×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

HDTV Reception Now Available on Linux

CmdrTaco posted more than 10 years ago | from the build-your-own-pvr dept.

Television 166

-tji writes "A new company, www.pchdtv.com, has just released the first digital TV receiver card for Linux. Along with the Linux drivers, they have also modified xine to support HD playback and add XvMC support for MPEG2 hardware acceleration with some video cards. This has great potential for integration into PVR apps, like freevo and mythtv. There is also another project to reverse engineer drivers for the Teralogic TL880 based DTV cards. The one active developer has done a great job, but could use some help."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

166 comments

TOASER!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777663)

toaster,toaster toaser, do you have toast in you yet i think [rowdyruff.net]
so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Im not a toaster!!!!!!!!!!And one more
thing........YOUR A TOASER!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND A COOKIE WITH MILK SOAGE
MILK!!!!!!!!!!AND A BUTT WITH POOP IN IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CmdrTaco??? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777756)

What POSSIBLE interest could YOU have in a Linux topic? Go back to your fancy, schmancy, OS X Powerbook and long for Steve Jobs's engorged dick in your mouth.

And let the REAL Linux cognoscenti go on about their business.

Fucking sell-out.

A message from the irritated (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6778182)

I'd like to take an off-topic minute to thank Redmond for really pissing me off.
The concept that people enjoy freedom has escaped you, particularly where upgrades or re-installations are concerned.
Previous versions of Lose^H^H^H^HWindows didn't screw up the partition table the way XP does.
As a result of this crap, I just wiped a drive, and now get to spend a bunch of time putting Humpty Dumpty back together again.
If I trusted Redmond enough to think this a simple technical issue, a lack of testing, that would be one thing.
Rather, I'd bet Ballmer's bum it's a deliberate move to make it harder for people to use their hardware as they see fit, a la "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run."
Deal is, you do nothing but harden the resolve in the market to use alternative products.
And another thing: it's not like I'm not a paying customer; I pay you that MSDN subscription tax. Accusations of "socialist", "hippy", and "thief" do not apply. I simply enjoy freedom, and despise your efforts to jail the world.
So, even if this is a little over the top, and you're not as diabolical as I suspect, MicroSoft, more effort into making sure your stuff plays nice would be an excellent PR move.

Yay (-1, Flamebait)

CableModemSniper (556285) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777668)

go pchdtv.

Re:Yay (3, Funny)

blue_collar_man (622914) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777776)

So many toys, so little money.

I suppose I could go without food for a few days. =-)

Re:Yay (1)

eyepeepackets (33477) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777815)

Yes, that's the big downside of all these U.S.-based companies shipping as much of their production/labor overseas as they possibly can, all the while hoping to make big profits bringing back their products here to sell: Can you say "gutted consumer base?"

Otherwise, I hope this company's product is more robust than their website which seems to have gone t.u. very, very early in the /.ing process.

Re:Yay (1)

blue_collar_man (622914) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777854)

Very true. Imagine the price if us Americans made them.

It is unfortunate and will always be a no win situation. Prices too high if they don't go overseas, bad PR if they do.

Show me an equivelent product that is made in the USA with Linux drivers and I'll buy it instead. (Assuming the price/performance is comparable)

Drivers (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777670)

But are the drivers open source? I couldn't imagine running binary drivers on my Gentoo. Why can't these people just "get it" already?

Re:Drivers (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777685)

If you compile them, they'll be in BINARY FORM won't they???

Re:Drivers (-1, Troll)

Oceanman (701065) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777686)

After you compile them, they'll be binary drivers, fucktard. Geez, can't you open source losers THINK?

Re:Drivers (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777739)

Ha-ha. Very funny. You know perfectly well what I mean.

If I can't see the source code, it's not going on my system because of both ethical (buying binary only drivers encourages code hoarding) and security reasons. That's why I don't buy NVidia GFX cards and neither should you.

Re:Drivers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777761)

That's why I don't buy NVidia GFX cards and neither should you.

Open source software is crappy and never works. That's why I never use it and neither should you.

See how easy it is to make some crap up and then tell other prople what to do?

Re:Drivers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777775)

Oh really? And just how is free software crappy? What particular software does not work? Huh? I thought so. You're just bashing the community because you missed the greatest revolution in computing since the invention of the microprocessor.

Re:Drivers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777779)

Get a life, loser.

Thanks!

Re:Drivers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777802)

Gnome, emacs, sendmail......

Re:Drivers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777875)

Emacs is used by millions and millions of users throughout the world to code, write scientific papers and sending e-mails. Sendmail is the veritable backbone of the internet mail. Gnome is getting along very well and will be the easiest GUI to use ever made.

Your point?

Re:Drivers (4, Insightful)

toddestan (632714) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777778)

Not every company is willing to open source all their software and make it free. If we want many of the commercial software companies to take Linux seriously, we have to convey the message that we find it acceptable to pay for some software that will run in Linux.

Until then, they will continue to develop only for OSes like Windows and MacOS.

Re:Drivers (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777796)

If we want many of the commercial software companies to take Linux seriously

That's a pretty big "if".

I am not convinced at all that we need the commercial software companies so badly that we sell our ideals for it.

