locked
MediaCenter Integration RRS feed

  • Question

  • Ok, since nobody asked before....

    What about the integration with MediaCenter? The connector actually do less than the one in PP3 (no transcoding) and the feature a lot of users asked (MediaCenter in Vail to be used trough xboxes) is also missing.

    Was expecting this on Vail, a lot of people have being asking this. Really dissapointed its not there. Except for the backup of the server (witch I could already do trough a plugin), all the other features I use are actually regressing. :(

    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 3:40 AM

Answers

  • "Media Center through XBoxes" requires Media Center, because the Xbox is a Media Center Extender. Microsoft seems to have gone the way of DLNA (which, by the way, suggests that a future version of the Xbox could be DLNA compliant...).

    I don't know why transcoding was removed; Microsoft hasn't told me. I could speculate, but I don't think there's really any point. If you really feel strongly, you can submit a product suggestion on Connect. Don't be surprised, though, if it gets closed as "by design" or "won't fix".


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:05 AM
    Moderator

All replies

  • "Media Center through XBoxes" requires Media Center, because the Xbox is a Media Center Extender. Microsoft seems to have gone the way of DLNA (which, by the way, suggests that a future version of the Xbox could be DLNA compliant...).

    I don't know why transcoding was removed; Microsoft hasn't told me. I could speculate, but I don't think there's really any point. If you really feel strongly, you can submit a product suggestion on Connect. Don't be surprised, though, if it gets closed as "by design" or "won't fix".


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:05 AM
    Moderator
  • "Media Center through XBoxes" requires Media Center, because the Xbox is a Media Center Extender. Microsoft seems to have gone the way of DLNA (which, by the way, suggests that a future version of the Xbox could be DLNA compliant...).

    I don't know why transcoding was removed; Microsoft hasn't told me. I could speculate, but I don't think there's really any point. If you really feel strongly, you can submit a product suggestion on Connect. Don't be surprised, though, if it gets closed as "by design" or "won't fix".


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)


    Thats the point. I have an extra MediaCenter machine running and consuming power because HomeServer doesnt have the media center functionality on it. Thats what was requested so many times on foruns and connect.

    But you might be right, MS might be in the DNLA bandwagon and maybe that also means MCE is doomed.

    Well, anyway. No MediaCenter on Vail, no access to my files on other machines, no plugins working. Guess Vail is really not for me. Another let down (as a MediaCenter user, I should be used to that comming from Microsoft).

     

    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:11 AM
  • I never understood the desire for media center in WHS. I don't want to introduce other things that could cause WHS to fail. Just let it be a server and only a server.  

    I have 2 HTPC's in the house. Both play all movies stored on my server without issue. Recorded shows can be transferred to the server. All my computers can play those shows. In fact my main HTPC only has a 74gb drive in it. All data is on the server so I don't need a larger drive.

    So I guess I don't understand the issue.

    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:15 AM
  • Thats the point. I have an extra MediaCenter machine running and consuming power because HomeServer doesnt have the media center functionality on it. Thats what was requested so many times on foruns and connect.

    But you might be right, MS might be in the DNLA bandwagon and maybe that also means MCE is doomed.

    Well, anyway. No MediaCenter on Vail, no access to my files on other machines, no plugins working. Guess Vail is really not for me. Another let down (as a MediaCenter user, I should be used to that comming from Microsoft).

    A)  I'm not sure what you mean by "no access to my files on other machines" (unless you're referring to RD only connecting to certain versions of MS OSes, and if so, the WHS team has no control over that).

    B)  There are no add-ins for Vail yet (the beta version of the SDA kit was only released today).  None of the V1 add-ins will work on Vail.

    • Marked as answer by joboehl Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:35 AM
    • Unmarked as answer by joboehl Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:35 AM
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:30 AM
    Moderator
  • But if WHS was solelly dedicated to being a server, the entire AddIn concept is flawed. