture that at any decent framerate/resolution.
In my experience, the only way this can be done is with devices that have build-in MPEG2(dvd) encoding chips, and a USB2/firewire interface.
See the Dazzle DVC150 or the Adaptec Vide-oh DVD.
Re:Hello Shitty Quality (Score:2)
Twelve megabits is plenty for full-motion, full-resolution video. The SDTV signals you get over digital broadcast TV are only encoded at 4 Mbps, albeit with MPEG-2. MPEG-1 at 12 Mbps won't look that shit-hot, but that's a limitation of the codec, not of USB.
Re:Hello Shitty Quality (Score:2)
That should have read, "The SDTV signals you get over digital broadcast TV are only encoded at 8 Mbps, albeit with MPEG-2."
Oops.
Re:Hello Shitty Quality (Score:2)
USB can handle that ridiculous resolution at 30fps just fine, but thats TV quality, and looks really crappy on a computer monitor
That is, after all, what we're talking about here. TV signals: 480 lines at 59.94 fields per second. That's all the data you're ever going to get out of an SDTV signal, no matter how you slice it. This particular encoder down-rezzes the picture to half-D1, but that's to comply with the VideoCD spec, not a limitation of USB per se.
FWIW- HDTV and DVDs are at a much higher resolution as well.
HDTV, yes; DVD, no. HDTV can come in a variety of formats, but the most common are 1080i (1080 lines at 59.94 fields per second) and 720p (720 lines at 60 frames per second). DVD, on the other hand, has exactly one resolution: 480 lines at 59.94 fields per second, same as over-the-air television. Some-- many-- DVD players can do a reverse 3:2 pulldown and turn the 480i picture back into a 480/24p picture, but that's just trickery with fields. It doesn't actually give you any more resolution. Also, most DVDs contain an anamorphic picture that your TV stretches out (or squeezes down, depending on whether your screen is 4:3 or 16:9), but that doesn't magically give you any more resolution either. In fact, you're decreasing the effective horizontal resolution of the picture when you do it. You're trading horizontal resolution for vertical resolution, and just about everybody agrees that it's a good trade-off.
But the idea that DVDs contain more resolution than regular TV signals is a myth.
Re:Hello Shitty Quality (Score:2)
No, you forget that NTSC is not the only encoding system in common usage. There are DVDs which are encoded to PAL resolution--for example, the "Red Edition" of *Dellamorte Dellamore* which I just finished watching a few hours ago on my region-free DVD setup.
Re:Hello Shitty Quality (Score:2)
Ah, I see the problem. You don't realize that this device takes analog video input and encodes it to an MPEG-1 bitstream, then sends the bitstream over the USB connection to the computer. The data pushed over USB in this case never exceeds about 180 KB/s, so USB is more than adequate for that task.
If this device included a better encoder, it could generate an MPEG-2 bitstream at 6 Mbps, which is visually indistinguishable from broadcast-quality SDTV to the casual observer. USB could carry that bitstream to the computer quite easily. You said, "USB1.1 does not have the bandwidth to capture that at any decent framerate/resolution." That's not true at all.
Modern DV cameras produce resolutions higher than that.
Wrong. "Modern DV cameras" produce exactly 480 lines at 59.94 fields per second, nothing more. (Well, NTSC cameras, anyway. PAL cameras produce a picture that's slightly different.) In fact, they produce a picture that's considerably worse than broadcast quality, because the DV codec preserves full-bandwidth luminance data but discards more than half of the color data. In video jargon, this is called "4:1:0." Whereas broadcast-quality video (4:2:2) can be represented as an 8, 6, or even 4 Mbps bitstream with no objectionable artifacts or macroblocking, DV video (including DVCPRO and DVCAM) can easily be squeezed down to a megabit or less, due to the lower effective resolution in the color channels.
This device is *severely* limited- period.
That's true, but not for the reason you keep repeating. It's got nothing to do with USB qua USB. It's limited by the fact that it includes a cheap MPEG encoder chip. Saying "USB1.1 does not have the bandwidth to capture that at any decent framerate/resolution" is just exaggeration.
ordered one two days ago (Score:2, Funny)
USB vs. Firewire (Score:2, Informative)
Re:USB vs. Firewire (Score:3, Funny)
Now, your experience may simply have been with crappy devices. But that doesn't necessarily mean that USB sucks.
