Official Ceton Echo Extender Info Thread - Page 193 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #5761 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 04:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
Never?

Sammy2 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #5762 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 04:51 PM
Senior Member
 
mcturkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

Never?

Flawless playback of all MKVs and other media types, live tv/dvr, Netflix, Amazon, etc - cannot do it all within WMC, because Microsoft is not going to unlock that capability, nor sell it off to allow someone else to do so. My feeling is that if we need two different interfaces, then the Echo should have just been a pure TV extender with older hardware for $50, when a Roku or other similar device could already do a great job handling the rest. The biggest draw of WMC and extenders was the promise of a unified interface throughout the home.
mcturkey is offline  
post #5763 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 04:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,047
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Liked: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcturkey View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

Why? They can do LiveTV now. What they need to do is proper mkv playback now and web apps for netlix and amazon for the masses that enjoy that highly compressed stuff.
WMC is irrelevant. It will never give you what you want in a unified interface. DTCP-IP is essential to make that happen, or you're switching between two different interfaces.
DTCP-IP isn't required for what Sammy2 listed. (proper MKV playback and netflix (et al) streaming video.

WMC already does everything I want. As far as performance and meeting my requirements from a technology perspective the XBox was fine. The only reason I'm interested in replacing them with Echos is the power consumption. In a small room they can be loud (depending on who you talk to) and they are like little tiny space heaters, Not good for a bedroom environment.

Your requirements/expectations may be different, but you are absolutely wrong to say that DTCP-IP is essential for the requirements listed above.

Microsoft doesn't have to do anything to "unlock" netflix or amazon or any other streaming video within WMC. Netfilx and Amazon just need to write plugins.

If I had a signature, this is where it would be.
ajhieb is offline  
post #5764 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 05:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
It would seem that an application plugin could be launched from within WMC on the echo that loads these items in another player. I'm not a programmer and don't know the internals of WMC for sure but that seems doable to me.

Sammy2 is offline  
post #5765 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 05:12 PM
Senior Member
 
mcturkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

DTCP-IP isn't required for what Sammy2 listed. (proper MKV playback and netflix (et al) streaming video.

WMC already does everything I want. As far as performance and meeting my requirements from a technology perspective the XBox was fine. The only reason I'm interested in replacing them with Echos is the power consumption. In a small room they can be loud (depending on who you talk to) and they are like little tiny space heaters, Not good for a bedroom environment.

Your requirements/expectations may be different, but you are absolutely wrong to say that DTCP-IP is essential for the requirements listed above.

Microsoft doesn't have to do anything to "unlock" netflix or amazon or any other streaming video within WMC. Netfilx and Amazon just need to write plugins.

WMC doesn't do all of the other things, so you need different software to do that. At no point did I say DTCP-IP is required to do anything but Live TV - but it *is* required to do Live TV without being chained to WMC. Plugins having to be written from the ground up for all of this stuff that can somehow be made to work on extenders (hint: none exist to properly do Netflix or Amazon, and both of those companies have the money to make it happen already, but have not). Ceton would be throwing money away to invest in doing that for a dead-end platform when they could harness existing Android-based frameworks for all of these things. Making a DTCP-IP client for Android and then hooking into the existing apps for playing all the other content is far simpler, and makes more sense for the long term. I seriously cannot fathom a reason that Ceton would take the time to make WMC do Netflix/Amazon/MKVs. While the current setup may work for some, it's a very niche market, and $170 is steep for such a limited device - how much can they really grow that market without bringing something to the table that other devices do not have?

It's great that WMC/extenders do what you need and want - for most people, it does not. Ceton needs to expand their potential market, and a DTCP-IP client that breaks them free of the WMC shackles is the only way for it to happen.
mcturkey is offline  
post #5766 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 05:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
They need a DTCP-IP server device too.. Using WMC for TV content and then launching android for other things does not require DTCP-IP at all.

Sammy2 is offline  
post #5767 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 06:02 PM
Senior Member
 
reggie14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
DTCP-IP isn't a silver bullet either. DTCP-IP gets you live TV and live TV alone. Who watches live TV? You'd have to add a DVR server that also speaks DTCP-IP. And, since DTCP-IP is just for protecting the video stream in transmission between components, that DVR server would have to implement some form of DRM to protect the content as it is stored on the server. You can maybe imagine someone licensing PlayReady and creating such a server, but I assume that's much easier said than done. Sage never did that, and didn't seem to show any particular interest (though they did have a PlayReady license). I think the Sage guys may have had a strong philosophical complaint about DRM.

