AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › Ceton Q DVR-HTPC Info Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ceton Q DVR-HTPC Info Thread - Page 4

post #91 of 324
4/5/12 at 5:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowbiscuit View Post

There's no way it will be in that range, it will never sell to more than a very small niche.

My prediction? $750, and it will kill Tivo Elites at that price (and which can be had around that price with lifetime, btw - Elites are on sale for less than $399 now at some retailers and lifetime with a discount code is $399). But I still think the BR player is an unnecessary added cost to the box.

One thing you gotta realize is it's a SFF x86/x64 computer. And not a crappy atom, or zacate system. They don't manufacture most of the hardware that goes into it, like i'm sure Tivo does. So they can't really reduce costs by making manufacturing cheaper.. at least not by as much as someone who designs everything in the box.

Maybe when windows 8 comes out, and it runs on cheap ARM systems it will be possible to make a much cheaper system?
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #92 of 324
4/5/12 at 6:25am
Honestly what I want to know is if they are going to sell their 'Media Center' software stand alone. I would definitely pay $40 for something more integrated than the WMC/MB combo (nothing against the MB guys - they do an awesome job within the limits of WMC).

xnappo
Reply
Reply
post #93 of 324
4/5/12 at 8:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowbiscuit View Post

My prediction? $750, and it will kill Tivo Elites at that price (and which can be had around that price with lifetime, btw - Elites are on sale for less than $399 now at some retailers and lifetime with a discount code is $399). But I still think the BR player is an unnecessary added cost to the box.

Good point. But I doubt the part about it "killing" Tivo at $750, because with TiVo, you can buy just the box and have a monthly subscription, so to many people the TiVo will seem to cost only $399, since many people don't register the monthly cost as being significant. They'll just see them on amazon.com, hmmm, $399 or $750? I'll go with the $399.

Ceton will need to shave every dollar they can off the price of the Q if they hope to be competitive with TiVo outside of the enthusiast market.
Reply
Reply
post #94 of 324
4/5/12 at 9:27am
Which is why I think they should cut out the BR - it's a whole-house DVR first and foremost, with some apps thrown in to make it more of a 'one box' solution. But most enthusiasts already have BR wherever they want it, and the Q will likely be too expensive to buy for more than one set.

Have it play BR rips from network servers, sure, but there's no need for a drive unless they can source them for dirt cheap (less than $20).

If this box comes in higher than $750, it will be a tough sell outside of a small niche of enthusiasts. And it's still not a guaranteed win at that price. I've seen reports that Digeo/Arris sold less than 5000 units of their Moxi whole-home DVR, for example, which was priced roughly at this level (but only 3 tuner).
Reply
Reply
post #95 of 324
4/5/12 at 4:49pm
I think $750 is too high for much main stream support. Regardless of what it can do.
Reply
Reply
post #96 of 324
4/5/12 at 6:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim2100 View Post

Good point. But I doubt the part about it "killing" Tivo at $750, because with TiVo, you can buy just the box and have a monthly subscription, so to many people the TiVo will seem to cost only $399, since many people don't register the monthly cost as being significant. They'll just see them on amazon.com, hmmm, $399 or $750? I'll go with the $399.

Ceton will need to shave every dollar they can off the price of the Q if they hope to be competitive with TiVo outside of the enthusiast market.

But with a Tivo, they don't offer an extender, so even if it had 8 tuners it's not a whole house solution.

$750 is way too high for the Q. I really don't them selling many at that price.
Reply
Reply
post #97 of 324
4/5/12 at 6:52pm
A TiVo IP STB Extender has already been announced. Although the description and details are very vague at this point.

Also on the way is an IP set-top box coming to retail that sounds very much like the TiVo Preview multiroom extender
http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/23/t...p-set-top-box/
Reply
Reply
post #98 of 324
4/6/12 at 6:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan_CoxPHX View Post

A TiVo IP STB Extender has already been announced. Although the description and details are very vague at this point.