I mean, USB does suck, but just not in this particular way.
Re:USB vs. Firewire (Score:2)
But yeah, you can understand why they lock you into the low resolution, you'd never get full screen hi-resolution over a USB 1.x connection using MPEG 1 compression.
I think the whole thing is pretty overpriced for what you get though. I got the Video Blaster card with the same features (but with full screen video) at CompUSA last month and it was only $50. While I know that many Mac owners don't have the option of putting new cards in their boxes, a 300% markup seems kind of steep for an external unit that also has more limited capability.
Also, what is up with the 20MB software installation? You can play MPEG1 files with QuickTime, so all you need is a scheduling interface.
for the love of god (Score:2)
why hasn't someone written drivers for Hauppauge cards yet? they cost a fraction of the price of this product.
Re:for the love of god (Score:1, Funny)
Re:for the love of god (Score:1)
Oh, did you mean using hauppage cards under linux/bsd? They don't come bundled but it's quite possible. v4l is your friend.
Oh, did you mean using hauppage cards under osx? I suppose it's theoretically possible, desktop Apple's have PCI slots now right? I guess it's merely a matter of interest - you have to have people with the need (don't have tivo/etc.) and the knowledge, who also have the time - many times the time cost far outweighs the cost of just buying the device.
Re:for the love of god (Score:1)
Hauppauge supports OS X (Score:3, Informative)
MacAddict recently did a review and comparison of EyeTV (which I also use) and MyTV. EyeTV was easier to use and had a stronger value in their opinion. I was waiting for MyTV to get its drivers out of its eternal beta stage by the time EyeTV showed up.
Re:Hauppauge supports OS X (Score:2)
Re:Hauppauge supports OS X (Score:3, Informative)
That's interesting - but what are they taking those nice 1600x1200 stills _from_? NTSC and PAL aren't anywhere NEAR that kind of resolution - not even CLOSE (like around 1/4 that resolution). So what they're really doing is taking the image and scaling it up. Shit, you could do that better in the GIMP or Photoshop, so that's hardly a big deal.
Re:Hauppauge supports OS X (Score:2)
there *has* to be something out there better than this, anyway.
Re:Hauppauge supports OS X (Score:2)
I just wish someone would come out with a widescreen TUBE tv that supports 480p with no speakers. No higher resolutions needed (what would I use them for?. Lowest-cost possible with a great picture for watching regular tv and DVD movies. Is this too much to ask for? *sigh*
IE (Score:2, Informative)
A. Yes. EyeTV always uses Internet Explorer because other browsers do not work properly with the TitanTV.com web site.
Well, I'm going to assume that makes it unappealing for most of us mac-people, doesn't it? I don't even have IE on my machine anymore - I got rid of it when chimera hit
Added to which, the only reason I'd get a box like this would be to get rid of my TV - hook my VCR and various consoles through the Mac. But according to the FAQ there's a 1.5 second delay between signal output and display, making games unplayable. Damnit.
Triv
Re:IE (Score:2)
Re:IE (Score:3, Informative)
http://homepage.mac.com/WebObjects/FileSharing.
I'm also setting up a small section on EyeTV on
http://bschollnick.phpwebhosting.com/digital
- Ben
Saw it...passed (Score:5, Informative)
I have a couple of Tivos and the EyeTV quality is well below even the lowest quality I can get on my Tivo. I would rate it at about the same level as a decent telesync of a film...no better. I asked why no MPEG4/Divx compression and didn't get a decent answer.
Also, I don't want to watch TV off my Mac, even on a Cinema Display. I could stream it to my tv using Qcast [broadq.com] but then what's the point? Might as well just buy a Tivo.
I'm the most gullible of early adopters and I didn't buy EyeTV. Hopefully it'll improve in time.
I did however buy the very cool Powermate volume knob [griffintechnology.com] that they were using to control EyeTV. That's turned out to be a neat gadget, and really nice for film editing.
Re:Saw it...passed (Score:3, Funny)
[OT] Powermate "volume knob" (Score:1)
Re:Saw it...passed (Score:2)
Re:Saw it...passed (Score:2)
The answer would be that at least until recently no hardware compression chips where available. Because the data is sent over the slow USB bus, it has to be compressed by the device, before it goes over the bus.
