Mailing List Archive: MythTV: Users

Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

brandon+myth at linuxis

Oct 19, 2004, 8:53 AM

Post #1 of 19 (20741 views)
Permalink

Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more

Here are some answers that questions that many people are going to be
asking/re-asking about the pcHDTV hd-3000 card, and to save confusion...

Q: Why the HD-3000 card?

A: The HD-2000 card used older components that are now obsolete.

Q: Is the HD-3000 card better?

A: You could say slightly, but not much that anyone would notice really.
The new chip has better algorithms to reduce multi-path that can cause
some signal problems, but ATSC will always be plagued with multi-path
problems because of it's design. (And the only way to fix it is to
choose another spec, which isn't going to happen now... Also I've found
that you'll likely never get good reception if you antenna isn't
perfectly still, so say goodbye to palm TV's and car TV's).

Q: Will the HD-3000 let me watch HD cable?

A: Shortly yes, but right now no. pcHDTV has the micro code that is used
for decode cable signals. This is what prevented the HD-2000 from
allowing users to watch HD cable - the HD-2000 card does support QAM,
but pcHDTV was not able to get the micro code, but this still could
happen, but don't hold your breath. -- Someone could /guess/ the micro
code but good luck because you'll need it.

Also, just because you can decode the HD cable does not mean you can
watch it. You can only watch unencrypted cable. If cable providers
decide to encrypt signals and then sell special set top boxes that know
how to decrypt that signal you'll not be able to watch it with the
HD-3000 card. Whether your cable provider sends plan old QAM or
encrypted QAM varries greatly. Call your cable provider to know for
sure (But be aware that the customer service person may just tell you
yes because that's what they would assume...) Also, only some channels
could be encrypted and others may not be.

In some markets you could have 0% encrypted, in others it could be 100%.
Nation wide it's around 70% not 30% is from people I have spoken with.

As for when the HD-3000 card will have QAM support, my personal
guess (And it is a guess) would be 1-2 months.

Q: Does the HD-3000 have anything else new?

A: Yes, it has composite and svga video in. The audio out for the NTSC
tuner also has an external jack and it is stereo, as the HD-2000 was
internal and only mono.

Q: How long until Myth supports the HD-3000 card?

A: How does Now sound? I spent a few hours over at pcHDTV a couple
weeks ago to built a myth box. I was given base fedora box with the
driver for the HD-3000 card compiled and loaded into the kernel. I
grabbed the latest CVS of Myth and went through the setup as I do on the
HD-2000 cards and it worked right off, nothing special.

Q: What about windows drivers?

A: There are plans for windows drivers, but it will probably be a few
months before we see them.

Q: Can I use these cards after July 1st 2005?

A: Yes you can use them, they are "grandfathered" into the new
regulations. It will always be completely legal to use them. The card
ignores the copy right bit and if a show has this bit enabled, the
card doesn't care and will save the stream in full quality anyway.

Q: Can I get a card after July 1st 2005?

A: This becomes a very gray area. From what I have heard, the
regulation prohibits you from SELLING devices cross STATE boundries that
do not follow the new regulations. From what I hear, if you assemble
a HD tuner yourself, it is still legal. I know though that the
HD-3000 card will not be sold after July 1st 2005 if the EFF and other
groups don't win the case to fight the broadcast flag. I am 100% sure
this is not the end of HDTV in Myth or any computer, and I'm not just
refering to using firewire or usb from dish/cable boxes to get the HD
into Myth. For the next little while I can't comment though.

If I missed a common question let me know, or feel free to contact me
off list.

--Brandon

john at BlueSkyTours

Oct 19, 2004, 9:10 AM

Post #2 of 19 (19914 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Brandon Beattie wrote:

> Here are some answers that questions that many people are going to be
> asking/re-asking about the pcHDTV hd-3000 card, and to save confusion...

<snip>

Thanks Brandon. I have been very happy with my HD-2000 enabled Myth system,
and look forward to adding another card.

John

papenfuss at juneau

Oct 19, 2004, 10:33 AM

Post #3 of 19 (19915 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

> Thanks for the FAQ! One thing I'm still a little unclear on: on the
> HD-2000/3000 does the NTSC tuner work as a simple framegrabber (i.e., I
> must encode in software), or does it produce MPEG encoded output like
> the PVR-250? The ATSC stuff is already MPEG as broadcast, right?
>
> Tx,
>
The NTSC part is a simple software-based V4L device that uses a
newer revision of the BT8x8 chipset. The ATSC is best thought of as a
1-way modem... because that's what it is. It just takes the RF signal,
downconverts it to baseband, then demodulates it into the broadcast MPEG
stream and spews it over the PCI bus.