Re:Drivers (1)

hhnerkopfabbeisser (645832) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778123)

Its not about selling your ideals, unless you're as fanatic as RMS and try to change the world no matter what.

For all other people, it's just about living together with people who have different ideals.

Re:Drivers (2, Insightful)

listen (20464) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777837)

we have to convey the message that we find it acceptable to pay for some software that will run in Linux.

What you meant to say was:

We need to communicate that we are willing to give up our freedom and put up with binary crapware, just as long as we can use our leet new toys.


Some of us care more about freedom than HDTV. We need to encourage hardware companies to open their specs. Linux is not alone in the world as an alternative OS, and I sure as fuck hope that something better does come along some day. I don't think we want to be stuck emulating shifting Linux kernel interfaces to use some hardware on our shiny new EROS [eros-os.org] boxes ( yeah, right) in 2010.

Re:Drivers (4, Insightful)

justsomebody (525308) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777838)

I find that very acceptable. But you made a magic mistake.

driver!=software

I for one write just as OSS as proprietary (both for Linux). The only real need in being open is to be open to correct extent.

If drivers are proprietary and company goes to drain, your hardware goes with company too. Just look at older TV Tuners under XP. No drivers no fun. But if drivers are made as OSS someone might continue to support your hardware even then.

As far as I was talking about sotware needing to be open to the correct extent. Take two this as example.
Accounting software >> can be proprietary, the only thing that must be open are correctly documented tables and their relations.
Software for editing some type of file >> Make a complete specification of document type.

There are points that company must revise.
1. What will happen if they go down with their customers, I was there and to tell you the truth as a customer I didn't liked it. That's why I had to drag one machine running Win3.1 until a year ago, It was the only possibility to access documents that were made.
2. Let's take something more simple now. You're the one man band and you're administering servers on companies. You die in a car crash. Do customers have to break in to continue to work. Or would it be more simple to use an envelope, write password in and protect it to be used just in case.

As far as paying, my customers were paying me when I was making Win software, and they are paying me now. Where's the difference?

Drivers-Onion peels. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777884)

Agreed with both posts. The closer to the hardware, the more necessary openness is. But then what is freedom worth, when you can't use your shiny new toy?

Re:Drivers-Onion peels. (1)

justsomebody (525308) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778007)

I think Janis Joplin described that:)
"Freedom is when you've got nothing to loose"

But "closer to hardware > more necessary the openess" isn't really correct. Sometimes hardware might be needing to include tools.

Let's take a peak at Avid or Digi & Pro Tools.
Stripping software out of the box might not be favourable position for them. They would get them in a position where one product would be usable and one would be a bad review for the other.

Here is where "closer to hardware > more necessary the openess" starts getting wrong.

What is important is where to draw a line between open and closed. Mainly writting drivers is way shorter than writing specs, because drivers are not some huge peace of code and on the other side specs could be. But making complete application OSS would be bad, if that company sells hardware just because what software offers and hardware alone isn't worth shit just because you can get comparable hardware for more affordable price and use OSS app for hardware you haven't bought.

Re:Drivers-Onion peels. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6778081)

Oh, dear lord. Would it be too much trouble to at least get the quote right? It's "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose," and Janis Joplin didn't write it. She just covered the song. The song--"Me and Bobby McGee"-- was written by Kris Kristofferson.

MOD DUMB-ASS PARENT DOWN (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6778114)


1. used 'loose' instead of 'lose'

2. quoted a dirty hippy

3. misquoted a dirty hippy

Re:Drivers (2, Interesting)

jgilbert (29889) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777905)

If we want many of the commercial software companies to take Linux seriously, we have to convey the message that we find it acceptable to pay for some software that will run in Linux.

I'm willing to pay for software, just not when it's proprietary. I'll only play for Free Software.

Re:Drivers (1)

justsomebody (525308) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778018)

I'm willing to pay for software, just not when it's proprietary. I'll only play for Free Software.

Doesn't this funny sound strikes you?
Pay for free???

You probably meant Open Source;)

Re:Drivers (1)

wasabii (693236) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778034)

Free as in speech software. Open Source is an entirely different thing.

Re:Drivers (1)

justsomebody (525308) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778158)

So if I understand correctly this attitude.

One should write a software that's free. After that he hopes that there would be enough people making donations to put bread on the table.

I was controversing parent post about OSS or not. But in case of your attitude I actualy agree that parent had right and I was the one that was wrong.

It is a differece when someone provides distro like Redhat, than some coder writes a small software and hopes it will be seen enough to be appreciated so people would donate him some money.

After turning your opinion into reality:
Does job like a coder still exist. NO
1. No! They are not coders professionaly because they need other line of work to support themselves, they are called hobby-coders
2. Yes it does, but it's now called beggar

Fact1: Coder can't benefite of their work (other than being supported from users like you), they don't have the right that users have (just to use, not code anything and benefit from that).
Fact2: Red cross will support from now on coders too


I write just as OSS under GPL as closed source commercial (with full specs), and I appreciate GPL as far as it gets, but funny I can't find your point.

Re:Drivers (2, Interesting)

runderwo (609077) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778087)

Not every company is willing to open source all their software and make it free.
Right, well, if I pay for a piece of software that I depend on to make use of hardware that I've purchased, I want the source code so that I can make sure it continues to work for my purposes.

