AVS Forum banner

PCWorld's Article: "Build the ultimate Windows 8 home-theater PC for under $500"

4K views 82 replies 17 participants last post by  Mfusick 
#1 ·

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2048863/build-the-ultimate-windows-8-home-theater-pc-for-under-500.html

 

It's funny...if I where to have read this PCWorld post a couple of years ago, long before I delved into the HTPC world, I would be amazed that you could do everything mentioned in the article with a PC connected to your TV.

 

Nowadays, with the wisdom and awesomeness of Assasin, Renethx, Mfusick, greeneyez,and a ton of others here on AVS, the article is kinda passé (not knocking the author or anything...).

 

When I was reading the post, I was thinking to myself "cool, he covered the basics, but what about LAV & MadVR, what about streaming to extenders, what about SVP, can you bitstream with that setup, what about this and that..."

 

Then I remembered how far most hardcore HTPC hobbyists have come, and this kind of article is not really geared to us, which I guess is a good thing!
 
See less See more
#52 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by staknhalo  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/30#post_23763888


That's exactly what I'm talking about. There should be no talk about mad-vr or anything in a PCWorld HTPC build IMO. Wrong audience, or just plain beginners. Stuff like that would just scare them off most likely.

I am with you there.


It should be super easy to use for the newbie (meaning typical reader of PCWorld). But I think that HDMI is a must as its the standard for HD Video and Audio at this point.
 
#53 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/30#post_23763915


I am with you there.


It should be super easy to use for the newbie (meaning typical reader of PCWorld). But I think that HDMI is a must as its the standard for HD Video and Audio at this point.

Oh no, I agree that the HDMI thing is an oversight and should have been in the build - but that's all I can really say. The rest of it being coined an 'ultimate' HTPC build in a PCWorld article - is what I would expect/have no issues with TBH.


HDMI was overlooked because he put this together in 5 seconds without a second glance and it just doesn't surprise me is all.
 
#54 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/30#post_23763915


It should be super easy to use for the newbie (meaning typical reader of PCWorld). But I think that HDMI is a must as its the standard for HD Video and Audio at this point.

+1. An argument that suggesting a motherboard missing HDMI is "beginner" or "ok" is simply arguing for arguments sake. Not even my 2007 Panasonic plasma has a VGA input and my old Onkyo amp had at least S/PDIF. Any HDMI motherboard will have at least analog outputs if not S/PDIF.


I think though some of the replies to the author are unnecessarily harsh. Telling the author they "FAIL" because it's not a $100 streamer is ridiculous. If someone presented the author's build here as the first post of a thread asking for suggestions, would we reply "FAIL" or "hey, your motherboard is missing HDMI, what does your TV have for inputs?". I'd like to think we'd be respectful and helpful and make suggestions for a simple build and in my experience we usually are.
 
#55 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/30#post_23763955


+1. An argument that suggesting a motherboard missing HDMI is "beginner" or "ok" is simply arguing for arguments sake.

I don't think anyone argued it was OK. Just wasn't surprising he overlooked it in the 30 secs he took to make the parts list.
 
#56 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by staknhalo  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/30#post_23763999


I don't think anyone argued it was OK. Just wasn't surprising he overlooked it in the 30 secs he took to make the parts list.

Why even write the article then? Giving the OP an excuse for the omission due to "throwing it together" is poor form.


Let's put it this way...


Newbie reads article.


Newbie doesn't read the comments.


Newbie purchases all of the recommended parts.


Newbie builds HTPC.


Newbie goes to plug in his $150 Monster Cable HDMI cable and says, "WTH! This "Ultimate" HTPC doesn't even have a friggin HDMI!" (even a newbie knows that his appletv, bluray player, etc have a HDMI)


So in a way its actually a disservice to the HTPC community. I wish the author would have taken a little more time and maybe even (gasp!) actually built and tested the thing to ensure compatibility, list any caveats, etc.


