<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Heath Roberts <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:htroberts@gmail.com">htroberts@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div dir="ltr"><div class="Ih2E3d">On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 2:26 PM, jedi <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jedi@mishnet.org" target="_blank">jedi@mishnet.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex">
Tivo boxes have always been pathetically weak boxes with some<br>
special acceleration hardware added. They are NOT general purpose<br>
machines and not something you would want to try and use as such.<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>I don't think anyone asked about replacing a desktop machine or database server with a TiVo box.<br clear="all"><br>The other side of this particular coin is that not much energy goes into making Myth code efficient, which puts users on a constant upgrade treadmill--Myth is sort of the Vista of FOSS, and if it takes fairly high-end hardware to run it, the decision-makers seem okay with that. <br>
<br>That doesn't match up with my own personal wishes--I'd like to be able to run the frontend, at least, on inexpensive, low-power, resource-limited hardware--but I'm not trying to say it's inherently good or bad, just that it is. </div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>My Athlon 1800 is still running just fine as my backend using 2 SD and 2 HD tuners. The hardware requirements have only gone up as the requirement for HD has become standard for playback. Myth itself hasn't required any newer hardware to do what it did years ago when I started using it except maybe for a little more memory.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Kevin </div></div></div>