Just because they would deliver the source code with their product doesn't make it "Free", unless they specifically relinquish redistribution rights to the user of the software. That may or may not fit within their business model and is their choice to make. However, depriving the user of the source code is to maintain control over the user.

Re:Drivers (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778419)

Just because they would deliver the source code with their product doesn't make it "Free", unless they specifically relinquish redistribution rights to the user of the software. That may or may not fit within their business model and is their choice to make. However, depriving the user of the source code is to maintain control over the user.

Except that with the source, anyone is free to create e.g. pre-rooted versions with ease. Think something like Windows with a hidden backdoor that'll bypass any software firewall? Post that to warez groups and claim the CRC change is because of the anti-activation stuff. Wouldn't even have to show up on a scanner - make it only open up to a "magic sequence" of rejected packets. Voila - you suddenly have the perfect backdoor.

Sure, the same could happen with Linux. But there it is a web of trust in force, official CRCs to check against. Nothing like that exists for closed source products, because the company itself is distributing it, noone else. Naturally, such trojaned versions be very bad for the parent company.

Not to mention stuff like ripping them off would be easier (copy-paste "programming" for closed source programs), as well as what various bad patches people could apply (with the source, people could make small binary patches for other people). "KaZaA b005t3r! Make your downloads 100% faster" which is really a backdoor etc.

Another thing, is that those companies could end up in lots of legal battles (copyrights, patented algorithms etc.) that would otherwise have gone unnoticed. Even things that have a clean bill of health could draw legal attention, as with the latest SCOs malloc antics.

So I see very real reasons for closed source companies not to release their code. In the world where everybody plays nice it'd be fine, but as it is I'd call it a very poor business decision.

Kjella

Re:Drivers (1)

Nucleon500 (628631) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778173)

People are perfectly willing to pay for software if it does something they need, even people using Linux. Examples would be office software, servers, databases, desktop integration, and games. This is becoming even more true as companies and non-geeks use Linux more.

But hardware companies aren't selling software, they're selling hardware! The software is only provided to make the hardware work so people will buy it. And while an open source driver will be maintained and supported by the community, may be put in the vanilla tree, and will make the community like you, a closed source driver is a support nightmare, it's very difficult to deploy use, and it's only slightly better than nothing at all.

Re:Drivers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6778039)

Oh, please. Can you actually read source code?

I didn't think so. Next!

Re:Drivers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6778057)

ethical (buying binary only drivers encourages code hoarding)

Bwaaahaha! That's a good one. "Code hoarding." Nice buzzphrase. Very good. Excellent. Way to subvert the English language to advance your fucked-up agenda.

In other news, exchanging goods encourages value hoarding, so remember to never conduct any transaction ever!

Re:Drivers (2, Informative)

pyite69 (463042) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778159)


You can download the contents of the CDROM from
their web site. It includes full GPL source for
the driver and Xine.

Research first, then post your inane complaints.

Re:Drivers (1)

-tji (139690) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778430)

Yes, all the drivers and applications from this company are 100% open source. They provide the drivers only in source form, with easy instructions on how to build them. All the software is a available for download on their web site with no form of registration, purchase, etc. (it's all GPL'd code).

As for the Nvidia cards, that's a different issue.. Those cards are recommended because Nvidia has provided Linux drivers that implement the XvMC API for MPEG2 acceleration. This makes it feasible to do Hi-Def video on a reasonable processor.

ATI also has this capability in their Radeon hardware. But, they will not provide Linux drivers that enable this capability.

Also, on the other project listed there, to reverse engineer the Teralogic cards, ATI has refused to give ANY help/specs/API's/drivers for the NXT2000 ATSC demodulator on some of those cards. So, they are not exactly Linux-friendly either.

novel idea - check the link (2, Informative)

dwk123 (529337) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777750)

Both drivers and extensive patches to Xine are open source and already available.

Open source sucks ass! (-1, Flamebait)

Oceanman (701065) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777672)

Gay open source software is shit! Go take a shower, fucking NERDS!

Re:Open source sucks ass! (-1, Offtopic)

justsomebody (525308) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777760)

(Dam'n, I'll byte that one)

And you should probably brush your mouth after such comments:)

p.s. Few questions:
1. Is that Open Software/Gay a new software topic?
2. Never heard of software type like that? And could you describe it's functionality since it's probably reserved for gay people like you
3. Since Gay open source is shit, does that mean that Gay proprietary software is better?

p.p.s. Sorry for such a list of questions, but I'm not gay (obviously that topic is reserved for gays and you sound like a well informed person), so you should cover your topic and comments with more facts and explain to us non-gay public that might be interested in your points and views, even if no other reason than maybe try to contradict you.

Hell, I've got some karma to burn

Re:Open source sucks ass! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777874)

The dot com crash boom was really hard for you, wasn't it?

