<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Nick F <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nikos.f@gmail.com" target="_blank">nikos.f@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I'm adding a TV to my exercise room and need to build a new frontend -<br>
which is something I haven't done for a while, and I haven't seen any<br>
build recommendations on the list for a while.<br>
<br>
My last two frontends were built with Zotac ION motherboards in M350<br>
cases. Other than flash playback, these have worked out great using<br>
VDPAU.<br>
<br>
I'm looking for a recommendation for a build - all the usual<br>
characteristics - quiet, quick and cheap.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Just to help me understand. Why isn't one of the many many dozens of small internet TV devices a more appropriate frontend for some secondary TVs. I don't use Myth as a FE and probably only because I use Netflix and Amazon. I didn't particularly like Myth as a frontend 4 or 5 years ago and only use the BE for recording. Today we depend on DLNA and Mythweb from a Logitech Revue to interact with the backend. I don't know the current abilities of the Roku app for Myth but that would make a great small inexpensive MythTV viewer. I have a Roku or two so I should give it a try myself. We have a 3D BD player that does a great job as a DLNA player. It also gives us access to a great long list of streaming sources. And Smart TVs have DLNA and the ability to add / build apps. </div>
<div><br></div><div>So wouldn't it be an appropriate time to consider whether the Myth frontend is the most appropriate device behind our TVs. Just a though.</div></div>