[mythtv] Suggestion for improving SLOW channel changing inLiveTV.....

[Tom E. Craddock Jr.]

Peter Lee wrote:

>On 9/10/05, J. Donavan Stanley <jdonavan at jdonavan.net> wrote:
>  
>
>>Nobody wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>To have a petty argument about what a PVR is and question why someone would want to watch live TV _without_ a buffer, was amusing to say the least.  (it's called buffer-while-paused-only) and it works very well:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Its a half-assed implementation that ignores one of the major pieces of
>>functionality _every_ other PVR has, the ability to REWIND "live" TV to
>>catch something you missed.
>>    
>>
>
>OK, I understand now that I am the only one here who holds this
>opinion ;-), so I'll say this one more time and then drop it.  I'll
>reiterate that I am very happy with the way that MythTV works now and
>personally I do not find live TV channel changing to be unacceptably
>slow.
>
>My "non-techie" user group consists of my wife and 8-year old son. 
>They both watch a lot more TV than I do, and both love MythTV.  But
>they both also channel-surf, even after having owned a Tivo for years,
>and now having lived with MythTV for well over a year.
>
>Anyway, here my key observation of my wife and son: When they watch
>live TV, they find it natural to think that the program they are
>currently watching is *not* being recorded, and thus they do not
>expect things like pause and rewind to work.  In fact, my son
>consistently hits the "record" button on the remote control when/if he
>wants to pause the program and go get a snack.  Obviously, the mental
>model that he has built for a PVR is that it records programs, but
>only if you ask MythTV to do that, either via scheduling or via the
>record button.  By the way, I think my son learned this from my wife,
>who did the same thing with our old Tivo, and only recently realized
>that there was no need to do this.
>
>So, bottom line: I don't think I am in outer space on this one.  There
>are at least two people who find this model to be a natural one.  It
>furthermore is a model that would not affect me (as a rather geeky
>technie nerdy PVR user), so it wouldn't annoy me if MythTV (or Tivo)
>worked this way, or had an option to work this way.  And, finally, I
>think its implementation would be simpler than the dual-stream concept
>proposed by Cory and even potentially simpler than the "put timing in
>everywhere and shave a few ms here and there" concept.
>
>Well, I've said my piece on this topic.  I'm sure it won't really have
>an impact on anyone here, and I don't have time to implement this
>myself which means I can't live up to the "put up code or shut up"
>maxim.  But I thought it important to state the concept as clearly as
>possible, since it is clear that there are a lot of strong opinions on
>the subject of live TV, including my own.
>
>Peter
>
>  
>

But as you said, neither MythTV, not Tivo, and I can say for a fact, 
neither does the DVR/PVR from Scientific Atlantic follow the model your 
wife use to have and you son has.  To me this shows that the 
fault/problem/need for change doesnt come from all DVR/PVRs mentioned, 
but from the user. Their natural model goes against what is, for all 
intents and purposes, the model that has been adopted by most 
hardware/software in the industry.  Why keep re-inforcing an idea that 
is counter-current to the 'standard'?

Tom