Listen. Nobody can help you if you are an asshole Oceanman.

morons WANdering about use of term interaction (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777673)

morons WANdering about use of term interaction

for the most part, that appears to mean that you sheeples read the pitch, & hopefully pull out
yOUR wallets. that's your end of the 'interaction'.

other possible uses for the miracles of communication we've been given:

disempowering the unprecedented evile that is destroying the planet/population.

how does won login/become a member?

consult with/trust in yOUR creator. get more oxygen on yOUR brains. seek others of non-aggressive
intentions/behaviours.

couldn't be easier. what's blocking all this interaction/cooperation? why greed/fear based
misinformation canpains of course.

you NEVER hear of any corepirate deathmongers touting oxygen, even though it's the best thing for
you/us. perhaps there's no countabull profit in it. another possibility is the overwhelming fear
associated with knowing that a power that exceeds all known before, is in the wings/air.

we're in crisis mode. the lights are coming up. pay attention (to the weather for example). it's
affordable, & tends to help prevent being misled further.

dupe (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777680)

Do subscribers (*) get to see dupes in 1080i?

Are the drivers "O.S.S." or not? (0, Troll)

Pope Raymond Lama (57277) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777689)

When one talks in support for Linux for any hardware, it is always important to note if sad software is Free Software or not.

If not for ideological motives, which seen so secondary to most /. readers, one should note that a proprietary driver is all but ilegal if functioning with a GPLed Kernel.

Re:Are the drivers "O.S.S." or not? (-1)

SCO$699FeeTroll (695565) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777712)

important to note if sad software is Free Software or not.

Yep, it is sad software, especially when you have to pay the $699 licensing fee. Good Day, teabagger.

Re:Are the drivers "O.S.S." or not? (1)

DarlFromSCO (701080) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777736)

Hey ! That's my quote ! What are you, some fancy schmancy IBM developist or something ?

Re:Are the drivers "O.S.S." or not? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777759)

I don't believe the nerve of this guy.

I you just insane or why are you posting on Slashdot?!

Re:Are the drivers "O.S.S." or not? (1)

pyite69 (463042) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778126)


Yes, they are 100% completely GPL, it looks like a
basic modification of the standard bttv driver.

You can download a copy of the whole CDROM from
their site and check for yourself.

Mark

Re:Are the drivers "O.S.S." or not? (5, Informative)

Elm Tree (17570) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777727)

According to their website they distribute with the card the sources for the V4L driver and the modified version of xine they talk about. Although they do talk about optionaly using NVidia cards to accelerate things, so they may encourage the use of NVidia's binary drivers. But either way, those are optional optimizations so...

Looks like a very nice card... If I had HDTV service I'd definately think about buying one.

Re:Are the drivers "O.S.S." or not? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6778019)

"If I had HDTV service I'd definately think about buying one."

Why not buy one to get the broadcast HDTV signals? I get FOX, NBC, CBS and NBC in 1080i from an antenna.

kill -9 (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777690)

There's no greater pleasure in life than being able to

kill -9 JerrySpringer

when those irritating twats show up every morning.

C-CUBE. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777702)

That reminds me. Does anyone have Linux drivers for the C-CUBE chip on the Pinnacle line of video editing cards? C-CUBE is long gone, absorbed by LS-Logic I believe. And chip info has disappeared.

John Geoghan, pedophile priest, dead at 68 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777709)

I just heard some sad news on talk radio - child analer John Geoghan was found dead in Souza-Baranowski Correction Center this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to Catholic Sex Scandals. Truly an American icon.

Good riddance. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777767)

As a Catholic, I'm glad to see this fucker get his. In fact, he went too easily. Somebody should've beaten the fucker to death, just like Jeffrey Dahmer. No difference at all between the two, as far as I'm concerned.

Great (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777725)

How far behind Windows XP are you now?

cool (3, Interesting)

wolrahnaes (632574) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777733)

Now if we get support for the HDTV outputs on the Radeon 9800, I will have the perfect DVR to go with my 61" HDTV!

Site's already slow....
Probably won't survive the /.ing...

Re:cool (1)

Stigmata669 (517894) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778195)

actually, your Radeon9800 will output to your HDTV card because HDTV can't be sent over the PCI bus... too little bandwidth. The MyHD card takes input from your graphics card and then overlays the HD signal output to your monitor

Re:cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6778425)

If HDTV can't be sent over a PCI bus then how do you explain this [gnu.org]?

Cool (2, Interesting)

kcb93x (562075) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777735)

This is really interesting- I know I'll be buying one within a year or two, to go along with my wonderful new LCD screens and system. Linux-compatible from the ground up. Got RH 9 on it right now (Mandrake choked on it last time for some odd reason- never did figure that out)

Now...just to find a cheap big lcd screen... ...and mucho more HD space...no, not for pr0n, but for timeshifting the shows...let's see you beat that, RIAA. *Wonders if a lawsuit could ensue for people trying to timeshift, but not being able to...hmmmm....*

On a side note, out of 14 posts (when I first viewed page) only 1 was actually relevant. The sad status of /. *Sigh*.

Re:Cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777833)

...but for timeshifting the shows...let's see you beat that, RIAA.

what makes you think the Recording Industry Association of America [ie, record label trade assocation] is gonna care whether or not you timeshift television shows?

Outstanding! (4, Interesting)

YetAnotherName (168064) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777751)

I tell you, it's darn difficult watching things in standard definition once you've gotten used to Jennifer Gartner on Alias in her glorious 1920 by 1080 pixels with a full color gamut.