-Cory

pc-mythtv04 at crowcastle

Oct 19, 2004, 10:52 AM

Post #4 of 19 (19911 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

While the HD-3000 will hopefully have support for unencrypted QAM
digital cable streams, am I correct that there is only one coax input,
so you won't be able to switch between broadcast and cable in software?

Personally, I would have kept the two coax inputs and dropped NTSC input
altogether. All the reports from the forums suggests that hardly anyone
is even trying to use the NTSC side of the card, as using a hardware
MPEG encoder is vastly superior.

--PC

david at thegeorges

Oct 19, 2004, 10:54 AM

Post #5 of 19 (19943 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On 10/19/2004 12:32 PM, Joseph A. Caputo wrote:

>On Tuesday 19 October 2004 11:53, Brandon Beattie wrote:
>
>
>>Here are some answers that questions that many people are going to be
>>asking/re-asking about the pcHDTV hd-3000 card, and to save
>>confusion...
>>
>Thanks for the FAQ! One thing I'm still a little unclear on: on the
>HD-2000/3000 does the NTSC tuner work as a simple framegrabber (i.e., I
>must encode in software), or does it produce MPEG encoded output like
>the PVR-250? The ATSC stuff is already MPEG as broadcast, right?
>
>
Yes, on the NTSC side it is a simple framegrabber. You must encode in
software.

Yes, the ATSC stuff is already MPEG2 which is why the card outputs MPEG2
for ATSC.

--
David

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

jcaputo1 at comcast

Oct 19, 2004, 10:54 AM

Post #6 of 19 (19876 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tuesday 19 October 2004 13:33, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> > Thanks for the FAQ! One thing I'm still a little unclear on: on
> > the HD-2000/3000 does the NTSC tuner work as a simple framegrabber
> > (i.e., I must encode in software), or does it produce MPEG encoded
> > output like the PVR-250? The ATSC stuff is already MPEG as
> > broadcast, right?
> >
> > Tx,
>
> The NTSC part is a simple software-based V4L device that uses a
> newer revision of the BT8x8 chipset. The ATSC is best thought of as
> a 1-way modem... because that's what it is. It just takes the RF
> signal, downconverts it to baseband, then demodulates it into the
> broadcast MPEG stream and spews it over the PCI bus.

...so, under Myth, does that mean the card would be configured as two
separate devices? i.e., /dev/video0 for the ATSC feed, and /dev/video1
as a standard V4L tuner? If that's the case, can both be used
simultaneously?

-JAC
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

papenfuss at juneau

Oct 19, 2004, 12:06 PM

Post #7 of 19 (19999 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Preston Crow wrote:

> While the HD-3000 will hopefully have support for unencrypted QAM
> digital cable streams, am I correct that there is only one coax input,
> so you won't be able to switch between broadcast and cable in software?

That's an interesting thought. It doesn't sound all that uncommon
to want to tune in some stations via QAM cable, and some via VSB
broadcast, but I guess it wouldn't fly. Of course, what you really are
referring to is either a mux'd tuner, or multiple tuners. You might
be able to mix the RF through a VCR's RF output to select between two
different inputs. It would definately be a kludge, though.

>
> Personally, I would have kept the two coax inputs and dropped NTSC input
> altogether. All the reports from the forums suggests that hardly anyone
> is even trying to use the NTSC side of the card, as using a hardware
> MPEG encoder is vastly superior.
>
It's not that simple. Although I don't know for sure, I suspect
that the two RF inputs on the HD2k were for TV and FM-radio, not TV1 and
TV2. Getting the smaller form-factor and possibly cheaper tuner on the
new card were probably a factor.

I emailed (Jack?) at HDTV and he said that they use they were
using the (then hd2k) bt879 chip for the PCI bus arbitration. The Oren
chip talked to the PC via the BT879 chip's GPIO pins, so the BT879 could
do the DMA, etc. That basically means that the framegrabber part of the
board is a "free" additional feature.

Also, for clarification, the HD-[23]000 is *NOT* an MPEG encoder.
It is an HDTV bitstream demodulator. Again... 1-way modem is the right
way to think of it.

I *am* interested to know if the CX23883 chip has higher quality
than the BT87[89]. I was underwhelmed with the analog resolution limit of
about 352x480 with my resolution test pattern testing before. At least
the ivtv-based ones will do 480x480 before crapping out.

-Cory

grante at visi

Oct 19, 2004, 12:13 PM

Post #8 of 19 (19873 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 01:54:28PM -0400, David George wrote:

> Yes, the ATSC stuff is already MPEG2 which is why the card outputs MPEG2
> for ATSC.