DTCP-IP might be our best bet to see better whole-home DVRs, but I don't think its going to help PC-based DVRs much. Ceton could create their own Moxi-like whole-home DVR solution using the Echos as extenders, much I'm not sure they'd fare better than Moxi.

Also, when it comes to streaming apps, the problem isn't what Ceton decides it wants to do. I bet Ceton would absolutely be willing to put in a lot of work to get Netflix working within the extender environment. The problem is its not up to them. It's mostly up to Netflix, and they're not going to care. This problem applies to the Android environment too, by the way. I think the Android Netflix app seems to work on just about everything, but the same it not true for Hulu and HBO Go.
reggie14 is offline  
post #5768 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 06:58 PM
Advanced Member
 
skybolt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Stony Brook, NY
Posts: 564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggie14 View Post

DTCP-IP isn't a silver bullet either. DTCP-IP gets you live TV and live TV alone. ....

Currently, but if some company adopted and Android platform and implemneted DTCP with certificates, then we'd have Sage like DVR system. And with the right player front end, maybe XBMC, maybe anotherone not written yet, we could have great ripped content playback. It's not so far off I think. 1-2 yrs. It all depends if anyone adopts the new DTCP-IP format or not. Who knows, maybe Ceton has this kind of plan, doesn't look like it though.

skybolt is offline  
post #5769 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 07:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kapone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,316
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggie14 View Post

DTCP-IP isn't a silver bullet either. DTCP-IP gets you live TV and live TV alone.
This.

Just writing a DTCP-IP client doesn't get you $hit. smile.gif It just gets you live TV from a DTCP-IP compliant tuner/stream. The "DVR" part of the eco-system has the exact same restrictions with DTCP-IP as it does with today's methods. As far as that part of the system is concerned, the problem isn't DTCP-IP, it's DRM.

Think about this for a second. WHY did Microsoft implement an extender based model for protected TV?? To implement DRM, because without DRM the studios wouldn't allow Microsoft access to the content. Now, how does that situation change, just because DTCP-IP came along? It doesn't.

As far as online streaming goes...the problem isn't WMC, it's the fact that it's PC based. If all these companies made it real easy for you to consume their content within WMC, would you spend the $70 or so on these streamer boxes? Nope. Now, if they wrote fantastic plugins for WMC and priced them at $50, would you buy them? smile.gif I'm guessing no. These companies get a cut from EVERY device sold, that can access their content, in the form of licensing fees. Unless Microsoft is willing to eat that cost, it aint happening on a PC, until pigs fly.

Admit it, we're all cheap. We all want free stuff. Not because we can't spend the money from a monetary standpoint, but it's the mindset. If Media Browser was $25 (or $50 or whatever), would you still be using it?smile.gif We probably know the answer to that.

btw...Intel announced a new "web TV" initiative today...promising a more "interactive" TV experience. Word is that their vaporware settop box has an HD webcam built in..for...well..something. They claim it's for facial recognition. For watching TV?? Time will tell.
kapone is online now  
post #5770 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 07:52 PM
Senior Member
 
reggie14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by skybolt View Post

Currently, but if some company adopted and Android platform and implemneted DTCP with certificates, then we'd have Sage like DVR system. And with the right player front end, maybe XBMC, maybe anotherone not written yet, we could have great ripped content playback. It's not so far off I think. 1-2 yrs. It all depends if anyone adopts the new DTCP-IP format or not. Who knows, maybe Ceton has this kind of plan, doesn't look like it though.

I'm not quite sure I'm following what you're saying.

The DTCP-IP spec says if you store content in persistent storage, it must be protected using an approved scheme. By itself, DTCP-IP doesn't get you much.

Now, a vendor could use the Android for their DVR platform. Looking at the list of approved DRM schemes, it looks like the only one that might run on Android is IPRM-HN. I don't know if IPRM-HN requires any particular hardware support, but it wouldn't surprise me. In any event, I think a vendor could create their own DVR software. I said that in my previous message. But I really worry about the commercial viability of that. PC-based systems like SageTV and Next PVR don't require the same level of capital investment that a DVR appliance would require. So those lend themselves better to niche markets. I'm not sure there are enough people willing to shell out $500-$1000 at once for a whole-home DVR system.
reggie14 is offline  
post #5771 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 08:02 PM
Senior Member
 
reggie14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapone View Post

Think about this for a second. WHY did Microsoft implement an extender based model for protected TV?? To implement DRM, because without DRM the studios wouldn't allow Microsoft access to the content. Now, how does that situation change, just because DTCP-IP came along? It doesn't.

I think Microsoft could have gotten any DRM modifications necessary to support Softsled through CableLabs. I just don't think they tried very hard. And at a certain point I think they decided Xboxes should be connected to TVs, not computers. I'm not sure I disagree with that, at least as a general rule.

And I don't even necessarily think this was part of some evil attempt to sell more Xboxes. I just think they decided there was a better, albeit more limited, experience with an appliance, rather than a full computer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapone View Post

These companies get a cut from EVERY device sold, that can access their content, in the form of licensing fees. Unless Microsoft is willing to eat that cost, it aint happening on a PC, until pigs fly.

I'm not sure I buy this. I don't know what the licensing situation is on streamers. My understanding of the way Netflix operates is that its mostly dependent on you convincing them that you'll bring in a lot customers. I suspect that's usually how it works. To the extent there are licensing fees, I suspect the fees don't even cover the cost for the company to support third-party streamers.

The content providers are making their money from subscribers, not from licensing fees.
reggie14 is offline  
post #5772 of 7721 Old 02-12-2013, 08:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,047
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Liked: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapone View Post

Now, if they wrote fantastic plugins for WMC and priced them at $50, would you buy them? smile.gif I'm guessing no. These companies get a cut from EVERY device sold, that can access their content, in the form of licensing fees. Unless Microsoft is willing to eat that cost, it aint happening on a PC, until pigs fly.

Admit it, we're all cheap. We all want free stuff. Not because we can't spend the money from a monetary standpoint, but it's the mindset. If Media Browser was $25 (or $50 or whatever), would you still be using it?smile.gif We probably know the answer to that.

I'm not one who is looking for a plugin/app for netflix or any of the other streaming services, but if I was, then I wouldn't mind paying a one time fee for a plugin.

I don't mind investing in hardware and applications if it gives me a better experience. If I have to pay for MediaBrowser, I can live with that. Unfortunately last week something went awry when moving my very happy, very stable HTPC which refused to boot into windows no how many repairs I tried so I eventually had to start over from scratch. That means the licenses that I didn't have backed up I'll be getting again, so I'll be paying for a lot of the little "frills" that I had installed before. All are priced reasonably so I don't mind. The money isn't a big deal if it gives me something I want.

In fact here is a list of things I would happily pay for if available:
Native BluRay plugin for WMC (not shelling out to some other app)
Picture in Picture. I have 8 tuners and I know the technology exists. Let me watch two things at once
Video Wall. I have 8 tuners. Let me watch all four NCAA games at once in March
Proper subtitle support
And if somebody could figure out a way to prevent WMC from jumping to a live TV channel when I type in a number on my remote to skip to a place in my media library if I don't mash the stupid "play" button in time. <-- Most annoying thing in WMC if you ask me.

That's just off the top of my head, and I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I don't mind paying for tech that improves my experience.

If I had a signature, this is where it would be.
ajhieb is offline  
post #5773 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 04:31 AM
Senior Member
 
mcturkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapone View Post

This.

Just writing a DTCP-IP client doesn't get you $hit. smile.gif It just gets you live TV from a DTCP-IP compliant tuner/stream. The "DVR" part of the eco-system has the exact same restrictions with DTCP-IP as it does with today's methods. As far as that part of the system is concerned, the problem isn't DTCP-IP, it's DRM.

Think about this for a second. WHY did Microsoft implement an extender based model for protected TV?? To implement DRM, because without DRM the studios wouldn't allow Microsoft access to the content. Now, how does that situation change, just because DTCP-IP came along? It doesn't.

As far as online streaming goes...the problem isn't WMC, it's the fact that it's PC based. If all these companies made it real easy for you to consume their content within WMC, would you spend the $70 or so on these streamer boxes? Nope. Now, if they wrote fantastic plugins for WMC and priced them at $50, would you buy them? smile.gif I'm guessing no. These companies get a cut from EVERY device sold, that can access their content, in the form of licensing fees. Unless Microsoft is willing to eat that cost, it aint happening on a PC, until pigs fly.