Timeshifting her is the hard part. For that, I've resorted to the MyHD [digitalconnection.com] card with its Windows drivers sitting on a system with an IDE-based RAID array. Yes, it works. But it's Windows. Need I say more to a Slashdot crowd? ;-)

Re:Outstanding! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777772)

s/ to a Slashdot crowd//

Re:Outstanding! (4, Interesting)

steve_bryan (2671) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777950)

Since Alias is on ABC doesn't that make it 1280 x 720? Still plenty of Garner pixels but they are all honest progressively scanned pixels. What may surprise many is how good even 480i and 480p programming is compared to NTSC. The local FOX affiliate was showing episodes of Fastlane in upconverted 720p widescreen (presumably from 480p source) and the picture was amazing (not as good as real 720p or 1080i if you did a screen capture, but still remarkable).

If you enjoy any program on OTA (over the air) TV this sort of product will enhance it immensely. I don't know for sure that this board supports it (the site is properly slashdotted) but the other significant enhancement is 5.1 surround sound. Let's not forget the other advantage is that the programming involves no monthly bill and with the right software it can be recorded to your hard disk (about 9 gig per hour).

Great news (4, Insightful)

tzanger (1575) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777758)

But does anyone know what the status of v4l is in the 2.6 series? I went from 2.4.21 to 2.6.0-test3 (and now test4) as the HPT370 controller is iffy on Linux with APIC (this is an Epox EP-D3VA)... 2.6.0 completely solved all the APIC and SMP issues, but now V4L's not quite there. :-)

Ahh, the bleeding edge...

Re:Great news (1)

pantherace (165052) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777798)

Look around for v4l2 (why it isn't in 2.6 (which I thought was planned is beyond me)) most cards seem to have both v4l and v4l2 (via patches) support.

Well, not quite the first.... (5, Informative)

edwardd (127355) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777768)

This is the first card specifically for HDTV, but:

For a while now, DVB cards have been available with software for Linux that have been able to recieve and process HDTV satalite signals. The 'other' PVR app that doesn't seem to catch on in the US is VDR, located at http://www.cadsoft.de/vdr This is a full featured, open source PVR application that does work with DVB cards to show HDTV.

Re:Well, not quite the first.... (2, Informative)

mprinkey (1434) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777852)

There are only a handfull of HDTV channels on direct-broadcast satellite feeds. DirecTV has HDNET, Discovery, ESPN, HBO and SHO in HD. The Dish lineup is similar. There is just not that much Satellite HD content available.

The DVB system that you pointed to is a nice setup, but there are no PC add-in cards that I know of that allow access to DirecTV or Dish digital feeds whether SD or HD. The one exception might be via DirecTivos which can be hacked to allow extraction of the video feeds, but this is as a postprocessing task, not realtime. Perhaps there are add-in cards for Big-Ugly Dishes to decode HD broadcasts, but I am not aware of them.

I believe that Sony is planning to produce an HD DirecTivo receiver shortly for timeshifting HD content. I don't know if they will do a better job of hack-proofing that unit than with other Tivo units, so offline HD extraction is still an open question.

Re:Well, not quite the first.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6778186)

There are only a handfull of HDTV channels on direct-broadcast satellite feeds. DirecTV has HDNET, Discovery, ESPN, HBO and SHO in HD. The Dish lineup is similar. There is just not that much Satellite HD content available.

Which is largely due to the networks not providing the HD content. But the momentum is definitely shifting. My company (a very very large cable network company with dozens of channels) has been dragging its feet on HD until now. We are launching our first HD channel next year.

It's coming, hang in there. The FCC forcing the [standard def] DTV issue has a lot to do with it.

Re:Well, not quite the first.... (1)

mprinkey (1434) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778243)

It has been "coming" for several years now. Really, it is pretty pathetic. I outted the bucks for an HD projector, the Sony HD DirecTV receiver, and an amplified UHF antenna rig. With a lot of work, I was able to get ABC, CBS, FOX, PBS, and NBC to tune in from the broadcast towers in Pittsburgh.

After all of that work, the *only* channel that has decent HD content is PBS...and there are only a few shows that run all of the time. FOX is completely pathetic. The real networks run only a few shows a week. Even so, the prospect of being able to timeshift those few shows is pretty compelling, so I might need to build a MythHDTV box...Tivo has pretty much ruined me.

I'll cut you nigga (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777769)

Lunix this, Lunix that. Just buy XP and shut the fuck up.

Goddamn commies.

A/S/L?????? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777812)