Also on the way is an IP set-top box coming to retail that sounds very much like the TiVo Preview multiroom extender
http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/23/t...p-set-top-box/

I used to like Tivo. In fact I had used the series 1 for about 6 years. The problem is they are way behind in terms of inovation these days.

1 - They should have had an extender years ago. It's still not even out so it's not exactly an option today.

2 - 4 tuners? I'm already at 8. Back when i had gotten a Moxi, they only offered 2.

I still have a grandfathered Tivo series 1 sitting around where I can transfer lifetime for free to another box, but have been underwhelmed by their offerings.
Reply
Reply
post #99 of 324
4/6/12 at 7:36am
4 tuners is plenty for the vast majority, remember we are a niche. The current cable Moto DCX3501-M 'whole home' DVR still only has 2, I think. I don't have a problem with the Elite only having 4, but it would have been better to have had 6 to maximize use of the Cablecard of course.

I can't see how the Q will be around $500 (which is what y'all are implying it would take to be successful) with the hardware it has and the fact that it will be a limited market, low production run device.

Anyway, Tivo has tried to compete against cable DVRs for years now but too many people want to rent and have the cableCo take care of everything for them, even if the DVR they're using is junk. The big advantage the Q will have is no monthly fees, but the upfront cost will make it limited even if it is $500.
Reply
Reply
post #100 of 324
4/6/12 at 7:56am
Seems like some cable co's are teaming up with Tivo to allow OnDemand content; maybe that'll eventually trickle down to Ceton/SD/etc.

In any case, as long as Ceton marketing does a good job illustrating payoff within X months vs. renting, it should be pretty convincing to most folks.
Reply
Reply
post #101 of 324
4/6/12 at 10:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowbiscuit View Post

4 tuners is plenty for the vast majority, remember we are a niche. The current cable Moto DCX3501-M 'whole home' DVR still only has 2, I think. I don't have a problem with the Elite only having 4, but it would have been better to have had 6 to maximize use of the Cablecard of course.

I can't see how the Q will be around $500 (which is what y'all are implying it would take to be successful) with the hardware it has and the fact that it will be a limited market, low production run device.

Agreed. 4 is probably enough for most. It's just that Tivo is always behind the curve. Had they offered 4 tuners 2 years ago with the option of a media extender, I would have gone with that solution instead of a Moxi with 3 tuners and an extender). Since as you noted, cable cards support 6 streams you have to wonder why they didn't offer 6.

I seriously doubt the Q will be $500. It might however be around $600. If it's much higher than that, I don't think they will sell many and it will go the way of the Moxi (they sold about 2000 units and then discontinued it).
Reply
Reply
post #102 of 324
4/6/12 at 12:04pm
I don't get why everyone is using Tivo as the benchmark to compare the to the Q. Can the Tivo play blu-ray disks? Can it play mkv files? Does it have unified search of personal/online media?

The Q is a commoditized HTPC. There's a reason I have an HTPC and don't have a Tivo...it can only do a fraction of what an HTPC can.
Reply
Reply
post #103 of 324
4/6/12 at 3:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowbiscuit View Post

Which is why I think they should cut out the BR - it's a whole-house DVR first and foremost, with some apps thrown in to make it more of a 'one box' solution. But most enthusiasts already have BR wherever they want it, and the Q will likely be too expensive to buy for more than one set.

Have it play BR rips from network servers, sure, but there's no need for a drive unless they can source them for dirt cheap (less than $20).

If this box comes in higher than $750, it will be a tough sell outside of a small niche of enthusiasts. And it's still not a guaranteed win at that price. I've seen reports that Digeo/Arris sold less than 5000 units of their Moxi whole-home DVR, for example, which was priced roughly at this level (but only 3 tuner).

Personally I actually kinda like the BD drive, but it does add patent/IP costs for playback of BD content and I sure hope their BD playback software works more like a dedicated BD player, and less like a buggy windows app? Time will tell.

