awatson
07-19-07, 12:13 PM
I recently purchased the Netgear EVA8000 when my DSM-520 died. Then yesterday D-link actually sent me a replacement for my DSM-520. So, I'm in the fortunate position of comparing the two (one at a time, unfortunately).
I only need simple playback of MPEG2 and DVR-MS video files (recorded TV shows), so I have no interest in the music, photo, or internet capabilities of each device. My comparisons are based solely on the user interface and video playback issues. I'm using a wired ethernet connection, S-video, and optical audio connections (the best connection my aging receiver supports).
Weaknesses of BOTH units:
1. Limited on-screen display of video titles. I haven't counted, but both devices only show about 32 characters of the title on-screen. I often have several episodes of a TV show with longer titles and the date/time appended to the end. With the limited displays, there's no way to tell the shows apart or know when they were recorded other than selecting the video.
The EVA8000 has a "slight" advantage here, in that it scrolls the text of the selected file. But, it's kind of hassle to select each file and wait for it to scroll to the end. On the other hand, the only way to see the full title on the DSM-520 is to play the video and hit the info button.
2. Complicated navigation. With both units, I have to navigate down through several levels of share/folder/etc. selections to get to my list of shows. It's repetitive and annoying for me, and not very family friendly. I'd prefer to see my list of videos immediately when I select "Video" from the main menu. Any share and folder selections should be dealt with in Setup.
3. Displayed video lists are outdated. I record and watch TV shows daily, and neither device offers a "real-time" display of what's on my hard drive. The DSM-520 in cooperation with the TVersity media server, at least updates everything once an hour, but even that can be annoying when you want to watch a show that just finished recording. The EVA8000 shows the same old list until you perform a full scan. A "quick scan" lets you add new shows, but it doesn't remove shows that have been deleted.
4. No way to delete shows from the device. Once I finish watching a recorded TV show, it would be nice to have a way to delete it on the spot. But, neither device offers this capability. Instead, I have to go to my computer at the end of the evening and delete the shows we have watched. Kind of a hassle.
Miscellaneous Comparisons:
1. The EVA8000 only shows four video titles on the screen at once. This makes it awkward to view and select from a long list of shows. The DSM-520 has a slightly longer list, but both devices would benefit from less "fluff" on the screen, and show more substance.
2. The DSM-520 gets the nod for starting a show. Press Play, and the show begins almost immediately. The EVA8000 has a 5-10 second delay while it says "playing", then "buffering", and finally the show begins.
3. The EVA8000 gets the nod for startup times. Apparently, the EVA8000 runs all the time, even when the power button is turned off. The advantage here is turning on the power immediately brings up the main menu. The DSM-520 has to go through the same long (over a minute) boot-up everytime you turn the machine on.
4. Both devices seem to be fairly stable playing back MPEG2 videos. The DSM-520 occasionally pauses temporarily when there is hard drive or network activity, but continues on it's way. In comparison, the EVA8000 seems to have better buffering and is able to overlook temporary pauses in data flow.
5. The DSM-520 seems to handle the screen setup better than the EVA8000. I can select 16:9 in setup, set my TV to 16:9, and the DSM-520 will automatically scale the shows to fit the screen. The EVA8000 seems a little awkward in this respect. I can select 16:9 aspect ratio, but the end result is a widescreen video in the space of a 4:3 screen. So I end up with a small picture in the center of the screen with a wide black band around all four edges. My S-video connection is obviously a big part of the problem, but the DSM-520 just handles it better.
6. Each device has strengths and weaknesses when it comes to playing high definition material. The EVA8000 played both DVR-MS and MPEG2 videos, but there was no audio on files with AC3 unless I selected analog outputs. The DSM-520 handled the AC3 audio just fine (over either output), but it failed to play the DVR-MS files. It seemed to play the MPEG video's without problems.
7. The EVA8000 gets the nod for playback features. Multiple fast forward and rewind speeds, and forward and reverse skip options all work well. The fast forward speeds could be a little faster on the EVA8000, but the DSM-520 is limited to a single slow fast forward.
8. I like that the EVA8000 can access the hard drive in my PC directly, instead of relying on a uPnP server. This avoids many of the communication issues I'd experienced with the DSM-520 in the past. Unfortunately, there seems to be some issue with the EVA8000 accessing a folder in the root directory of my drive (i.e. D:\Video or D:\Shows). I've tried changing every sharing and permission setting available, and keep having access problems. Oddly enough, I can always access a SUB-folder of those (i.e. D:\Video\TV Shows). So, I'm not sure if that's a problem with my PC or the EVA8000, but either way I couldn't get it to work properly.
Overall, I'd say the EVA8000 has the most "potential", but for current daily use I think I still prefer the DSM-520. It just works closer to the way I want things to work.
I think media players in general try to be too many things at once. I don't expect my toaster to do anything but make toast. But media players try to play every format known to man, show your music and photo's, and bring the world of the internet onto your TV. That's fine if the core functions work, but I'd prefer fewer capabilities and more stability and flexibility with the basic operations.
Also, in my opinion, there's too much focus on appearance instead of functionality. My toaster is basic black or chrome. I don't need flames painted down the side, or fancy shaped handles. Media players in general waste too much screen real-estate with fancy graphics instead of showing me the material I want to watch (why only 30 characters when I have a widescreen plasma TV?).
