Make Us Pay More

[pastimer]

I would absolutely have no problem paying 10 euro each year for DVBViewer if the extra money went to development of functionality that users want.

 

I have the impression that currently the developers concentrate on elements that are not realy an issue to ordinary users.

So let the users speak out what THEY want the developers to improve first.

 

For example i expect that users would want improved ease-of-use in the area of channellist, setup, epg, scheduler etc. whereas the development team seems to think a new very complex (so complex that only two people can understand what it's all about) rendererer is of the highest importance.

 

Eppo

[Moses]

the use of the channellist is very easy... click on a channel and it's tuned... every change can only be more complex

 

if you refer to the direct 3D renderer, then you might have noticed that it will take a long time, till it's integrated. Of course other things will happen until then, don't misunderstand that.... but you shouldn't underestimate the importance of the direct3D Renderer... it's more or less the only hope to get a decent picture in DVBViewer for many people with all the possible features.... vrm sucks because of the vrm-bug, evr sucks because of some problems (for example zoom isn't possible, sound hicks up, when the picture is minimized in osd)... the only good working renderer at this time is overlay, which only works on the main display, which is not realy cool for many people that use two displays.

 

If you have a point where DVBViewer can get better, you should think of a fully working concept, that takes all eventualities into account and post / explain it in this forum. Eventually it will be considered and implemented (of course that will take some time, at least some months for bigger things and mostly will happen without notice)... for example that happend with the picture in picture feature. The current concept was developed by an ordinary user and some months later it was integrated, changed only in a few parts.

[Lars_MQ]

the developers concentrate on elements that are not realy an issue to ordinary users.

This is simply not true, I do of course concentrate on things the ordinary user wants. This user is me.

 

OK joking asside. you mean we don't concentrate on what YOU want. Well AAC is important for a lot of users, dvbsubtitles and ccsubs are important. Just because it is not important to you doesn't mean you right.

[pastimer]

This is simply not true, I do of course concentrate on things the ordinary user wants. This user is me.

 

OK joking asside. you mean we don't concentrate on what YOU want. Well AAC is important for a lot of users, dvbsubtitles and ccsubs are important. Just because it is not important to you doesn't mean you right.

 

do not take it out of context. it is an impression. The main issue: i would be willing to PAY MORE for DVBViewer if the development could be intensified.

and for example there could be an investment in architecture and design to eliminate a lot of elements that are sub-optimal or simply bad design.

With the whole channel list - mapping - transponder - satellite - device approach as the obvious example. And don't tell me you are happy with that as it is because you can't be proud on that part of DVBV.

 

Regards, Eppo

[hackbart]

It is i think not a question of money. Let's say we (includes the developers as well as the mods and contibutors) are enthusiasts. I would also work on the project if it does not bring money (okay not completely correct since its a full time project). It is a "baby" produced while i was studying (http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.tu-ilmenau.de/~hackbart) and to be honest it is amazing how it grown up with the help of almost everybody here in the board

 

The biggest problem is that a pc is unlike a set top box not a system you (as developer) created. Since there is an unlimited amount of combination between used hardware and software you have to set things up in the options. The DVBViewer can deal with multiple dvb devices simultaneous, this trough up for example the following problem:

1. Device A is capable to decode some encrypted paytv channel. Device B is just a Plain FTA receiving card. How to deal with it: Easy, just check if there is a CI interface available

2. Device A is capable and Device B also to decode paytv channels. Device A uses a different encryption like Device B. You have to find a solution in order to check before tuning or recording which device should be used.

 

And while writing these lines i could also easily add two or three more cases for just 2 devices (e.g. DVB-S2 adapter).

 

Christian

PS: The DVBViewer is by the way the only DVB/HTPC solution i even personally use (in my free time) on all of my systems.