Regardless, I will likely pick up one of these things, not that I need it, but just because it looks like a really nice deck.

Now if it could mount NFS shares and present a unified playback front end for libraries of ripped BD's/DVD's/ts's/MKV's that would be a killer feature.

Imagine 6 tuners recording while playing back that ripped copy of the Star Wars BD's located on your file server located in the basement through CAT5/6. Your own Kaleidescope without the excessive price. I'm sure it wont be able to do this though. Maybe Gen2 Q (remember those engineered revenue streams companies use).
Reply
Reply
post #104 of 324
4/6/12 at 3:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcruse View Post

I don't get why everyone is using Tivo as the benchmark to compare the to the Q. Can the Tivo play blu-ray disks? Can it play mkv files? Does it have unified search of personal/online media?

The Q is a commoditized HTPC. There's a reason I have an HTPC and don't have a Tivo...it can only do a fraction of what an HTPC can.

True, but the Q appears to be a device squarely targeted to compete with Tivo's for those who want a small, quiet device which can record premium content with more than 4 tuners, provide a whole home capability, without having to worrk about dll hell and the "wait, I have to install PowerDVD to get codec X, then unregister yousuck.dll, then install service pack 1,000,000,000, then reboot in order to get mkv's with H.264 & AC3 to playback at 23.976 and bitstream to my receiver" (I did exxagerate a bit there)
Reply
Reply
post #105 of 324
4/6/12 at 4:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by qz3fwd View Post

Imagine 6 tuners recording while playing back that ripped copy of the Star Wars BD's located on your file server located in the basement through CAT5/6. Your own Kaleidescope without the excessive price. I'm sure it wont be able to do this though. Maybe Gen2 Q (remember those engineered revenue streams companies use).

Of course it will be able to do that...why wouldn't it? Any HTPC has been able to do that for years now. You do realize the CETON Q is an HTPC, right?
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 324
4/9/12 at 11:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcruse View Post


Of course it will be able to do that...why wouldn't it? Any HTPC has been able to do that for years now. You do realize the CETON Q is an HTPC, right?

Whats important is if the extenders will be able to do it. And there had been no mention of the q having the ability to connect to a backend file server via SMB/ntfs to support this. Let's hope it does or that kinda kills the whole thing for me.
Reply
Reply
post #107 of 324
4/10/12 at 6:56am
I'm a bit concerned about the apparent lack of wireless connectivity. It's impractical to run cat5 cable to my router from the target tv (or other tv's). I bought a pair of NetGear MOCA units. Since I have 8 outlets fed with cable tv, I had installed a high end drop amp several years ago. The drop amp only supports up to 1000mhz bandwidth so basically killed the MOCA signal. I had to put a 2000mhz splitter before the drop amp and feed the den tv with a tap from the passive splitter. While MOCA is now passed to that outlet, I'm concerned that using a Ceton Q on other outlets will be problematic since the other outlets are fed by the drop amp. I've been unable to find a drop amp that is MOCA compatible. In testing the passive splitter, it seems that my InfiniTV card does not have a high enough signal strength and/or poor signal to noise to work properly, although it now does if connected to the drop amp. It looks like I'll have issues if I can't find a MOCA compatible drop amp.
Reply
Reply
post #108 of 324
4/10/12 at 8:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by m82a1pa View Post

I'm a bit concerned about the apparent lack of wireless connectivity. It's impractical to run cat5 cable to my router from the target tv (or other tv's). I bought a pair of NetGear MOCA units. Since I have 8 outlets fed with cable tv, I had installed a high end drop amp several years ago. The drop amp only supports up to 1000mhz bandwidth so basically killed the MOCA signal. I had to put a 2000mhz splitter before the drop amp and feed the den tv with a tap from the passive splitter. While MOCA is now passed to that outlet, I'm concerned that using a Ceton Q on other outlets will be problematic since the other outlets are fed by the drop amp. I've been unable to find a drop amp that is MOCA compatible. In testing the passive splitter, it seems that my InfiniTV card does not have a high enough signal strength and/or poor signal to noise to work properly, although it now does if connected to the drop amp. It looks like I'll have issues if I can't find a MOCA compatible drop amp.