Admit it, we're all cheap. We all want free stuff. Not because we can't spend the money from a monetary standpoint, but it's the mindset. If Media Browser was $25 (or $50 or whatever), would you still be using it?smile.gif We probably know the answer to that.

btw...Intel announced a new "web TV" initiative today...promising a more "interactive" TV experience. Word is that their vaporware settop box has an HD webcam built in..for...well..something. They claim it's for facial recognition. For watching TV?? Time will tell.

I agree that DTCP-IP won't solve the DRM problem from a customer standpoint. What it does do is allow Ceton (and others) to break free from WMC's horrible restrictions.

I'm not really clear on what you're trying to get at with buying things--Netflix (and Amazon, and others) all just want their content available on as many platforms as they can get so they can expand their customer base. They don't generate that much revenue from licensing fees, if any. I'm really not at all clear why you think those plugins would be charged for when you can already watch the content on any Windows device (and most Android devices) without paying extra for a client/plugin/app. Microsoft isn't eating any costs by having Netflix have an App in the Windows Store--nor is Google eating costs by having Netflix in Google Play. Netflix and Amazon make their money not by getting licensing fees here -- they're making it by adding customers who otherwise would go with a competitor or just wouldn't watch at all. The only reason WMC plugins aren't supported is because the market is too small--the number of people using an HTPC+Extenders vs. just an HTPC is likely in the few hundreds of thousands. Then when you break down the number of people using that setup who are unwilling to switch interfaces just to access the already available application, the market shrinks even further--I could access Netflix or Amazon from my 360, but it would never receive WAF approval like that.

From the Windows 8 Start screen, you can easily 10-foot navigate through media apps, just as you can with a 360. The only thing that WMC is bringing to the table that is technologically superior to Windows 8/Android w/ apps is Live TV/DVR support. A DTCP-IP client/server model could easily allow that functionality to be built into a piece of software that could present a unified interface for all of our available content sources. I seriously doubt that WMC would get much attention by anyone at all anymore if it did not have a lock on Copy Once content. It was fantastic when it first launched, but has become archaic compared to other, newer options out there.
mcturkey is offline  
post #5774 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 04:34 AM
Advanced Member
 
skybolt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Stony Brook, NY
Posts: 564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggie14 View Post

I'm not quite sure I'm following what you're saying.

The DTCP-IP spec says if you store content in persistent storage, it must be protected using an approved scheme. By itself, DTCP-IP doesn't get you much.

Now, a vendor could use the Android for their DVR platform. Looking at the list of approved DRM schemes, it looks like the only one that might run on Android is IPRM-HN. I don't know if IPRM-HN requires any particular hardware support, but it wouldn't surprise me. In any event, I think a vendor could create their own DVR software. I said that in my previous message. But I really worry about the commercial viability of that. PC-based systems like SageTV and Next PVR don't require the same level of capital investment that a DVR appliance would require. So those lend themselves better to niche markets. I'm not sure there are enough people willing to shell out $500-$1000 at once for a whole-home DVR system.

In one on the white paper specs, they speak of certificates. Which as long as the viewing device is on your local network, your portected content can viewed on any device which meets the criteria of the certificate. And yes, I agree a form of DRM absolutly needs to be implimented. I posted the certificate link over at the Sage forums a while back. I will try and find it to post here. I might have interpurted it wrong, but it sounded like you could move content around and view it on certificate approved devices that are DRM approved devices. Not quite sure exactly what that means.

Edit: Not what I posted at Sage, but explains it in a PPT type doc.

skybolt is offline  
post #5775 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 07:17 AM
Member
 
CorporateASH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Currently the major issues I'm facing with the Echo are 1.) using the optical output, I'm noticing that the audio is incredibly unbalanced to the left. It's still significantly louder on the left channel when balanced all the way to the right. This got worse with the latest update. 2.) The IR response is T.E.R.R.I.B.L.E.! The Echo turns on and off instantly, but when actually in WMC, at times it's almost unusable due to the mixture of perceived double presses and moments when it doesn't recognize presses despite practically standing on the button.

I still believe in the potential of the Echo and I'm going to keep using it, but these HAVE to be software issues. I know the IR response problem seems to be common, but is anyone else using the optical audio out? Am I the only one experiencing that particular issue?
CorporateASH is offline  
post #5776 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 08:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
The thing that really has me wondering about the echo is the widely different user experiences with it for even Live/Recorded TV playback. There's no consistency which I don't understand at all. Is it the echo or is it the user's set up? Even from the beginning my echo has performed pretty well but now it is doing real well. So it is either bad QA at ceton's manufacturing partner in China or it is differing conditions in the locations the echo is located and used. I'm thinking of getting another one to see if it is an issue or if it performs as well as the one I have right now.