*E_S_R_s_u_c_k_s_E_S_R_s_u_c_k_s_E_S_R_s_u_c_k_s_*
EDDDDDDDDEDDDDEEDDDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEKKKKKKKKKKKKE
SDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDLfjttjLGDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEKKKEES
RGDDDDDDDDDDDDGGLtt;;::,;itti;ijLDDDDDDEEEEEEEEEER
sGGDDDDDDDDDDDGLLfLLjti;;:...;jjitfGDDDDDDDEEEEEEs
uGGGGGGGGGGGDDGDDDDGfLf,. .:tGDGfLGGDDDDDDEEEEEEEu
cGGGDGGGGGGDKKKKEDDDDf,......:;fDEEDDGGDDDDDDDDDDc
kGGDDDGGGGDKKWWWELLfi:.......::,LEEEEDGGGGDDDDDDDk
sGGGGGGGGGDKWWWKDLj,:.........::;DEEKEGGGGGDDDGDDs
*GGGGGGGGGDWWWKfi;,:::::::,ijjjjjjDKKDGLGGGGGGGGG*
EGGGGGGGGGGWWKGti;;i;;;;itfLLGGGLttDDLLLLGGGGGGGGE
SGGGDGGGGGGEWKGjfffLGLjiiLGLfff0i;ijDGjLLLGGLLGGGS
RGGGGGGGGGGDKKGjfLfffjti,tLLjti;,;tjfjjLLLLLLLLGGR
sGGGGGGGGGGGGjLtti0i;;ti,;jffjttjfjjffLLLLLLLLGGGs
uGGGGGGGGGGGGttjti;ijtjfjLEEDGGLjfLfLLLLLLLLLLLLGu
cGGGGGGGGGGGGLjjttjfffLDDDDDEKKDGLLLLffLLLLLLLLLLc
kGGGGGGGGGGGGGGLjttfGDDDGGGDDDLfLLLGffffffffffLLLk
sGGGGGGGGGLLGGGLLfjjLjtjjfLffLLLGGGGfjjfffffffLLLs
*GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGLGfffjttttjjffGGGGGGLft;;iitjfLLL*
EGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGDDfjjfffjjjfLGGGGGGGLGLttiii;,;itE
SGGGGGGGGGGLLLDDDDfttttfLLGGGGGGGGGGEDGfjjtttii;,S
RGGGGGGGLfffLGDDEDELjtttjffLLLLLLGEKKEDLffjjjjttiR
sGGGGGfjtjfLGDDDDDEEEDLfffffLGDEKKKKKEDGGLfjjjjjts
uGGftittjfLLGDDDDDDDEEEEEEKKKKKKKKKEEDDGGLffjjjjju
cjiitttjffLGGGDDDDDDDDEEEEEKKKEEEEDDDDGGLLLfjjjjjc
kittjjjjfLLGGGDDDDDDDDDDDEEEEEEDDDDDGGGGLLLLfjjfjk
sjjjjLLLfLGGDGDDDDDDDDDDDEEDDDDDDDDDGGGGGLLLLLLfLs
*jjfffLGGGGGDGDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDGGGGLGLjjLLfLG*
EjjfLLGGGGGGDGDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDGGGfjfGLt;jLfiLLGfLLE
SfffLGGDGDGGGGDDDDLLLGftfDDDLiLDGifGGGGj;;fGGGGDDS
RfLLLGGDDDDGfitGDDDtGDDit;tLGfLDDttGGGGLtjitLGGDDR
sfLLGGGGDDDDG:jGGDDtLDDjGGft;tjDDLiLGGftGGLjtfGDDs
ujLLGGGDDKEDG:jGGGDjfGDffDDDGftGGfjfLGGDGGGGLLLDDu
cjfLLGGGDEKDGi;jfjjjGGGffLDDDDDGLLLGGLLLLGGGDDDDDc
kjfLLLLGDEKDDDGGGLGGLLLLLLLGGLDGGGDDDDDDDDDDDDEEEk
s;ijfLLGDEWEDLGLDGGLGGGDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEEEEs
*E_S_R_s_u_c_k_s_E_S_R_s_u_c_k_s_E_S_R_s_u_c_k_s_*

90 day warranty? (5, Interesting)

Torp (199297) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777816)

http://www.pchdtv.com/faq.php#faq0000007

Isn't that a bit low for the average piece of hardware in a PC? I bought an ancient (used) ISA sound card for an even more ancient PC and I still got 180 days of warranty for it...

Reasons to make offical Linux drivers (5, Informative)

Felinoid (16872) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777818)

1. Users will continually update drivers and eventually absorb them into vareous Linux projects taking support off your hands permenently.
2. Free advertsing on Freshmeat as your drivers are announced then again as projects absorb your drivers.
3. Free adveritsing on Slashdot.
4. Slimmer marketshare means greater sales amoung Linux users.

Reasons to NOT provide offical Linux drivers
1. If your suffering on the Windows side a quick throw in to support Linux will not save you.

2. It'll piss off Microsoft.

3. Your website will be slashdotted.

4. There is a lose lose factor on your drivers. If your drivers are too good users may not improve them if they suck to much users won't buy your product.

Your best bet is to always supply unoffical drivers directly into open source projects so that users will always look to the open source projects for support and not you while at the same time the open source projects give you free advertsing and they get slashdotted not you.

Re:Reasons to make offical Linux drivers (4, Insightful)

Nucleon500 (628631) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778047)

Of course, the most important thing is completely open standards, without which any third party drivers are bound to suck, if they work at all. And why not, anyway? I've heard two reasons.

First, for "Win-" hardware, like controllerless modems and printers, companies are afraid if their driver was open-source, it would be simple for their competitors to use, reducing their software development costs. Two solutions: one, the company could GPL it, so at least they'd get any improvements. Or (more likely), someone should make a GPL driver core, which could be attached to similar dumb hardware, even of different brands. Then, with open specs, it would be easy to bind the hardware to the core to the kernel, and the company may even find it cheaper to adapt the open version for all OSs. (Aside: would Microsoft sign drivers with GPL cores?)

