Linux Looms Large in DVRs, PVRs

An anonymous reader writes "According to an article at LinuxDevices there's a new fanless digital entertainment center reference design based on Linux and the MythTV open source DVR (digital video recorder) software. The 'Royal Linux Media Center' runs ESG's Royal Linux OS on a Transmeta development board based on its Efficeon chip. Linux has been increasingly popular in DVRs and PVRs, with examples including TiVo (of course), HP's recently unveiled Linux media hub, i3's Mood box, Interact-TV's Telly, Siemens' Speedstream, VWB's MediaReady 4000, Amino's AmiNet500, Sharp's Galileo, Dream-Multimedia-Tv's Dreambox, NEC's AX10, and Sony's CoCoon, to name a few."

Re:Can any of these

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would anyone care?

Re:Might DRM be the mighty blow?

[cbrocious]

No, it will not be.

They don't have to put it in hardware as long as they close the source for their software. DRM can be done on Linux, just not in opensource software.

Ouch! Bill must be upset

[Ridgelift]

Over the last 5 years Microsoft and their cronies have been crowing about who's going to "own the livingroom". The idea has been to get away from the PC and onto the TV.

I'm sure Linux making such deep inroads isn't going to sit well with Gates and Ballmer. I'm also sure they will attack Linux with all their legal and marketing muscle. Expect to see a bloodbath over this one.

Why not VIA

[SunFan]

Some of VIA's CPUs have built-in compression and encryption hardware that would seem perfect for a DVR.

Why so special?

[BobSutan]

Wht do manufacturers keep coming up with special names and looks for their PVR/DVRs? Why not take the approach that made VCRs ubiqutous and have a general design that everyone knows and will not be afraid to buy. If everytime someone walks into a store and sees 10 different versions of what are essentially the same device, they're going to inevitably get confused. Its already tough enough getting folks to shed their VCRs for a digital replacement so why compound the issue? In my opinion commodidty and simplicity is what will drive the DVR/PVR market to the levels of market penetration (or saturation if you will) that VCRs have already achieved. Whenever something whiz-bang enters the market this always seems to happen and is eventually later "fixed" by the companies that make it simple enough for Joe Sixpack to own and operate, which is a point I hope we're quickly approaching. Until then the standalone DVR/PVRs will be a fractured market fighting to stay alive. Don't get me wrong, I love the ability to space & time-shift my stuff in a digial format, but too many options/features can lead to a divergence in the selling points that may end up killing any advanced funtionality they offer (assuming costs don't do the trick beforehand).

Re:and still no ATI AIW support

[MBCook]

Blame ATI. Hauppage supports Linux. I don't know if they write the drivers, or if they just tell people what they need to know, but the drivers are there.

Your beef is with ATI. I have an All-In-Wonder 3D Pro AGP 8mb card. This is from when AGP was first introduced. Pentium II era. There is STILL no decent TV input support that I could even find under Linux. It was a ton of hacking and messing around with beta/cvs drivers the last time I looked (a few months ago). If ATI would make the drivers so you could use your card, things would be fine. They make bianary closed source drivers so you can use 3D, why can't they do it for TV input too? Ask 'em, I'd like to know the answer. They also refuse to tell people what they need to know to make the apropriate video capture drivers, let alone 3D and such.

The solution? Buy video capture stuff from Hauppage, or anyone else who supports Linux. Buy 3D stuff from nVidia (who at least gives great 3D support for all their cards) or someone else who supports their cards well under Linux (Matrox has good Linux drivers, don't they?).

In short: DON'T BUY ATI FOR LINUX USE. It's that simple.

Re:Ouch! Bill must be upset

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the most appropriate comment from television and satellite companies to Microsoft would be "Your reputation precedes you."

Re:Neat, but in violation of patent laws.. ie ille

[Anonymous Coward]

any commercial implementation would be in violation of international patent law.

Unless, of course, the commercial company simply paid for a license for the patents!

Re:HP aint cool

[ColMustard]

HP is a whore like IBM. They'll sell anything to get your money. They don't care if it's Windows, Linux, UNIX, x86, RISC, mainframe, whatever. If it sends bucks their way, it'll be in their catalog.

Yes, you're right. How dare these rotten companies try to earn money! We have too many businesses trying to sell stuff to consumers in order to make money. The nerve! What whores.

Seriously though, you are a moron. Why should companies care about what software their devices run but for the fact of profit. That's what companies strive to do (make profit) and it doesn't make them whores for doing so (at least not in America). If a company thinks that by using Windows (or anything else) they will get a higher profit then it should be expected that it's the "right" and logical choice, especially considering that choosing Windows is neither illegal or immoral.

If you as the consumer have a problem with a product (i.e. it runs Windows) then that's your own bias and it doesn't make the company a "whore" (except perhaps in your own biased mind). The choice you can make is to not buy the product (perhaps to try to punish them), but if the company has a decent market research staff, they will have seen it coming.