On the other hand I am glad he wrote it because I am sure there are readers looking at it that had never even heard of the term HTPC before the article.
 
#58 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/30#post_23764045


So in a way its actually a disservice to the HTPC community. I wish the author would have taken a little more time and maybe even (gasp!) actually built and tested the thing to ensure compatibility, list any caveats, etc.

 
 

So true, that's my beef with the article...well said.
 
#59 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by staknhalo  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/30#post_23764077


Dude - no one is giving him an excuse and saying it's acceptable - I'm just not even caring enough to brandish my pitchfork over it is all; and where we differentiate apparently. He was corrected in the comments - how much sleep do you want to lose over it?

Not losing any but thanks for asking.
 
#60 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...-theater-pc-for-under-500/0_100#post_23763955


+1. An argument that suggesting a motherboard missing HDMI is "beginner" or "ok" is simply arguing for arguments sake. Not even my 2007 Panasonic plasma has a VGA input and my old Onkyo amp had at least S/PDIF. Any HDMI motherboard will have at least analog outputs if not S/PDIF.


I think though some of the replies to the author are unnecessarily harsh. Telling the author they "FAIL" because it's not a $100 streamer is ridiculous. If someone presented the author's build here as the first post of a thread asking for suggestions, would we reply "FAIL" or "hey, your motherboard is missing HDMI, what does your TV have for inputs?". I'd like to think we'd be respectful and helpful and make suggestions for a simple build and in my experience we usually are.

This is well said.


I think we usually would say "do you need HDMI? " (which is appropriate) If the OP does not, then hey... all good in da hood.



But that is a big difference versus writing an article to be published in perhaps the most popular computer magazine- for a target audience and segment that is "techie" considering most of the home theater products available for more than just a few years have been primarily based on HDMI ( AVR , TV, etc... )


It should be assumed a brand new HTPC build that is "ultimate" would require HDMI. How would you bitstream audio ? optical? Can that do HD audio ? or 7.1 ? (nope)


Anything "ultimate" really needs to support HDMI and specifically should support it for 3D, and HD audio (even if we can argue about the advanced video processing)


I think "ultimate" means it needs to support advanced video processing because in my opinion it's not "ultimate" if it does not. The term ultimate suggests what the word means:
Quote:
ul·ti·mate (lt-mt)

adj.


a. Of the greatest possible size or significance; maximum: Has the ultimate diamond been found?

b. Representing or exhibiting the greatest possible development or sophistication: the ultimate bicycle.

c. Utmost; extreme: the ultimate insult.

d. The greatest extreme; the maximum: actions that represented the ultimate in political expediency.

Using "ultimate" to me means it's going to represent the best or most sophisticated that is available today. That HTPC he built is weaker than your average noob build around here.


It really seems like people go different directions with these things. One side you have the energy conscious and budget conscious extremists looking for "ultimate" in the sense of power consumption, physical size, and smallest budget spent. Then you have "ultimate" in that the performance and user experience is representative of the best possible available today- this includes picture and sound quality, ease of use, and performance capabilities. Very different "ultimate" HTPC's though....


I reserve judgment on which is better. HTPC is a hobby and people should be able to enjoy it how they wish. I know which one I would like better though
 
#61 ·

Quote:
Build the ultimate Windows 8 home-theater PC for under $500

That's the title of the article. Windows 7 and GPUs (or other expensive not totally necessary components) need not apply.


I'd imagine the people who pay PC World to run ads want them trumping up Windows 8.
 
#63 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/60#post_23764210


yeah I have no issue with the choice of windows 8 - it's the newest and most popular OS available today. Putting that on it - I have zero objections about. It makes sense for a myriad of reasons. (even if I still use win 7 pro x64
)

The problem with the choice of Win8 is that 1) he didn't factor in the cost of the OS; 2) he didn't factor in the cost of the WMC add-on upgrade; 3) he didn't factor in the cost of the Pro version of Win8 that allows WMC to be installed. For the reason of keeping it under $500 then he should have went with Win7.
 