The other problem is that companies fear open-source drivers won't honor the evil bit, for example, WiFi cards with hacked drivers operating on forbidden frequencies, or video cards not honoring MacroVision signals. For starters, it's almost as easy to hack binary drivers, so it's no protection. Another solution is to make the hardware only accept register sets signed by the manufacturer's private key. This was proposed for WiFi cards, is better protection anyway, and can be used by open-source projects.

Not the first (3, Informative)

mocm (141920) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777824)

There have been digital TV cards with open source Linux support for years. This may be the first card for the ATSC standard and doesn't even have an MPEG decoder, or why would the need xine.
Do they support the Linux DVB API, or at least the parts that are common in ATSC and DVB?
Are the drivers open source?

For more information on linux and digital TV see
LinuxTV [linuxtv.org]
Metzlerbros [metzlerbros.org]
and links on those sites.

Re:Not the first (2, Informative)

mocm (141920) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777918)

Just had a look at the drivers. They just modified the bttv drivers a little and added a tuner driver with big chunks of firmware. No frontend device no demux device, just a TS dump.
They should have taken a look at the DVB API and its history, which also started with a slightly modified v4l API, but has matured quite a lot over the past few years.
They could have used the software demuxer which is already in the 2.6er test kernels.

Timeshifting (2, Interesting)

NaveWeiss (567082) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777827)

I've read a lot here about the possible recording limitations. Does this (slashdotted) company mean no more timeshifting problems?

Maybe they can provide us (developers) some HW? (5, Informative)

k-s (162183) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777879)

Hello,

I'm a core Freevo developer and I have something to say:

Hardware makers:
PLEASE SEND YOUR PRODUCTS TO PROJECTS DEVELOPERS! We don't have money/machine to buy every HW on the earth, so if you want to be supported, please provide at least one board to the project!

Recently we won an Epia and Hauppage PVR-250 and they will be better supported than others, just because we can test it.

If you like the idea and want to be supported, contact us via developers list (freevo: freevo-devel@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto])

Thanks, Gustavo

web site javascript errors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6777932)

Now if they'd fix their site to not throw javascript errors on every menu or flyover, I could have a look. You'd think they would at least test with IE6.

Re:web site javascript errors (1)

Mike Hicks (244) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778306)

Heh, well, when the card only has drivers for Linux (so far, at least), I think they can get away with that.

Digital Cable Card (5, Interesting)

TornSheetMetal (411584) | more than 10 years ago | (#6777989)

Do any cards exist that can decode digital cable tv without having to go through the digital cable tv box? I'm not looking to get channels I'm not paying for. I just want a PVR that can act like my VCR did when I had analog cable. I used to be able to easily record shows on different channels. Tivo solves the problem by changing the channel on the Digital Cable TV box which isn't the optimal solution and prevents me from watching one show and recording another.

Re:Digital Cable Card (1)

pyite69 (463042) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778096)

Why not get a DirecTivo and DirecTV?

Mark

Re:Digital Cable Card (3, Interesting)

adpowers (153922) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778152)

Because he wants Digital Cable, not DirecTV.

I looked around the DirecTV website and din't find a digital video recorder that supports HDTV.

If you did get a Tivo one, you are limited by what they let you do. They can remove 30 second skip at well or make you watch advertisements. Stuff like MythTV has lots of features with no advertisements and it doesn't track what you record (and send it to some master database at HQ). Plus, MythTV-like programs allow you to do a bunch of other stuff like play ROMs, DVDs, look at your pictures of the network, listen to mp3s, check your weather, etc.

Re:Digital Cable Card (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6778276)

HDTV signals use different encoding over the air (8VSB) and on cable (QAM). Right now no one is making HDTV tuner cards for PCs that understand QAM, but there are many that understand 8VSB (including the one that this article is about).

One big problem is that encryption is not standardized across cable companies, and unlike DirecTV, there is no card which contains your decryption keys. This makes it difficult to build a solution that works in a PC and gets you any extended channels. My understanding is that there is work going on to standardize cable boxes, but I don't know the status of that.

alex

Re:Digital Cable Card (3, Informative)

PatJensen (170806) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778299)

Here's a solution for you.

Don't use the IR blaster on your TiVo. Upgrade to a Series 2 standalone with OS 4.0 and use a serial cable to connect your digital cable box. This gets rid of the slow channel change delays and pop-ups that come up when you change channels.

Despite what some say, you have to have a Series 2 to use serial channel change support. There is a port on Series 1, but it won't work - and you will just be sending IR without a blaster.

If you are on Comcast/AT&T, quite a few of the Motorola boxes support serial with the latest firmware. Check out the TiVo forum on AVS (www.avsforum.com) for more information.

Pat

Re:Digital Cable Card (2, Insightful)

diatonic (318560) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778367)

If you want to watch one show and record another, use the analog cable signal that should co-exist on the coax with the digital signal. Run your digital cable box to a S-Video or Composite in on your TV-tuner card, and use a serial cable to change channels on the external tuner. Then you should be able to use the tuner to watch the 70-80 channels offered on the analog cable signal. Or you could always go for 2 digital cable recievers. .:diatonic:.