Wireless isn't always going to be stable enough, or may not even work. It would just introduce more problems for Ceton to deal with. Ever see the size of the shows recorded by media center? they are huge! I doubt streaming that much data over wireless would work well. It's hard enough trying to get reliable streams of ripped and compressed movies over wireless. I have most of my TV shows and movies ripped on my NAS, and I can't even reliably wireless-stream HD shows (compressed) to a Roku 2 XS without buffering happening constantly.

And if the customer really wants to try wireless, they can always go with wireless bridges, or possibly usb wireless devices if the Q isn't totally locked down.
Reply
Reply
post #109 of 324
4/10/12 at 9:14am
You really, really don't want the server (Q) on wireless. As noted wireless is troublesome enough for a single stream, it's basically a non-starter for a server which needs to be able to support many streams. The amount of data being transferred to/from a server could very easily swamp a wireless connection.

Consider the case of an extender watching a BD, you've got potential for 50Mbps going from a network share into the Q, and that same 50Mbps going to the client, both over WiFi, and since (I don't think) WiFi is full duplex, that's effectively 100Mbps of bandwith that needs to be 100% reliable, and even 802.11n is essentially incapable of that, and that's just one client.

Now the extenders (other thread) are sort of a different story, since there you've only got one thread, and it's not unreasonable (though still not recommended) to expect wireless to be "OK".
Reply
Reply
post #110 of 324
4/10/12 at 9:17am
I used to have the buffering problem as well. What seemed to have cured it was when I installed an Intel 1GB ethernet card in my PC. My router is a LinkSys E4200V1(with 1GB wired ports as well as wireless). Since this router is in the basement near an exterior wall (at the cable service), I couldn't reliably get wireless connectivity on the other end of the house on the first floor where my Roku box, HP WMC extender and my Vizio TV w/wireless are located. I set up my previous Belkin wireless router (also with 1GB wired ports as well as wireless) up as an access point, and ran cat5 to the LinkSys router. The Belkin router is located in the basement underneath the first floor den where the other equipment is located. I now have zero buffering issues using Roku, and WMC recorded HD TV streaming from my PC.
Reply
Reply
post #111 of 324
4/10/12 at 10:04am
Ceton doesn't want to take support calls for wireless issues on the Q, and I can't say I blame them. It's always been one of those deals with HD streaming where if you're lucky you can make it work near 100% reliably, but it's never guaranteed. Add 6 tuners to the mix, all of them possibly streaming full HD, and you can see the problem.

Having said that, this is another one of those 'advanced mode' questions where it would be nice if it could handle third-party USB wireless NICs in an unsupported by Ceton way. Same deal as with ATSC tuners, in other words.

But it's probably easier just to use Ethernet to wireless bridges if you're determined to go wireless because of access or whatever.
Reply
Reply
post #112 of 324
4/10/12 at 10:13am
Point taken. I had just about given up on the wireless. Since I've got the MOCA unit working, I'll probably connect it to an ethernet switch and run the whole entertainment setup through it. Providing I can afford a Q when they come available :>)
Reply
Reply
post #113 of 324
4/16/12 at 2:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by m82a1pa View Post

I used to have the buffering problem as well. What seemed to have cured it was when I installed an Intel 1GB ethernet card in my PC. My router is a LinkSys E4200V1(with 1GB wired ports as well as wireless). Since this router is in the basement near an exterior wall (at the cable service), I couldn't reliably get wireless connectivity on the other end of the house on the first floor where my Roku box, HP WMC extender and my Vizio TV w/wireless are located. I set up my previous Belkin wireless router (also with 1GB wired ports as well as wireless) up as an access point, and ran cat5 to the LinkSys router. The Belkin router is located in the basement underneath the first floor den where the other equipment is located. I now have zero buffering issues using Roku, and WMC recorded HD TV streaming from my PC.