#64 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by bryansj  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...-theater-pc-for-under-500/0_100#post_23764227


The problem with the choice of Win8 is that 1) he didn't factor in the cost of the OS; 2) he didn't factor in the cost of the WMC add-on upgrade; 3) he didn't factor in the cost of the Pro version of Win8 that allows WMC to be installed. For the reason of keeping it under $500 then he should have went with Win7.

yeah. But that is why the author and the article suck though... that's what we are saying
 
#65 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/60#post_23764210


yeah I have no issue with the choice of windows 8 - it's the newest and most popular OS available today. Putting that on it - I have zero objections about. It makes sense for a myriad of reasons. (even if I still use win 7 pro x64
)

Not to get too far off track but I have been reading about how horrible the Win8 launch was and I was curious to see how it was being adopted as of late.


Looks like its still being crushed by Win7 and XP but very slowly improving. Still a fairly big disappointment for M$ though. Likely multi-factorial with the downward trend overall in desktop PC sales.



http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/09/02/windows-8-jumps-past-os-x-for-74-market-share
 
#66 ·
Well - also WINDOWS 7 has been sold for how many years? And windows 8 for how long ? I am pretty sure that when windows 8 is the age of windows 7 it should have more market share. Many people with windows 7 just are not "upgrading" or replacing their windows 7 machines just yet.


Windows 8 is a pretty poor reason all alone to purchase a new PC (or HTPC) in my opinion. I'd much more likely do it (and have) to get better hardware or performance and not just to get WIN8. Many windows 7 owners just are not ready yet. But windows 8 was different enough that many hardcore 7 users like me are hesistant to make the jump. I think if they kept the start menu and the traditional feel of 7 even if it was just a "win 7 mode" it would have increased the adoption rate.


It really is a pretty modern and high performance OS. Many windows 7 people bash on it because it's too different or they are not ready to upgrade but I don't think it's anywhere near as bad as some people say. It seems legit to me. I just hate being the early adopter because drivers and programs and such are PITA at first launch. I jumped into win7 after a year- and I am basically ready to jump into 8 anytime now but I am just not seeing a good deal on it yet. Plus I am really comfortable with my win7 and there is nothing to be gained with win8 from what I can see. Time will change things. I remember when people were still on XP when windows 7 came out.
 
#68 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/60#post_23764298


Well - also WINDOWS 7 has been sold for how many years? And windows 8 for how long ? I am pretty sure that when windows 8 is the age of windows 7 it should have more market share. Many people with windows 7 just are not "upgrading" or replacing their windows 7 machines just yet.


Windows 8 is a pretty poor reason all alone to purchase a new PC (or HTPC) in my opinion. I'd much more likely do it (and have) to get better hardware or performance and not just to get WIN8. Many windows 7 owners just are not ready yet. But windows 8 was different enough that many hardcore 7 users like me are hesistant to make the jump. I think if they kept the start menu and the traditional feel of 7 even if it was just a "win 7 mode" it would have increased the adoption rate.


It really is a pretty modern and high performance OS. Many windows 7 people bash on it because it's too different or they are not ready to upgrade but I don't think it's anywhere near as bad as some people say. It seems legit to me. I just hate being the early adopter because drivers and programs and such are PITA at first launch. I jumped into win7 after a year- and I am basically ready to jump into 8 anytime now but I am just not seeing a good deal on it yet. Plus I am really comfortable with my win7 and there is nothing to be gained with win8 from what I can see. Time will change things. I remember when people were still on XP when windows 7 came out.