Re:Digital Cable Card (1)

konfoo (677366) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778431)

No, because digital cable is a pay service and not free-to-air. Content and movie providers will not allow it, and any provider who would attempt to roll out such a device will instantly have their content culled. In the future, when content protection systems (no I won't use the DRM word) can guarantee rights all the way down to storage on the PVR device, then you may see a PC-based option. Until then, unfortunately, forget it.

My review of the card (5, Informative)

pyite69 (463042) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778151)


I have one of these and it is basically as
advertised. I use it to capture streams on Linux,
though I still play them back on my Windows-based
card which has component video support.

However, the xine patches work OK.

It is still a hacker's delight, though, and will
continue to be until all of the modifications
make it into the xine and v4l trees; and into at
least the Debian Unstable package system. The
software works, but takes some effort to get
installed and running.

I am quite satisfied with my purchase!!! Everyone
who supports Linux should buy one, if only to
support the business model.

Mark

Cool, but... (2, Interesting)

Glendale2x (210533) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778339)

This is pretty neat, but it appears to fall short of being able to just capture the ATSC stream and play it back unmodified to the TV.

Not everyone needs mad power hardware or cards to decode the MPEG2 stream and output it. Some HD tuners, like those included in the Mitsubishi HD sets [mitsubishi-tv.com], have FireWire jacks that are capable of feeding the transport stream to something (typically a D-VHS deck) and accepting a transport stream back from a device.

Apple has released a sample application with their FireWire SDK for MacOS X called VirtualDVHS that I've been playing with. My notes on it are here [mattinen.org]. The FireWire enabled tuner does all the work, including sending start/stop commands to the device, and on Mits sets, timer recordings.

It's a great little program, and since it's a SDK, you get all the source code for it and the FireWire drivers. The TV's remote control works (commands sent via the FireWire interface) and here's the best part: it works on a dead slow stock CPU G3 266. This computer can't even play simple QuickTime movies properly, yet it works like a charm because all it does is capture and stream back the MPEG2 transport stream. The tuner's decoder does all the hard work.

Okay, so it isn't a PVR with nifty features and whatnot, nor will it work if you don't have a tuner with FireWire jacks. But I don't care too much about the PVR features for the moment because there isn't enough OTA HD programming yet. All I need it to do is time shift a few programs each week when I'll have to be at work, or busy with school, or whatnot.

VirtualDVHS may be a ghetto program, but it gives you a glimpse of what you can do with MPEG2 streams. No special ATSC cards required. And hey, you get the source: make it do more of what you want and tell people about it, or write your own.

Re:Cool, but... (1)

konfoo (677366) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778373)

Yeah but it requires you buy a HDTV tuner with Firewire output. So you are essentially purchasing the same thing as a ATSC tuner board and plugging it into a PC with firewire output. You can do all you describe on a PC with windows already. So that's nothing new. What is new is the broadcast protection flag and how it will be finally implemented. I personally wouldn't spend a whole lot of cash on hardware HD tuners with digital interfaces - one might find them not to be 'HDTV Ready' when the specs are finally ratified and implemented.

Re:Cool, but... (1)

Glendale2x (210533) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778485)

Yeah but it requires you buy a HDTV tuner with Firewire output. So you are essentially purchasing the same thing as a ATSC tuner board and plugging it into a PC with firewire output. You can do all you describe on a PC with windows already. So that's nothing new. What is new is the broadcast protection flag and how it will be finally implemented. I personally wouldn't spend a whole lot of cash on hardware HD tuners with digital interfaces - one might find them not to be 'HDTV Ready' when the specs are finally ratified and implemented.

Well, I have a Mits 511 series, and it came with FireWire jacks. Cost to add recording capabilities to the TV: free. And that was basically my goal.

In my playing with the Mits set and transport streams, I did stumble across the broadcast protection flag. Basically, it just flashed a message up on screen saying "recording prohibited" or something of that nature.

The goal of the broadcast protection flag is to prevent any recording, and it's been there since the beginning. All someone has to do is switch it on with their broadcasts and nobody can record it. They just haven't done that yet.

You don't have to buy anything if you get a set (or tuner) with FireWire. Any Mitsubishi HD integrated (including promise module upgraded) set or the Samsung 165 STB will do, since they have built-in controllers. The WalMart special HDTV probably won't cut it.

Like I said, this isn't for everyone. But with I got the Mits 511 I knew it had FireWire and what it was capable of doing, but I haven't tried to exploit it until recently. But if you have FireWire access to your tuner, and a computer laying around, you get a free HD recorder.

Great! (1)

konfoo (677366) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778347)

Now I can *finally* add support for my ATSC datacasting product [nds.com] to Linux. If you're in San Diego (KPBS), Washington DC (WETA), Kentucky (KET), or Michigan (Station name escapes me), you should be able to pick up this emergency information / weather imaging data feed.

Nice but... (1)

slykens (85844) | more than 10 years ago | (#6778410)

Too bad the FCC's balls are in the broadcasters' purse.

Simply put, many people can't receieve a HD signal period. Where I live only one station is transmitting HD and they are 65 miles away, so no over-the-air (UHF).

Until the FCC requires full power DTV transmission along with must-carry on cable systems and a requirement to pass the highest definition signal available from a network the masses just don't have enough access to HD, period.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...