If they had used Firewire, any compression could have been used, provided that the Mac's CPU can handle it in real-time.
so the question is..... (Score:2)
preferrably NOT using the mess called video4linux.
i'd like a real video record app, not something that kinda works.
try formac's firewire solution (Score:5, Informative)
Re:try formac's firewire solution (Score:2)
I found a few reviews on Google:
http://www.whatcamcorder.net/frame.html?http://www .whatcamcorder.net/reviews/VideoEditing/Formac/For macStudio.shtml [whatcamcorder.net]
http://www.ibook-user.com/reviews/review-formac.ht ml [ibook-user.com]
http://www.synchrotech.com/product-1394/analog-dv- converter_01.html [synchrotech.com]
I'm afraid that MPEG-1 is a distinct turnoff with the EyeTV thing. Further USB seems far too slow. Has anyone used the Formac and would like to say how it works? I wished it did Digital Cable as I have that and many channels I'd like to record are on the digital. C'est la vie I guess.
Re:try formac's firewire solution (Score:3, Informative)
It's got all you want, RF, S-Video, and Composite In and Out for all them. It's firewire and DV, so Final Cut Pro and iMovie can import the DV, even from a TV show. Qualitywise, it's DV so depending on your video source, it should look pretty good, very high quality copying.
Formac makes its own program to watch TV in a window, floating or regular, and lets you record channels on a schedule.
The OS X software, at the moment, sucks. There is a lag between changing channels and the change, and it eats up 80% of the CPU time on a Powerbook G4 800MHz. Recording a show is straight into DV-size uncompressed
Luckily, Formac announced they're working on a updated OS X version of the software, availible this month, which I eagerly await.
Re:try formac's firewire solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Get Watson 1.5 (Score:3, Informative)
I just got Watson 1.6 (came out yesterday) and it RULES. Using the TV section when you find a show you want to record, click on it, then click on the EyeTV icon and it will set it up to record, it works GREAT!
Give it a try, i'm actually using it as a pvr now...
Re:Get Watson 1.5 (Score:1)
All I want is a USB 2.0 or Firewire tuner. (Score:1)
The bitrate limitations on the USB port makes this product D.O.A. as far as I can tell. Who wants to watch a tiny window of video on an expensive Apple monitor?
-dameron
Re:All I want is a USB 2.0 or Firewire tuner. (Score:2)
Answers to slews of dumb responses (Score:5, Informative)
Second, the picture quality is pretty low, but the files are "small" (i.e. the same as raw audio CD or about 600 mbytes/hour.) In all, it looks like VideoCD quality. It's better quality than a lot of QuickTime movies on the web, but a far cry from DVD, or even Sorensen on a good day. But it's good enough. I'd rank it around the quality of a 5 year-old VHS tape at EP. Far from videophile acceptability, but also far from unwatchable (unless you're a real snob about it.)
I happen to own one and I didn't have aspirations to download copies of movies and be able to watch them at DVD quality levels. It's so far worked fine to watch (oddly exactly the same as the reviewer) the Daily Show at work. I was looking for a quick way to create time-shifted copies of a handful of shows I watch. I also want to rip VHS tapes recorded at EP in 1995 and before to VideoCD and this looks like a great solution.
So anyway, my main point is, the tradeoffs are acceptable, and it's nice that it's bus-powered and includes its own tuner along with a video input.
Re:Answers to slews of dumb responses (Score:2)
- Worst-case senario:
- Low-Speed USB 1.1: 1,500,000 bits per second. (1.5Mbps * 1,000,000 bps)
- VideoCD data stream: 1,228,800 bits per second. (150KBps * 1024 bytes per KB * 8 bits per byte)
Woohoo! It works!(semi-ot): tv/radio capture in linux? (Score:2)
Hauppauge (Score:2)
The PVR ones work somewhat - The drivers under Linux allow you to watch TV just like a non-PVR card, but don't support the onboard MPEG encoder yet.
The USB PVR model also works for composite video.
I fail to see how this article is anything but a Slashvertisement... Devices that offer higher quality than this USB1 piece of junk have been available for over 5 years. It's all about PCI or Firewire, USB (1.1 or 2.0) is inherently unsuited to video (It can't guarantee uninterrupted data, so there's nothing preventing dropouts.)