I think the first reaction most Windows 7 or XP users have when trying Windows 8 is "WTF? How do I get to this or do that?" The complete overhaul in the UI has alienated a lot of desktop users and probably scared off potential customers due to it's total lack of intuitiveness. The thing about every previous Windows versions is that migrating to a new version may take a little orientation to learn the new features, but you could usually find your way around the system without too much difficulty. Windows 8 made us start over from scratch. It doesn't matter all that much how well it performs or how modern it looks if nobody can figure out how to use it. Replacing the Start button with the "Charm Bar" (dumbest name ever, BTW) was a major faux pas, IMHO. They needed to keep some familarity for current Windows users. I know there are 3rd party apps that will restore the Start button, but Microsoft should never have removed it in the first place.


With regards to Media Center, there is no difference for either OS version aside from the fact that Microsoft made every existing media extender obsolete except theirs. I thought this was a pretty cheap shot seeing as how Microsoft is dropping support for Media Center in upcoming releases. Other compatibility issues make me want to stick with Windows 7 for Media Center.


I bought a copy of Windows 8 for $40 from Staples the day it hit the stores. After using it I can honestly say I wouldn't pay more than $40 for it. Apple has been selling their OS software for a reasonable cost for quite some time. Considering Microsoft has the larger market share and almost holds a monopoly on desktop operating systems for the business community they could easily sell copies of Windows for under $50 and still make huge profits.


I'd like to see Microsoft take a step back and not try forcing a new OS on the public every few years. Most people don't switch operating systems for at least 5-6 years or even more. I tend to skip OS versions and install every other release.
 
#69 ·

Quote:
With regards to Media Center, there is no difference for either OS version aside from the fact that Microsoft made every existing media extender obsolete except theirs. I thought this was a pretty cheap shot seeing as how Microsoft is dropping support for Media Center in upcoming releases. Other compatibility issues make me want to stick with Windows 7 for Media Center.

There is a huge difference in price though, HTPC users should go win7 on this alone.
 
#70 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/30#post_23763955


Not even my 2007 Panasonic plasma has a VGA input and my old Onkyo amp had at least S/PDIF.

Our 2012 60" LG has VGA, 2010 24" Sceptre has VGA, 2009 19" RCA has VGA, 2008 24" Dynex has VGA, 2007 42" Dynex has VGA, 2000 Denon amp had analog inputs for all 5 channels, and 2012 Denon has HDMI, TosLink, SPDIF, but only stereo analog.
 
#71 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiedgod  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/60#post_23766873


Our 2012 60" LG has VGA, 2010 24" Sceptre has VGA, 2009 19" RCA has VGA, 2008 24" Dynex has VGA, 2007 42" Dynex has VGA, 2000 Denon amp had analog inputs for all 5 channels, and 2012 Denon has HDMI, TosLink, SPDIF, but only stereo analog.

I am not sure what your point is as it relates to the "Ultimate HTPC" article. Do you believe having no HDMI in a modern HTPC is preferable or on par with HDMI?. Is VGA preferred? Is two cables (VGA + RCA) is better than one? What is it?


It's clearly an omission on the author's part -- an oversight. What makes you want to defend it?
 
#72 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkro  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/60#post_23766581


There is a huge difference in price though, HTPC users should go win7 on this alone.
That all depends on when you bought Windows 8 and what you paid for it. Lots of people got in on the $15 deal with a free license for WMC when Windows 8 first came out. I bought my copy for $40 and got five free WMC license keys, which I'm told still work (I gave one away recently and was told as much).


Now, if you bought Win 8 Pro at the current retail price plus the $10 for WMC, it would depend on which version of Windows 7 you wanted to use. Newegg currently has the retail copy of Win 8 Pro upgrade for only $70 with free shipping if you have a .edu e-mail address. Otherwise, the 64-bit OEM version is $140. I've seen Home Premium for about $70 so that would probably be your best deal. I don't know if the deal offered in the bulk purchase thread is still available, but that also looks like a good discount if you can get it.
 