Sammy2 is offline  
post #5777 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 08:54 AM
Member
 
CorporateASH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

The thing that really has me wondering about the echo is the widely different user experiences with it for even Live/Recorded TV playback. There's no consistency which I don't understand at all. Is it the echo or is it the user's set up? Even from the beginning my echo has performed pretty well but now it is doing real well. So it is either bad QA at ceton's manufacturing partner in China or it is differing conditions in the locations the echo is located and used. I'm thinking of getting another one to see if it is an issue or if it performs as well as the one I have right now.

Overall I'd say mine has performed pretty well. I've not had video or audio reproduction issues outside of what I just listed. The things that have really irritated me are the IR and menu responses.
CorporateASH is offline  
post #5778 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 08:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
erickotz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorporateASH View Post

Currently the major issues I'm facing with the Echo are 1.) using the optical output, I'm noticing that the audio is incredibly unbalanced to the left. It's still significantly louder on the left channel when balanced all the way to the right. This got worse with the latest update. 2.) The IR response is T.E.R.R.I.B.L.E.! The Echo turns on and off instantly, but when actually in WMC, at times it's almost unusable due to the mixture of perceived double presses and moments when it doesn't recognize presses despite practically standing on the button.

I still believe in the potential of the Echo and I'm going to keep using it, but these HAVE to be software issues. I know the IR response problem seems to be common, but is anyone else using the optical audio out? Am I the only one experiencing that particular issue?

Re:1, there's no way that Echo could cause this, as it just passes through the bitstream - have you checked the balance settings on your receiver?

Re: 2, did you remove the protective film from the front of your Echo?

Quality Assurance Manager, Ceton Corporation
erickotz is offline  
post #5779 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 09:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
So even for MPEG Video for TV content the splitting is done in the HTPC and not the echo? If the echo does the splitting, it could inadvertently disrupt the balance, no? Probably less likely for bitstreaming than for decoding to PCM.

I've noticed that the echo needs direct aim from my remote now that I am not using with the RF H-900 and an IR blaster located 2" in front of it. It is a bit sensitive to button pushes and length of those pushes. It is controllable but it takes some practice.

Sammy2 is offline  
post #5780 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 09:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ken.F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: West Rockhill, PA
Posts: 1,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

The thing that really has me wondering about the echo is the widely different user experiences with it for even Live/Recorded TV playback.
I wonder if it has anything to do with the TV it's being played on.
Ken.F is offline  
post #5781 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 09:08 AM
Member
 
Haba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

The thing that really has me wondering about the echo is the widely different user experiences with it for even Live/Recorded TV playback. There's no consistency which I don't understand at all. Is it the echo or is it the user's set up? Even from the beginning my echo has performed pretty well but now it is doing real well. So it is either bad QA at ceton's manufacturing partner in China or it is differing conditions in the locations the echo is located and used. I'm thinking of getting another one to see if it is an issue or if it performs as well as the one I have right now.

I have been wondering myself if there are hardware issues with some Echos or is this a combination of firmware issues, varying cable systems and end user setups. Comments that are consistent when owners compare the Echo to the Xbox 360, the Xbox 360 while limited and controlled by Microsoft seems to work without issue.
Haba is offline  
post #5782 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 09:17 AM
Member
 
CorporateASH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by erickotz View Post

Re:1, there's no way that Echo could cause this, as it just passes through the bitstream - have you checked the balance settings on your receiver?

Re: 2, did you remove the protective film from the front of your Echo?

Re: 1, I had to correct the balance on the receiver to correct the issue in the first place. As a recording and live sound engineer, I have knowledge as to why this *shouldn't* happen, but at the same time, I've connected the Echo to some of my recording equipment, changed the devices from ADAT to SPDIF, and confirmed that this is an issue. Hence why I was curious if anyone else was using the optical out and, if so, were they having the same or similar issues.

Re: 2, Yes, the protective film came off the day it arrived. Again, never an issue in response when turning it on or off: that's always immediate. It's the response in WMC that has the issue. It's like working on a computer running an application with a memory leak. Everything works fine on the surface (e.g. whatever is playing is smooth and seamless), but when you try to get it to do anything else, it's like being in a fist fight with it.