If the card is outputting MPEG2, why does the web page say that
it requires so much CPU to use it (1.2+ GHz)? Is doing
programmed I/O? I can't believe it's not capable of bus-master
DMA, but the web page never mentions it.

--
Grant Edwards
grante[at]visi.com

pc-mythtv04 at crowcastle

Oct 19, 2004, 12:22 PM

Post #9 of 19 (19855 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 15:13, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 01:54:28PM -0400, David George wrote:
>
> > Yes, the ATSC stuff is already MPEG2 which is why the card outputs MPEG2
> > for ATSC.
>
> If the card is outputting MPEG2, why does the web page say that
> it requires so much CPU to use it (1.2+ GHz)? Is doing
> programmed I/O? I can't believe it's not capable of bus-master
> DMA, but the web page never mentions it.

Everyone overestimates the system requirements for their products.

In this case, you probably don't need anywhere near that fast of a CPU
to record HDTV. You probably do need that to record NTSC TV, which is
an advertised feature. So if all you care about is recording HDTV, then
you're probably fine with a much slower CPU.

However, if you actually want to see what you've recorded, you need a
CPU and graphics card with sufficient combined power to display
HDTV-resolution MPEG-2 files, and that's no simple chore. From what
I've heard, most people would consider 1.2GHz to be less than half what
you need, even with a decent nVidia card.

--PC

jcaputo1 at comcast

Oct 19, 2004, 12:38 PM

Post #10 of 19 (19867 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tuesday 19 October 2004 15:13, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 01:54:28PM -0400, David George wrote:
> > Yes, the ATSC stuff is already MPEG2 which is why the card outputs
> > MPEG2 for ATSC.
>
> If the card is outputting MPEG2, why does the web page say that
> it requires so much CPU to use it (1.2+ GHz)? Is doing
> programmed I/O? I can't believe it's not capable of bus-master
> DMA, but the web page never mentions it.

The CPU requirements are likely to do with the horsepower needed to
decode the received MPEG-2 stream. Actually, 1.2GHz is probably quite
underpowered for HD content.

-JAC
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

ender at speakeasy

Oct 19, 2004, 12:44 PM

Post #11 of 19 (19883 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Oct 19, 2004, at 3:22 PM, Preston Crow wrote:

> However, if you actually want to see what you've recorded, you need a
> CPU and graphics card with sufficient combined power to display
> HDTV-resolution MPEG-2 files, and that's no simple chore. From what
> I've heard, most people would consider 1.2GHz to be less than half what
> you need, even with a decent nVidia card.

How about a Sempron 3100+?

--chris

wendy at seltzer

Oct 19, 2004, 1:02 PM

Post #12 of 19 (19898 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

At 9:53 AM -0600 10/19/04, Brandon Beattie wrote:
>Here are some answers that questions that many people are going to be
>asking/re-asking about the pcHDTV hd-3000 card, and to save confusion...

Thanks Brandon! I just have one legal update:

>Q: Can I use these cards after July 1st 2005?
>
>A: Yes you can use them, they are "grandfathered" into the new
>regulations. It will always be completely legal to use them. The card
>ignores the

flag's do-not-redistribute

> bit and if a show has this bit enabled, the
>card doesn't care and will save the stream in full quality anyway.
>
>Q: Can I get a card after July 1st 2005?

A: You may have to pay a premium on eBay. Anyone who's willing to
part with one can still sell a card manufactured before July 1, but
it will be unlawful to manufacture or import from abroad a card that
does not comply with the broadcast flag.

(the prohibition is on import into the U.S., not interstate sales)

>A: This becomes a very gray area. From what I have heard, the
>regulation prohibits you from SELLING devices cross STATE boundries that
>do not follow the new regulations. From what I hear, if you assemble
>a HD tuner yourself, it is still legal. I know though that the
>HD-3000 card will not be sold after July 1st 2005 if the EFF and other
>groups don't win the case to fight the broadcast flag. I am 100% sure
>this is not the end of HDTV in Myth or any computer, and I'm not just
>refering to using firewire or usb from dish/cable boxes to get the HD
>into Myth. For the next little while I can't comment though.
>
>If I missed a common question let me know, or feel free to contact me
>off list.