[pastimer]

It is i think not a question of money. Let's say we (includes the developers as well as the mods and contibutors) are enthusiasts. I would also work on the project if it does not bring money (okay not completely correct since its a full time project). It is a "baby" produced while i was studying (http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.tu-ilmenau.de/~hackbart) and to be honest it is amazing how it grown up with the help of almost everybody here in the board

 

The biggest problem is that a pc is unlike a set top box not a system you (as developer) created. Since there is an unlimited amount of combination between used hardware and software you have to set things up in the options. The DVBViewer can deal with multiple dvb devices simultaneous, this trough up for example the following problem:

1. Device A is capable to decode some encrypted paytv channel. Device B is just a Plain FTA receiving card. How to deal with it: Easy, just check if there is a CI interface available

2. Device A is capable and Device B also to decode paytv channels. Device A uses a different encryption like Device B. You have to find a solution in order to check before tuning or recording which device should be used.

 

And while writing these lines i could also easily add two or three more cases for just 2 devices (e.g. DVB-S2 adapter).

 

Christian

PS: The DVBViewer is by the way the only DVB/HTPC solution i even personally use (in my free time) on all of my systems.

 

Thank you Christian. I think it is not necessary to go to that level of detail in one go. I would be more then happy if dvbv could come up with a channel list (the unique occurences of logical channels) and enables a dvbv administrator to manage the channel mappings (which channel through which device). Maybe a simple database is needed to host the increasingly complex datastructures that are needed to be able to enhance the product further. To be able to handle concurrent use of devices through dvbserver for example.

 

As an alternative to administering all the capabilities of devices: You can give the user the option to start a program that will trie to create a graph for each tv and radio channel that has been mapped. After that program has run (will take a long time) you have a set of PROVEN mappings. The user should be able to manipulate this mapping characteristic, but DVBViewer would rely on this characteristic and only tune to mappings that have the PROVEN bit set to 'true'. By using the PROVEN filter in the channel list we would be freed of hundreds of entries that have no meaning at all.

 

And yes, I also solely use DVBViewer on all my computers. I have a server with 2 pci-cards (tt1400 and tt3200) and one usb device (tt3600) and I use dvbserver to distribute transport streams over the network.

DVBViewer is the best software as it comes to core capabilities. The administrative part however needs a redesign. It is only 'simple to use' and 'simple to control' if your setup is simple too.

 

Regards, Eppo

[dgdg]

Thank you Christian. I think it is not necessary to go to that level of detail in one go. I would be more then happy if dvbv could come up with a channel list (the unique occurences of logical channels) and enables a dvbv administrator to manage the channel mappings (which channel through which device). Maybe a simple database is needed to host the increasingly complex datastructures that are needed to be able to enhance the product further. To be able to handle concurrent use of devices through dvbserver for example.

 

Again, that's not the idea of DVBViewer. As Moses stated in another thread with DVBViewer every user (every member of your family) has to know about the technical details of your DVB home installation. So show them the installation and than they will understand, why it needs a lot of knowledge to operate DVBViewer.

 

Sorry for being a little bit sarcastic.

 

But many people here have a lot of fun connecting several different DVB-cards to their HTPC, mixing DVB-C, DVB-S and DVB-T hardware and handle it in one single channel list. That's the features that are optimized more and more in every new version of DVBViewer.

 

DVBViewer is in fact a toy for DVB freaks (I'm one too). And for them everything is fine. I still hope, that I can use this toy as a serious HTPC software. But I'm not sure about this.

Edited January 18, 2008 by dgdg

[pastimer]

Sorry for being a little bit sarcastic.

 

DVBViewer is in fact a toy for DVB freaks (I'm one too). And for them everything is fine. I still hope, that I can use this toy as a serious HTPC software. But I'm not sure about this.

 

You're not sarcastic, you're cynical.

[ElecardFAN]

So this is something which piss me off. Such a "i want this and hello mister computer programmer this can not be so compliated, i guess". Well you dont need a diploma in computer science in order to figure out that some things wont work that simple. I read this board daily and somehow i dislike the stupid arrogance of some users who think they ate wisedom with spoons. Absolutely nobody (within the last two years) offered a smart solveable solution for a published wish.

[Griga]

i would be willing to PAY MORE for DVBViewer if the development could be intensified.

Please tell us: Where can we find additional developers who

 

- are familiar with programming in Delphi

- know everything about DirectShow

- can cope with the BDA interface

- are DVB experienced

- understand the internals of MPEG2 / H.264 / AAC data streams

- are good UI designers

- are willing to work for an apple and an egg (as we say in Germany).

 

Believe me, if everybody involved in DVBViewer development (plus addditional programmers) would do it as a full time job and would be payed according to his qualification you'd pay something like 199,- Euro for DVBViewer, not 15,- or 25,-. Plus 99,- for each major update.

 

Well AAC is important for a lot of users

A lot of Norwegian users didn't mind the channel management at all (maybe they will later ). Do you know why? Because they had no audio. Norwegian DVB-T is transmitted with AAC audio. Investigating and programming the basics that were necessary to integrate AAC support in DVBViewer occupied most of my (spare) time in the last six months, plus the time Christian & Lars needed to include it in DVBViewer Pro.

 

Try to be a bit more realistic...

[Lars_MQ]

Well as a saying here is: Some people do not think further than the tip of their nose...

 

For me this and most if not all of the other topics are closed, so you loose the attention of about half of the DVBViewer Pro development team.

 

Maybe should I get a more peacefull and harmless hobby, like swimming with hungry piranhias...

[ElecardFAN]

i can not drink that much beer, like i would swallow while reading this crap. Everybody who thinks to improve something, please RTF and all other sources.

[pastimer]

Please tell us: Where can we find additional developers who

 

- are familiar with programming in Delphi

- know everything about DirectShow

- can cope with the BDA interface

- are DVB experienced

- understand the internals of MPEG2 / H.264 / AAC data streams

- are good UI designers

- are willing to work for an apple and an egg (as we say in Germany).

 

Believe me, if everybody involved in DVBViewer development (plus addditional programmers) would do it as a full time job and would be payed according to his qualification you'd pay something like 199,- Euro for DVBViewer, not 15,- or 25,-. Plus 99,- for each major update.

 

 

Try to be a bit more realistic...

 

Not all the developers need ALL the qualifications right from the start. A large part of DVBViewer is user interface. You will be able to find programming talent and they will learn.

 

And you're absolutely right: DVBViewer is way too cheap. You should grab the momentum as a market leader and increase the price drastically.

So: Let Us Pay More.

[dgdg]

You should grab the momentum as a market leader and increase the price drastically.

 

DVBViewer is not a market leader. It's a niche product. High sophisticated but much to complex for a mass market.

[Griga]

A large part of DVBViewer is user interface.

That's what you think because the UI is all you can see. But you can't see the motor behind it.

 

You will be able to find programming talent and they will learn.

It will take a lot of time to instruct them.

 

DVBViewer is way too cheap.

I doubt that it would sell sufficiently if it would cost a lot more - even now we have enough trouble with those parasites who are using cracked versions. They don't want to support the project, but they come here for support. And there are freeware competitors, you know, and they are not too bad...

[uglyrooster]

DVBViewer works in a HTPC since nearly two years here and EVERY family member has no problem to use it.

 

There is and was a solution for almost every problem to bring a HTPC near to a STB from the usability point of view.

 

I am happy with it and the possibilities I have in addition to a quite easy to handle (OSD)-interface.

 

And as hackbart already mentioned: I am using two HD-DVB-S cards with CI and one DVB-C card with CI. DVB-S with Monoblock and two satellites...

Edited January 19, 2008 by uglyrooster

[dezzy]

I am amazed and disappointed at the criticism of this fine software and the developers. No other software comes even close to doing everything that DVBViewer does. And all this for a nominal low fee.

 

In principle I can not understand people being rude and demanding attention, if something is not exactly how they want. Surely a polite request will do. If your request is not met then some understanding and restraint is warranted. If the developers do not want to pursue some course of action or other, it is their right to do so. As a consumer you can always go to another source to find some other product or service that meets all your requirements, if it is available.

 

I hope that the developers do not get discouraged by such criticism. I for one am a happy user who is grateful for your effort. Well done to have produced this excellent product and for the ongoing improvements.