UPDATE: Of course, today it proves me a liar and the IR response is back to working as it used to before this last update. Still the same audio issue however.
CorporateASH is offline  
post #5783 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 10:07 AM
Advanced Member
 
skybolt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Stony Brook, NY
Posts: 564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

The thing that really has me wondering about the echo is the widely different user experiences with it for even Live/Recorded TV playback. There's no consistency which I don't understand at all. Is it the echo or is it the user's set up? Even from the beginning my echo has performed pretty well but now it is doing real well. So it is either bad QA at ceton's manufacturing partner in China or it is differing conditions in the locations the echo is located and used. I'm thinking of getting another one to see if it is an issue or if it performs as well as the one I have right now.

For me I went a little extreme, I ran a new cat6 line just for WMx use and setup a dedicated GB backend for 7MC and my two Primes as well. That being said, I realize that is overboard and defietly not needed, but as a result I now have zero network issues with any WMx. I am also hooked to a new Sharp 70" quadtron LCD display. Which is very picky with it's input signal. My 360's play quite nicely, not perfect but real nice.

The Echo still seems to have a deinterlacing issue or two and the HDMI color space is still off. The stutter and freeze in panning or action scenes is unacceptable on this dislay, also on my 40 samsung in the MB. Hooked to a smaller set, say in my kitchen, I probably wouldn't care or even notice it. I am not saying there is not a quality issue, I am also not saying there is. But I know there are still FW issues causing what I am seeing.

Lets see what happens next week, that should still provide enough time to return the them if desired. I truely wish I could be a happy with the Echo as you Sammy2, I would by more.

skybolt is offline  
post #5784 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 10:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roginator View Post

Just unhooked the XBox and hooked up the Echo to try the new beta. The Echo is still vastly subpar compared to the XBox on my test recordings.

The Echo's native mode still plays my Malta clip with heavy combing. It seems to play ok at 720p.

Last night's Simpson opening has a constant stutter in the opening. On the XBox it plays smoothly, although it's a bit blurrier -- perhaps indicating it's averaging the frames to deinterlace? The Echo seems to simply throw out a frame every half second or so.

Result? XBox hooked up again.

I have to wonder how much money Ceton has to continue bug fixing this product.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

I tested that clip. No combing at all. It looks fantastic. I'm connected to a totally different TV now. My 19" Toshiba in the kitchen. No AVR i/p scaler or processing in the TV as this is a cheap TV. I'm not sure but maybe you need to do a Recovery on your echo? Open a ticket with ceton for sure.

Here's a video of the playback of Malta via the echo on my 19" TV. The rainbow effect at the end is in the way my phone picked up the image but is not seen on the screen.

Sammy2 is offline  
post #5785 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 10:35 AM
Senior Member
 
JorgeA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Topic: subtitles on extenders --
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacobsjg View Post

WTV subs you record from live TV work fine. You control them the same way as you do on the htpc, same menus and whatnot. It is everything else not WTV that is broken. So yes, any ripped DVDs or other non recorded from live TV content that has subs embedded within mkv or with a separate srt file or whatever will not show on extenders.
Thanks, that's good to know.

All of our film watching takes place on the HTPC in the family room, so we have no need to send movie files around the house. But I'd like to ditch the bedroom DVR (and its monthly fees), which is why I keep monitoring this thread to see how people are taking the Echo. smile.gif
JorgeA is offline  
post #5786 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 10:47 AM
Senior Member
 
reggie14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by skybolt View Post

In one on the white paper specs, they speak of certificates. Which as long as the viewing device is on your local network, your portected content can viewed on any device which meets the criteria of the certificate. And yes, I agree a form of DRM absolutly needs to be implimented. I posted the certificate link over at the Sage forums a while back. I will try and find it to post here. I might have interpurted it wrong, but it sounded like you could move content around and view it on certificate approved devices that are DRM approved devices. Not quite sure exactly what that means.

Edit: Not what I posted at Sage, but explains it in a PPT type doc.

I think we're talking past each other. If I understand the DTCP-IP licensing situation, you're right. Any two certified DTCP-IP implementations should be able to talk to each other. But how different is that from how PlayReady works? I guess there isn't the same notion of pairing devices, but I'm not sure how much that matters in practice. So, I still don't see how that helps that much with a DVR system without figuring out how the DRM is going to work for stored content.

