DBSTalk Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

· Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Based on the polling, it looks like nearly 70% of readers on dbstalk want Dual Live buffers added to this box. (Links to polls below)

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=62118

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=72416

Earl - Can you get any kind of unofficial comment from D* about the likelihood of getting this feature added, and a possibly a time frame if they are indeed planning it?

Is there anyway we can, as a community, convince the required powers to make some kind of commitment to adding this feature? (and to communicate that to us) What can we do - if anything?
 

· Lifetime Achiever
Joined
·
30,090 Posts
You've already done as much as you can (As a forum).
They are very much aware of the polls, and the "demand" by this user base for the dual buffers.

I will try to get an update on where Dual Buffers may be in the "big picture".
 

· Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Earl Bonovich said:
You've already done as much as you can (As a forum).
They are very much aware of the polls, and the "demand" by this user base for the dual buffers.

I will try to get an update on where Dual Buffers may be in the "big picture".
Thank you, Earl - that would be highly appreciated.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
765 Posts
Earl Bonovich said:
You've already done as much as you can (As a forum).
They are very much aware of the polls, and the "demand" by this user base for the dual buffers.

I will try to get an update on where Dual Buffers may be in the "big picture".
Earl, when you do talk to them, I'd appreciate if you get their feel for if this could be done via software only. It really seems some hardware architecture changes would be needed, but I hope I am wrong.
 

· Legend
Joined
·
119 Posts
HolmesCo said:
Earl, when you do talk to them, I'd appreciate if you get their feel for if this could be done via software only. It really seems some hardware architecture changes would be needed, but I hope I am wrong.
Hmm. Interesting query. Assuming that the current buffer fills the available buffer space after 30 minutes, then if you have two, one logically can conclude that they would share the buffer space and be limited to 15 mins of buffer space each. However, if the current buffer is not fill after 30 mins, then a software tweak telling the box to buffer content from the second tuner should not be that much of a headache to program.

Anyone have any insight on this?
 

· Lifetime Achiever
Joined
·
30,090 Posts
HolmesCo said:
Earl, when you do talk to them, I'd appreciate if you get their feel for if this could be done via software only. It really seems some hardware architecture changes would be needed, but I hope I am wrong.
Everything tells me, that is a software only solution.... that is the programmer in me...

Why?

The unit can already record two things at once.
So what is the difference between "recording and saving" two programs at once; vs "recording and not-saving" two programs at once.

Since you can toggle between the two recording programs, ect....

I really really think it is going to be a software only solution.

Lets put it this way... if it requires any hardware changes, it won't be comming.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
765 Posts
Earl Bonovich said:
Everything tells me, that is a software only solution.... that is the programmer in me...

Why?

The unit can already record two things at once.
So what is the difference between "recording and saving" two programs at once; vs "recording and not-saving" two programs at once.

Since you can toggle between the two recording programs, ect....

I really really think it is going to be a software only solution.

Lets put it this way... if it requires any hardware changes, it won't be comming.
Yes tht does make sense. The buffers are there for sure, its a matter of making some keycombo on the remote possibly to toggle like we could on the tivo. Good, I have a sense and hope that you are right. Else the HR30 I guess? :nono2:
 

· Legend
Joined
·
132 Posts
Earl Bonovich said:
Everything tells me, that is a software only solution.... that is the programmer in me...

Lets put it this way... if it requires any hardware changes, it won't be comming.
Any idea what the capacity would be for the dual buffers?

30 min each like the HR10-250?
45 min each, assuming the current buffer can be shared by both tuners?

Why not 90 each? That would be my preference. Do we need another survey?
 

· Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Bad Rex said:
Any idea what the capacity would be for the dual buffers?

30 min each like the HR10-250?
45 min each, assuming the current buffer can be shared by both tuners?

Why not 90 each? That would be my preference. Do we need another survey?
In my opinion - I think we wait to see what - if anything - Earl can find out. Then we start chiming in on what "features" we would want DLB to have. (Like maybe make it an option - One 90 minute buffer, or Two 45 minutes buffers. )
 

· Lifetime Achiever
Joined
·
30,090 Posts
jaywdetroit said:
Hey Earl-

Any news on this topic today?
Sorry... no..
I was out at the "bar" all night last night watching the Bears game.
Hopefully tonight...
 

· Legend
Joined
·
191 Posts
For what it's worth, the ideal solution would be to have a selectable buffer length. The current 90 minute buffer is nice and there would be no reason that it would have to be 'split' when allowing dual buffers, it's a matter of how much disk space do you want to pre-allocate to the buffers.

Can you (have you already) suggest to D* to make the buffers of a selectable length. Maybe give us 15, 30, 60 or 90 minutes as options. I understand the issue with different lengths per buffer (that would introduce more problems than it would solve), but letting us assign the length should not be a big deal if caught at the right phase of development. (The current 90 minutes is probably in there as an assigned variable anyway, just allow us to set it.)
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top