#73 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_video  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...-theater-pc-for-under-500/0_100#post_23766116


Replacing the Start button with the "Charm Bar" (dumbest name ever, BTW) was a major faux pas, IMHO. They needed to keep some familarity for current Windows users. I know there are 3rd party apps that will restore the Start button, but Microsoft should never have removed it in the first place

I agree with this for most users. It doesn't really seem to matter for an HTPC (at least the way I use one). For me it didn't make any difference at all as my main htpc/server/general computer since I haven't used the start menu since XP. I typically don't even ask programs to install a start menu shortcut (when given the choice). If I'm looking for a new program I'll use the desktop shortcut, and move that to the taskbar or delete it if I don't really use it. Everything is a taskbar shortcut for me. If it's not there, I fire up explorer (win+e) and start looking in the program files folders. Now if only they didn't have to x86 and 64 folders separately . . .


P.S. - I think you mean start screen? When you press the window key in W8 you are taken to the start screen. The charms bar is for settings and shutdown
 
#74 ·
Win8 would be super cool for HTPC if the Metro/Modern UI was remote control friendly. I'd like to give a try on a 10' interface with the new Logitech keyboard that has a trackpad (supposedly) optimized for Win 8 gestures. A Live TV metro app and a Guide metro app would be enough for me to no longer care about WMC.
 
#75 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...-theater-pc-for-under-500/0_100#post_23767421


Win8 would be super cool for HTPC if the Metro/Modern UI was remote control friendly

I always wonder what is meant by this statement? What part needs to be remote friendly?


For example, I mapped the "win" key and "alt+esc" to my Flirc remote's "green" and "exit" buttons. I left back mapped to "backspace"


If you use "alt+esc" to exit you are returned to your previous running app (which is always XBMC for me)


The win key lets me bring up the start screen which can be navigated through with the arrow keys


I've also always had "tab" and "alt+tab" mapped to my remote in addition to "win+1" which is where I have the XBMC shortcut on my taskbar. I strive to never use keyboards/mice with my HTPCs. I use my laptop for normal computer stuff (ripping, webui mgmt, browsing, etc)


The only place I found myself needing a keyboard for HTPC usage was Youtube, so I have yatse installed on our Nexus 7 (quasi HTPC remote and browsing device for the house). I have all youtube links set to open with "Yatse" rather than the Android browser or Youtube app. Then I just hand it to whomever is looking for a youtube video (usually visiting family/friends) with the browser open to a google video search of youtube, and I tell/show them that clicking any link opens that video on the bigscreen
 
#76 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Slayer  /t/1491339/pcworlds-article-build-t...ome-theater-pc-for-under-500/60#post_23767761


I always wonder what is meant by this statement? What part needs to be remote friendly?


For example, I mapped the "win" key and "alt+esc" to my Flirc remote's "green" and "exit" buttons. I left back mapped to "backspace"


If you use "alt+esc" to exit you are returned to your previous running app (which is always XBMC for me)


The win key lets me bring up the start screen which can be navigated through with the arrow keys


I've also always had "tab" and "alt+tab" mapped to my remote in addition to "win+1" which is where I have the XBMC shortcut on my taskbar. I strive to never use keyboards/mice with my HTPCs. I use my laptop for normal computer stuff (ripping, webui mgmt, browsing, etc)


The only place I found myself needing a keyboard for HTPC usage was Youtube, so I have yatse installed on our Nexus 7 (quasi HTPC remote and browsing device for the house). I have all youtube links set to open with "Yatse" rather than the Android browser or Youtube app. Then I just hand it to whomever is looking for a youtube video (usually visiting family/friends) with the browser open to a google video search of youtube, and I tell/show them that clicking any link opens that video on the bigscreen

Being able to map a remote's buttons to keyboard shortcuts is not the same as an app/interface being remote friendly. Being remote friendly means it is completely usable with what you would find on a non-programmable MS WMC remote - everything could be done with the Up, Down, Left, Right, Enter keys - or any additional keys that would come standard on a regular WMC remote. Using a programmable remote with keyboard shortcuts is in essence the same as just using a keyboard instead of a remote - just a weird form factor keyboard.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top