Michael Bochynski wrote:
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 15:07 -0400, Michael T. Dean wrote:
[...]
However, honestly, the advantages of NVIDIA card you presented are not
overwhelming. The MythTV box will be used for MythTV only, nothing else,
hence OpenGL does not matter, am I right?
OpenGL is currently used by MythMusic (Goom!!!! among other
visualizations), and many games that are played using MythGame. Then,
there's OpenGL vsync for smooth frame delivery.
Also, MythUI--which will probably show up in 0.20--will use OpenGL as
the painting backend by default and will be the best reason to have
hardware-based OpenGL acceleration support.
While MythGames are not on the list, MythMusic and new MythUI is worth considering.
BTW, do you know when 0.20 is planned to be released?
Generally, the idea seems to be to release it "when it's finished." ;)
Even guessing a release date for 0.19 is way beyond my abilities. But,
when it is released (0.19, 0.20, or any other version), it should be
worth the wait. :)
I don't even have, and don't
plan to have, a regular monitor/LCD at home which I could use :) Signal
(MythTV) goes to TV out only.
Right now I output TV to my receiver and then to TV. While HDTV is a
nice-to-have, i do not expect to have it in the next 6 - 12 month, while
I will watch TV in the next 6 - 12 months :) Hence having DVI, HDTV and
so on is not the highest priority. I will probably want to add it,
Yeah, me too. But then again, plans change. I just bought an
HDTV--something I've been saying I wouldn't do...
:) yep. I totally agree. You never know. However, while I'd like to
have nice (new) tv, trekking in Peru and visiting Mexico, Paris and Toronto
takes precedence :)
I hope you do better at sticking to your low-cost resolution than I
did. :)
But, it's your
decision to make--I was just trying to answer your question, "whether it
makes more sense to get PVR-350 (I don't need dual tuners of 500, since
I use cable box) or nice NVIDIA graphics card for better support for
linux?"
I'm just thinking that if you're truly concerned with the pursuit of
video perfection, you'll eventually find that NTSC/PAL--not your
video/capture card--is the weak link in the chain. :)
:)
I am going solely after the picture (TV) quality. I do not mind
proprietary drivers, since I hope I have my compile-from-source times
behind me, starting with the (very) early Linux times. I know, however,
that ATI (proprietary) drivers are worse than NVIDIA ones. BTW, which
NVIIDA card is worth looking at? I don't want to end up with card which
is not supported under Linux at all.
Like I said, the PVR-350 will provide that placebo effect that makes you
believe for sure that you have the best possible picture quality. ;)
yeah ... and since my goal was not to spend any money (so far so good - old
parts from unused computers of mine), it seems that graphics card would be a
better solution in a long run.
Also, see if you can do anything with your current configuration. It's
quite possible that modifying the recording parameters/CODEC or
modifying your ATI/X settings may be all that's needed. And, if getting
a new $40-$60 NVIDIA 5200 card doesn't fix the problems you're seeing,
you'll have to dig into the configuration stuff, anyway. (BTW, I can't
recommend a brand for the 5200--I don't know anything about them. It's
hard enough trying to keep up with NVIDIA's/ATI's, "let's use our
competitor's naming scheme, but with a higher number" games as they move
from generation to generation of GPU's let alone trying to keep up with
the best 3rd-party card makers.)
And I admit, that software encoding itself, does not have a huge impact on
the system, I can live with that.
And decoding is even less of a hit, so even if you use a PVR-150 for
encoding, offloading decoding of standard-definition sized MPEG-2 to a
PVR-350 doesn't provide a big benefit. Now if we could offload
1920x1080 MPEG-2/MPEG-4/MPEG-4 AVC (H-264), that would be a whole
different story (much more like the story when the PVR-350 first came
out)... :)
Totally OT rant: I've got to admit that having received this message
from you, I'm extremely disappointed with Evolution. I know it's trying
to be the Outlook replacement, but do they really want to make it as
awful as Outlook? It actually puts a one-celled table containing
another one-celled table containing your entire message (and, therefore,
the entire body of the HTML page) in the HTML version of your multipart
message. And, it does the same HTML-obfuscation that MS FrontPage
does--i.e. opening and closing font tags all over (although FrontPage
goes much farther than Evolution with the obfuscation). And, I won't
even mention the deprecated HTML 4.01 instead of xHTML (or even
xHTML-like HTML)...
I couldn't agree more. Not to mention that integration with Exchange
is far from perfect, attachments are randomly
changed from a supported type/extension (zip, doc) to a binary (.bin)
type. No idea why and whet it happens, however
it's so frustrating that I have to use VMWare with outlook just for
the purpose of sending the attachments.
I'll cross my fingers and hope it gets better. I'm just glad I don't
need a LookOut! work-alike. Good luck with Myth (and Evolution).
Mike
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