--Wendy
http://www.eff.org/broadcastflag/
--
--
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy[at]seltzer.com || wendy[at]eff.org
Staff Attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School
http://wendy.seltzer.org/

grante at visi

Oct 19, 2004, 1:15 PM

Post #13 of 19 (19885 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 03:22:23PM -0400, Preston Crow wrote:

>>> Yes, the ATSC stuff is already MPEG2 which is why the card
>>> outputs MPEG2 for ATSC.
>>
>> If the card is outputting MPEG2, why does the web page say that
>> it requires so much CPU to use it (1.2+ GHz)? Is doing
>> programmed I/O? I can't believe it's not capable of bus-master
>> DMA, but the web page never mentions it.
>
> Everyone overestimates the system requirements for their products.

I suppose that's the save route.

> In this case, you probably don't need anywhere near that fast
> of a CPU to record HDTV. You probably do need that to record
> NTSC TV, which is an advertised feature. So if all you care
> about is recording HDTV, then you're probably fine with a much
> slower CPU.

So for a backend-only machine that isn't using the HDTV board
for NTSC, it wouldn't really need much CPU.

> However, if you actually want to see what you've recorded, you
> need a CPU and graphics card with sufficient combined power to
> display HDTV-resolution MPEG-2 files, and that's no simple
> chore. From what I've heard, most people would consider
> 1.2GHz to be less than half what you need, even with a decent
> nVidia card.

But that could be a different machine, so it wouldn't require
any extra CPU for the machine with the HDTV card. I think the
"system requirements" page needs to be a bit more clear on the
difference between the requirements for using the card to
capture a data stream and the requirements for viewing the
resulting datastream.

In theory, could one transcode to an MPEG-2 stream at a
resolution supported by a PVR-350 and use that to view the
recordings?

--
Grant Edwards
grante[at]visi.com

pc-mythtv04 at crowcastle

Oct 19, 2004, 1:59 PM

Post #14 of 19 (19895 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 16:15, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 03:22:23PM -0400, Preston Crow wrote:
> > In this case, you probably don't need anywhere near that fast
> > of a CPU to record HDTV. You probably do need that to record
> > NTSC TV, which is an advertised feature. So if all you care
> > about is recording HDTV, then you're probably fine with a much
> > slower CPU.
>
> So for a backend-only machine that isn't using the HDTV board
> for NTSC, it wouldn't really need much CPU.

Exactly.

> > However, if you actually want to see what you've recorded, you
> > need a CPU and graphics card with sufficient combined power to
> > display HDTV-resolution MPEG-2 files, and that's no simple
> > chore. From what I've heard, most people would consider
> > 1.2GHz to be less than half what you need, even with a decent
> > nVidia card.
>
> But that could be a different machine, so it wouldn't require
> any extra CPU for the machine with the HDTV card. I think the
> "system requirements" page needs to be a bit more clear on the
> difference between the requirements for using the card to
> capture a data stream and the requirements for viewing the
> resulting datastream.

Right.

> In theory, could one transcode to an MPEG-2 stream at a
> resolution supported by a PVR-350 and use that to view the
> recordings?

In theory, but I don't think Myth suports transcoding to MPEG-2. I also
haven't had luck using the regular transcoder to mess with HDTV
recordings, but I've only tried it once.

--PC

brandon+myth at linuxis

Oct 20, 2004, 2:14 PM

Post #15 of 19 (20074 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 01:52:11PM -0400, Preston Crow wrote:
> While the HD-3000 will hopefully have support for unencrypted QAM
> digital cable streams, am I correct that there is only one coax input,
> so you won't be able to switch between broadcast and cable in software?

There is one input for NTSC, ATSC, and QAM. You can switch between any
of these 3 in software (well just NTSC and ATSC since QAM support is not
here yet).

Yes, few use NTSC, but some do. Because NTSC and ATSC are tuned the
same, the hardware that was used to base the HD-x000 cards basically let
NTSC come free, and support was added because it was quite simple to do.
But yes, hardware encoders like the PVR-x50's are much better for
quality than what you get from Most NTSC tuners, but of course not all.

--Brandon

> Personally, I would have kept the two coax inputs and dropped NTSC input
> altogether. All the reports from the forums suggests that hardly anyone
> is even trying to use the NTSC side of the card, as using a hardware
> MPEG encoder is vastly superior.
>
> --PC
>
>

> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

--

brandon+myth at linuxis

Oct 20, 2004, 2:24 PM

Post #16 of 19 (19957 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 03:06:27PM -0400, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Preston Crow wrote:
>
> >While the HD-3000 will hopefully have support for unencrypted QAM
> >digital cable streams, am I correct that there is only one coax input,
> >so you won't be able to switch between broadcast and cable in software?
>
> That's an interesting thought. It doesn't sound all that uncommon
> to want to tune in some stations via QAM cable, and some via VSB
> broadcast, but I guess it wouldn't fly. Of course, what you really are
> referring to is either a mux'd tuner, or multiple tuners. You might
> be able to mix the RF through a VCR's RF output to select between two
> different inputs. It would definately be a kludge, though.