I guess I don't fully understand what major problem with CableCard DTCP solves. You were never locked-in to WMC, its just that's the only thing that implemented DRM. DTCP isn't going to make the DVR hardware noticeably cheaper, since you still need a CableCard-certified OCUR device. In practice it isn't going to make the "extenders" that much cheaper, because I don't think very many TVs out there are going to support what they'd need to support. I guess you get the advantage of not needing to mess with CableCard directly, but I doubt that's really any harder than making a good DVR system.

By the way, the certificates are sort of in the weeds of how DTCP is implemented. DTCP creates a mutually-authenticated encrypted session between the devices, using cryptographic mechanisms not all that different from TLS. It uses different algorithms and generally works a little differently, but at a high-level its not hugely different. The certificates identify and authenticate the device as a DTCP-compliant device. Each device has a public/private key key pair that's used in the device handshake to sign a random challenge to authenticate itself to the other party.
reggie14 is offline  
post #5787 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 10:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
xnappo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,660
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggie14 View Post


I guess I don't fully understand what major problem with CableCard DTCP solves..

To me it is about widening the market. If DTCP is available on Roku, AppleTV, Playstation3, new TVs etc, then there will be more of a market for whole-home solutions in general which is a good thing. Right now with MS backing off WMC and Extenders in general, there is not enough market to drive products.

xnappo
xnappo is online now  
post #5788 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 11:24 AM
Senior Member
 
reggie14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnappo View Post

To me it is about widening the market. If DTCP is available on Roku, AppleTV, Playstation3, new TVs etc, then there will be more of a market for whole-home solutions in general which is a good thing. Right now with MS backing off WMC and Extenders in general, there is not enough market to drive products.

I'm not really sure if changes the market. The consumer demand for retail DVRs is what it is. If people were really that interested and willing to pay we would seen more companies like Moxi pop up.

Unless the problem is that people don't want to spend $100 on yet another box to connect to a TV. Certainly I could see it helping if people can use boxes they already have, but I guess I'm a little skeptical that that's what's really been holding retail DVRs back. You're not asking people to get another box, you're asking them to replace one they already have (i.e., the cable STB).

Anyways, also keep in mind that not all DLNA(+DTCP) devices are created equal. Cable TV comes in as mpeg2 video. Roku and AppleTV boxes don't have hardware mpeg2 decoders. The usual solution for that is on-the-fly transcoding. I've used systems that do on-the-fly transcoding. It sort of works, but its not a great solution. It put up with it for a while with my MediaMVP knowing I was going to get a Sage HD extender soon later. I put up with it for a while with PlayOn because there was no other way to get Hulu and Netflix to work in SageTV. But I got sick of that quickly and got a Roku for each of my TVs.
reggie14 is offline  
post #5789 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 11:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
erickotz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
I hate to rain on your guy's parade, but DTCP doesn't really solve anything. We've been selling DTCP-based commercial solutions just because it's more of a standards-based body, rather than Microsoft, but it doesn't really do anything that wasn't doable with WMDRM. DTCP is slightly interesting because there are existing commercial devices (PS3, some TVs) which have support for it, but the UI is pretty much useless - you get no guide, no recordings, and poor channel navigation. Until that changes, I don't see it going anywhere.

Quality Assurance Manager, Ceton Corporation
erickotz is offline  
post #5790 of 7721 Old 02-13-2013, 11:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggie14 View Post

I'm not really sure if changes the market. The consumer demand for retail DVRs is what it is. If people were really that interested and willing to pay we would seen more companies like Moxi pop up.

Unless the problem is that people don't want to spend $100 on yet another box to connect to a TV. Certainly I could see it helping if people can use boxes they already have, but I guess I'm a little skeptical that that's what's really been holding retail DVRs back. You're not asking people to get another box, you're asking them to replace one they already have (i.e., the cable STB).

Anyways, also keep in mind that not all DLNA(+DTCP) devices are created equal. Cable TV comes in as mpeg2 video. Roku and AppleTV boxes don't have hardware mpeg2 decoders. The usual solution for that is on-the-fly transcoding. I've used systems that do on-the-fly transcoding. It sort of works, but its not a great solution. It put up with it for a while with my MediaMVP knowing I was going to get a Sage HD extender soon later. I put up with it for a while with PlayOn because there was no other way to get Hulu and Netflix to work in SageTV. But I got sick of that quickly and got a Roku for each of my TVs.

Most people don't even know that there's alternatives to the CableCo's STB's and DVR's.

Sammy2 is offline  
Closed Thread Home Theater Computers

Tags
Blu Ray Players

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off