I don't know how your current setup is working out but I'm glad you got it working. Considering the E4200 only transfers at 350Mbps wirelessly and I'm not sure what the Belkin does because you didn't give the model number you shouldn't really be getting a solid connecting unless you're streaming really compressed stuff. I'm surprised any wireless connection is working out for you.

If your Belkin is directly under all your equipment why not just drill a hole straight down and wire Cat5 or Cat6 to the Belkin?
Reply
Reply
post #114 of 324
4/16/12 at 4:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonkeyOnCrack View Post

I don't know how your current setup is working out but I'm glad you got it working. Considering the E4200 only transfers at 350Mbps wirelessly and I'm not sure what the Belkin does because you didn't give the model number you shouldn't really be getting a solid connecting unless you're streaming really compressed stuff. I'm surprised any wireless connection is working out for you.

If your Belkin is directly under all your equipment why not just drill a hole straight down and wire Cat5 or Cat6 to the Belkin?

E4200 is a 450Mbs router (on the 5GHz band).
Reply
Reply
post #115 of 324
4/17/12 at 7:01pm
Just make one without a bluray player and keep under four bills or I am forced to go with the Ceton htpc tuner card or Ceton USB and force my wife and toddler to learn the system without pulling what little hair I have left out.
Reply
Reply
post #116 of 324
4/18/12 at 5:50am
I think you all overestimate the cost of adding Blu-ray. You can go out and buy a standalone BD player for under $100, that means the drive, licenses, and "software" have to be significantly less than $100 for one of those players (considering they've got to have storage, SOCs, case, PSU, remote too). It's probably more for Ceton given low volumes and a PC environment (so playback "software") but I'd still say it should be less than $100, probably a lot less.
Reply
Reply
post #117 of 324
4/18/12 at 6:12am
But the point is that there's little need for a BD player in a DVR, especially one that's intended for whole-house use with extenders. All it does is add cost to benefit the few that don't already have BD.
Reply
Reply
post #118 of 324
4/18/12 at 6:17am
With how many here I see going to extraordinary measures to not need more than one box, I'd say it's value even for those who already have a BD player, to be able to eliminate that box/complexity from the setup.

And it's not a "DVR", it's a whole house, heck even beyond whole house with their companion apps, media "system". Realistically, if it does what they say, you should never need to use anything else to consume media in your house, not a BD player, not a Roku, etc.

If people just want a DVR they'll get one from their cable company, this thing is taking aim at people who want a more integrated, more complete system/experience.
Reply
Reply
post #119 of 324
4/18/12 at 7:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

With how many here I see going to extraordinary measures to not need more than one box, I'd say it's value even for those who already have a BD player, to be able to eliminate that box/complexity from the setup.

And it's not a "DVR", it's a whole house, heck even beyond whole house with their companion apps, media "system". Realistically, if it does what they say, you should never need to use anything else to consume media in your house, not a BD player, not a Roku, etc.

If people just want a DVR they'll get one from their cable company, this thing is taking aim at people who want a more integrated, more complete system/experience.

+1

I'm interested in the Q to replace my aging, and temperamental HTPC (which is my only blu-ray player). I really don't understand all the people complaining about it having blu-ray, because they already have a player. There's huge value in an integrated interface for all my media, including ripped movies, discs, Internet streaming, etc. WMC got close, but really dropped the ball with Internet content.
Reply
Reply
post #120 of 324
4/18/12 at 7:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcruse View Post

+1

i'm interested in the q to replace my aging, and temperamental htpc (which is my only blu-ray player). I really don't understand all the people complaining about it having blu-ray, because they already have a player. There's huge value in an integrated interface for all my media, including ripped movies, discs, internet streaming, etc. Wmc got close, but really dropped the ball with internet content.

+10
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Home Theater Computers

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › Ceton Q DVR-HTPC Info Thread