I only need simple playback of MPEG2 and DVR-MS video files (recorded TV shows), so I have no interest in the music, photo, or internet capabilities of each device. My comparisons are based solely on the user interface and video playback issues. I'm using a wired ethernet connection, S-video, and optical audio connections (the best connection my aging receiver supports).
Weaknesses of BOTH units:
1. Limited on-screen display of video titles. I haven't counted, but both devices only show about 32 characters of the title on-screen. I often have several episodes of a TV show with longer titles and the date/time appended to the end. With the limited displays, there's no way to tell the shows apart or know when they were recorded other than selecting the video.
The EVA8000 has a "slight" advantage here, in that it scrolls the text of the selected file. But, it's kind of hassle to select each file and wait for it to scroll to the end. On the other hand, the only way to see the full title on the DSM-520 is to play the video and hit the info button.
2. Complicated navigation. With both units, I have to navigate down through several levels of share/folder/etc. selections to get to my list of shows. It's repetitive and annoying for me, and not very family friendly. I'd prefer to see my list of videos immediately when I select "Video" from the main menu. Any share and folder selections should be dealt with in Setup.
3. Displayed video lists are outdated. I record and watch TV shows daily, and neither device offers a "real-time" display of what's on my hard drive. The DSM-520 in cooperation with the TVersity media server, at least updates everything once an hour, but even that can be annoying when you want to watch a show that just finished recording. The EVA8000 shows the same old list until you perform a full scan. A "quick scan" lets you add new shows, but it doesn't remove shows that have been deleted.
4. No way to delete shows from the device. Once I finish watching a recorded TV show, it would be nice to have a way to delete it on the spot. But, neither device offers this capability. Instead, I have to go to my computer at the end of the evening and delete the shows we have watched. Kind of a hassle.
Miscellaneous Comparisons:
1. The EVA8000 only shows four video titles on the screen at once. This makes it awkward to view and select from a long list of shows. The DSM-520 has a slightly longer list, but both devices would benefit from less "fluff" on the screen, and show more substance.
2. The DSM-520 gets the nod for starting a show. Press Play, and the show begins almost immediately. The EVA8000 has a 5-10 second delay while it says "playing", then "buffering", and finally the show begins.
3. The EVA8000 gets the nod for startup times. Apparently, the EVA8000 runs all the time, even when the power button is turned off. The advantage here is turning on the power immediately brings up the main menu. The DSM-520 has to go through the same long (over a minute) boot-up everytime you turn the machine on.
4. Both devices seem to be fairly stable playing back MPEG2 videos. The DSM-520 occasionally pauses temporarily when there is hard drive or network activity, but continues on it's way. In comparison, the EVA8000 seems to have better buffering and is able to overlook temporary pauses in data flow.
5. The DSM-520 seems to handle the screen setup better than the EVA8000. I can select 16:9 in setup, set my TV to 16:9, and the DSM-520 will automatically scale the shows to fit the screen. The EVA8000 seems a little awkward in this respect. I can select 16:9 aspect ratio, but the end result is a widescreen video in the space of a 4:3 screen. So I end up with a small picture in the center of the screen with a wide black band around all four edges. My S-video connection is obviously a big part of the problem, but the DSM-520 just handles it better.
6. Each device has strengths and weaknesses when it comes to playing high definition material. The EVA8000 played both DVR-MS and MPEG2 videos, but there was no audio on files with AC3 unless I selected analog outputs. The DSM-520 handled the AC3 audio just fine (over either output), but it failed to play the DVR-MS files. It seemed to play the MPEG video's without problems.
7. The EVA8000 gets the nod for playback features. Multiple fast forward and rewind speeds, and forward and reverse skip options all work well. The fast forward speeds could be a little faster on the EVA8000, but the DSM-520 is limited to a single slow fast forward.
8. I like that the EVA8000 can access the hard drive in my PC directly, instead of relying on a uPnP server. This avoids many of the communication issues I'd experienced with the DSM-520 in the past. Unfortunately, there seems to be some issue with the EVA8000 accessing a folder in the root directory of my drive (i.e. D:\Video or D:\Shows). I've tried changing every sharing and permission setting available, and keep having access problems. Oddly enough, I can always access a SUB-folder of those (i.e. D:\Video\TV Shows). So, I'm not sure if that's a problem with my PC or the EVA8000, but either way I couldn't get it to work properly.
Overall, I'd say the EVA8000 has the most "potential", but for current daily use I think I still prefer the DSM-520. It just works closer to the way I want things to work.
I think media players in general try to be too many things at once. I don't expect my toaster to do anything but make toast. But media players try to play every format known to man, show your music and photo's, and bring the world of the internet onto your TV. That's fine if the core functions work, but I'd prefer fewer capabilities and more stability and flexibility with the basic operations.
Also, in my opinion, there's too much focus on appearance instead of functionality. My toaster is basic black or chrome. I don't need flames painted down the side, or fancy shaped handles. Media players in general waste too much screen real-estate with fancy graphics instead of showing me the material I want to watch (why only 30 characters when I have a widescreen plasma TV?).