[mythtv-users] MythTV vs XBMC

[Mike Perkins]

On 07/05/14 23:57, Matt Emmott wrote:
>
> 4) Lack of a decent ARM or $100 solution - We see all of these threads on
> "would this work with Myth" and "why not this cheap box", but nobody can
> ever get them to work. Meanwhile a Roku device can render 1080p video for
> $50 with a remote! Why isn't there a low-end version of Myth FE tailored to
> some specific devices? If somebody came out with a Myth front end device
> with a custom build of MythTV for $199 or lower, I'd buy it in a second.
> Why hasn't this happened yet? Resources? Funding? Lack of interest? Surely
> somebody can build a no-frills FE interface similar to a Roku or Boxee Box,
> no?
>
There's a very good reason for this, and that is that almost every $100 box has 
been designed and made to be as cheap as possible - that may mean less RAM or a 
processor which can only /just/ manage the media formats it claims to support.

The big point is that most of these devices are made with non-standard chips 
and/or non-standard architectures which means that you would need to have the 
complete specs of *every* device on the board in order to write (or port) a 
front end to them.

You won't get that without signing a NDA and probably forking out $bucks for the 
privilege. By the time you've gotten your wad of specs and made a start on 
adapting the frontend logic to this device it will be out of production and the 
manufacturer will have moved on the the next Ooooh! Shiny! he thinks the punters 
will want to buy.

Short answer: diminishing returns. Too much effort and cash for what would be a 
small number of users. It makes more sense in writing a front-end for 
architectures that are easy for your potential users to obtain and program. Note 
that ARM /isn't/ a single architecture: there are significant differences 
between many of the CPU models.

-- 

Mike Perkins