It may be possible to switch between QAM and OTA on the fly. The idea
would be to use a Y-combiner to bring OTA and QAM onto the same cable.
This though could pose major problems. If 2 channels use the same
frequency you'll obviously have problems. (I'm not sure but cable may
use higher frequencies???) There will be a couple seconds of pause
between switching I was told. Personally, this may be a very ugly hack,
but this is how you would do it. Otherwise, if you want OTA and QAM,
you will probably be better off having one card for cable and the other
for OTA. There will probably be a little bit of work to do when QAM
support comes out to set the card into QAM from Myth, shouldn't be bad -
unless it's found you can somehow be safe pulling OTA and QAM feeds in
over the same cable to the card.

As for having a second coax input that would be a mute point since there
is only 1 tuner in the card.

> >Personally, I would have kept the two coax inputs and dropped NTSC input
> >altogether. All the reports from the forums suggests that hardly anyone
> >is even trying to use the NTSC side of the card, as using a hardware
> >MPEG encoder is vastly superior.
> >
> It's not that simple. Although I don't know for sure, I suspect
> that the two RF inputs on the HD2k were for TV and FM-radio, not TV1 and
> TV2. Getting the smaller form-factor and possibly cheaper tuner on the
> new card were probably a factor.

The HD-2000 card had one coax input for ATSC and the other was for NTSC.
Both used the same tuner though. This was somewhat helpful if you
wanted to use NTSC with your current home antenna, but you had to buy
another directional antenna for HD. NTSC and ATSC towers aren't always
in the same place so antenna location may only work well for 1 broadcast
type.

I do not know why the HD-3000 is different.

--Brandon

brandon+myth at linuxis

Oct 20, 2004, 2:27 PM

Post #17 of 19 (19868 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

> > signal, downconverts it to baseband, then demodulates it into the
> > broadcast MPEG stream and spews it over the PCI bus.
>
> ...so, under Myth, does that mean the card would be configured as two
> separate devices? i.e., /dev/video0 for the ATSC feed, and /dev/video1
> as a standard V4L tuner? If that's the case, can both be used
> simultaneously?
>
> -JAC

No, there is only 1 tuner in the card, the driver just sends data to one
of those two devices for reading from. ATSC is minor 32, so it's
/dev/video32 unless someone has set things up differently.

--Brandon

jcaputo1 at comcast

Oct 20, 2004, 8:20 PM

Post #18 of 19 (19972 views)
Permalink

Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:27:14 -0600
Brandon Beattie <brandon+myth[at]linuxis.us> wrote:

> > > signal, downconverts it to baseband, then demodulates it into the
> > > broadcast MPEG stream and spews it over the PCI bus.
> >
> > ...so, under Myth, does that mean the card would be configured as
> > two separate devices? i.e., /dev/video0 for the ATSC feed, and
> > /dev/video1 as a standard V4L tuner? If that's the case, can both
> > be used simultaneously?
> >
> > -JAC
>
>
> No, there is only 1 tuner in the card, the driver just sends data to
> one of those two devices for reading from. ATSC is minor 32, so it's
> /dev/video32 unless someone has set things up differently.

...so, wait... does that mean that there would be 2 video devices (say,
/dev/video0 (NTSC/V4L) and /dev/video32 (ATSC)), but that they couldn't
be used simultaneously? That would mean that both devices couldn't be
configured for use in Myth, unless a means was devised to let the
scheduler know that they share a tuner. Or am I not seeing this right?

-JAC

doug at ties

Oct 21, 2004, 4:25 AM

Post #19 of 19 (19925 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Answers about pcHDTV HD-3000 support in Myth, QAM support, and more [In reply to]

Joseph A. Caputo wrote:
> ...so, wait... does that mean that there would be 2 video devices (say,
> /dev/video0 (NTSC/V4L) and /dev/video32 (ATSC)), but that they couldn't
> be used simultaneously? That would mean that both devices couldn't be
> configured for use in Myth, unless a means was devised to let the
> scheduler know that they share a tuner. Or am I not seeing this right?

You are correct. This is probably the primary reason Myth doesn't
support the NTSC side of the hd-2000 card better: nobody's been inspired
to introduce this concept into the scheduler. This may matter to people
more with the HD-3000, since its NTSC side has composite/S-video in and
stereo sound, and is thus useful for a cable box.

-Doug

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.25 KB)

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact lists@gossamer-threads.com