Re:(semi-ot): tv/radio capture in linux? (Score:2)
Video4Linux [exploits.org] drivers support a number of FM tuners. I thought it would be cool to have a linux PVR for catching various radio talk shows that I miss (Car Talk is one of them... it's on way to early Saturdays in my area)
MacAddict Review (Score:4, Informative)
They liked EyeTV as well.
Dazzle Hollywood DV Bridge (Score:3, Interesting)
For those who'd rather have a FireWire device, there's the Dazzle Hollywood DV Bridge [dazzle.com], which I've been wanting to buy for some time now. The DV Bridge, however, is bidirectional (D->A and A->D), has S-Video and Firewire ports, doesn't have a TV Tuner, and goes for about $100 more, making it more geared towards video editing than just video recording á la TiVo.
I bought one recently, the quality is OK (Score:4, Interesting)
It's neat as a PVR. Not the greatest quality, but good enough for me. The 1.5 second delay from live is too bad- I wanted to use it for gaming, too. But that delay is the cost of being able to pause live TV, instant replay your live TV, etc...
Tip- Register for my.yahoo.com, configure the TV listings, then just manually set programs if you don't have or want to use IE.
There is no technical reason why EyeTV *needs* IE. All Titan/IE does is download a file with a certain protocol that EyeTV is listed as a helper for.
My conclusion is it's worth the 150 bucks I spent on it. (Now if only Formac, or someone else, would EVER deliver OS X drivers for my dead ProTV card...!)
wintv (Score:1)
I wonder if the Eye TV has this same issue.
They're charging $200 for this? (Score:1)
Re:They're charging $200 for this? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:They're charging $200 for this? (Score:1)
Re:They're charging $200 for this? (Score:2)
MPEG-2 PCI card for OSX (Score:4, Informative)
oh boy. (Score:3, Interesting)
It's one thing if the process to record TV is see as technically hard, but this thing will allow your mother to do it- and that's where the execs will start to worry. It's too simple...
I'm guessing that you can edit out the commericals, compile a season of a TV program and send it around the world in nothing flat.
Re:oh boy. (Score:2)
I'm Going to TRY to make this clear For EVERYONE (Score:5, Informative)
This device ENCODES and then sends the ENCODED mpeg1 video to the computer using usb at 1.2 megabytes per second.
Lets do some math:
if one hour of mpeg1 = 650 megs then:
650 / 60(mintutes) / 60(seconds) = 180555.6 bytes
you following me?
now the correct bandwidth that we need here is 180kBps. I think USB can handle that, don't you?
I hope we are all informed now, and i don't see anymore: "USB can't handle that" or "every USB tuner i've seen SUCKS"
cause its a HARDWARE ENCODER.
Thank you for your time.
Dear el Slashdotto (Score:2, Funny)
Sincerely,
El Presidento
El Gato
A better solution.... (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.formac.com/p_bin/?cid=solutions_conv
It beats the EyeTV hands down.
Re:A better solution.... (Score:2)
UK Support ? (Score:2)
Editing can be easier than that (Score:3, Informative)
then use this killer utility [versiontracker.com] to split the file (at time intervals) and rejoin components.
Much easier than what you are doing, IMO. I've been recording Simpson's episodes for a month now and I delete the commericals from the file each night.
Re:bitrate limitations (Score:4, Informative)
You might be thinking of low-speed devices which run at the slower 1.5 megabits/second if I recall correctly ... I haven't seen one, though.
Re:bitrate limitations (Score:2, Informative)
12megabits/sec (Mb/s) is 1.5 megabytes/sec (MB/s) which is the theoretical max for full speed USB. You can take about 1/3 of that off for packet overhead and timing as well leaving a full speed device about 1MB/sec of isoch data to play with. That is more than enough for a decent video stream like you said.
One other thing, you see low speed USB devices all the time. What do you think your USB mouse is?
Re:Apple... (Score:1)
(I'm serious - let's hear a real example)
Macs have more cool stuff, deal with it.
-milo
Re:Another Reason NOT to buy an Apple (Score:2, Insightful)
>PC you can get a PCI tuner card for less than $100
>bucks that will record your
Can I imply from this that you have never
actually done it? Try it, then try it on a
mac and see if you still think Mac is "obsolete".
-milo