1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

HMC30 details from CES

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by Citivas, Jan 8, 2011.

  1. Richierich

    Richierich Hall Of Fame

    8,489
    7
    Jan 10, 2008
    Doug, I will do it tomorrow and let you know what I find. :)

    Yes, 3 HR24-500s and 4 HR23-700s. Report back tomorrow Boss!!!
     
  2. Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    Hopefully you won't get lost and have to call 911 .. :p
     
  3. Richierich

    Richierich Hall Of Fame

    8,489
    7
    Jan 10, 2008
    I've got your number and HDTVFANBOY's number so if I get lost in my house I will call you for help!!! :lol:

    VIVA LAS VEGAS!!!
     
  4. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006

    The problem I see is that in order to do the content "sharing" between the 2 servers, you would need an MRV stream over DECA. So for each client wanting to view content from a "remote" HR34, that would actually require 2 streams going on. If you took the worst case scenario of all 8 clients wanting to view a stream from their respective "remote" HR34, that would require 16 simultaneous streams (8 MRV and 8 RVU) on the DECA cloud.

    In order to do the content sharing correctly, I think they would need 2 seperate DECA networks, 1 for the servers and 1 for the clients. Or the servers could connect USB or Ethernet, I suppose.
     
  5. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,683
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    Why?
    With multiple servers now and MRV, a client pulls the stream off the server that has the recording.
    With the HR34 and clients "tied to" them, wouldn't this task simply be to "talk to" the mother server and then get switched over to the server that has the recording? I don't see why one server would need to send the stream to another server, which would then stream to the client. :confused:
     
  6. Juanus

    Juanus Legend

    203
    4
    Jun 4, 2007
    I am patiently waiting for the new Samsung TVs that will have RVU built in. Does anyone else have any information of other TV Manufacturers that will have RVU built in to the new models? I am not sure if that was a selling point at CES or not.
     
  7. Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    There currently are no RVU servers on the market, so that is probably limiting the draw for TVs that would have clients. However, that should change as the year goes on.
     
  8. Juanus

    Juanus Legend

    203
    4
    Jun 4, 2007
    Yeah. I figured that since Samsung announced at CES that their RVU enabled TVs would be available in March, that maybe another TV manufacturer made a similar announcement.
     
  9. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    Assuming the server that has the recording has available client slots, that could happen. But what if the server you want to access is already serving 4 clients? Are you going to force one of those clients to renegotiate with the other server? This type of dynamic resource allocation would be a pretty tricky task, the MRV share between the servers would be far easier to manage.
     
  10. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,683
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    You make a good point, but not sure the solution is what we'll see.
    Expanding the number of streams from the server may be a solution.
     
  11. Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    I would expect any client will know how to contact more than one server. (It doesn't make any sense for a protocol to not allow that--consider a household with an RVU Roku, RVU HR34, pioneer RVU unit with both media and playback, etc.)

    So ultimately clients will have to be able to select which server they want, which should merely look like a client that's turned off at the server.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  12. Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    Yup .. I'd expect RVU to server with whatever the limit is set to and ultimately at least one MRV stream out of the server .. If there are multiple servers in the house, then RVU would first select the appropriate server to view.

    Where it gets dicey .. If you're on Server #1 and you choose an MRV program on Server #2 .. does it do Server to Server to Client streaming or should the client be asked to switch to the other server? Should it happen automatically?

    If it does end up being Server to Server (MRV) to Client (RVU), then that would take the the one outbound stream. However, it would be the most seamless option for someone trying to do this. Asking someone to disconnect/reconnect could get quite complicated actually.
     
  13. hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    I can assure you that such a process with 2 XX chromosome household participants here would be more like dangerous than complicated... :D:lol:
     
  14. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    The problem goes beyond that though. We have to keep in mind that we're not just talking about video streams between thick clients like in the MRV world. The server is actually serving the application layer as well as video stream. The RVU client will only "see" what it's server tells it, so it will not have the ability to browse playlists of other servers, etc. That functionality will reside on the server itself.

    I can easily imagine that, at least in the first generation, this functionality likely won't even exist. I would suspect that deployment will be a single server only.
     
  15. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    Then you have to throw in the possbility of "multiple" clients wishing to do this at the same time. I think the "server-farm" approach would be far less complex and more transparent than trying to dynamically allocate and re-allocate client connections. Basically, the servers would just mange a unified playlist similar to MRV now and the clients would remain blissfully unware which server the content is actually resident on.
     
  16. JoeTheDragon

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    4,612
    33
    Jul 21, 2008
    but how of a thin client system will be as D* plans to use the old H2X boxes for use with the server.
     
  17. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    It wouldn't make much sense to take a full featured receiver/dvr and turn it into a RVU thin client. I would imagine they would just operate in MRV mode without tying up client ports on the server.
     
  18. Groundhog45

    Groundhog45 Hall Of Fame

    4,580
    89
    Nov 9, 2005
    Cedar Park,...
    Can you imagine the unified playlist for an installation with two or more HR34s? That may be a solution.
     
  19. Drucifer

    Drucifer Well-Known Member

    9,404
    244
    Feb 12, 2009
    NY Hudson...
    Thought I saw LG on the Alliance website. That was months ago. Could be more by now.
     
  20. LameLefty

    LameLefty I used to be a rocket scientist

    12,182
    105
    Sep 28, 2006
    Middle...

Share This Page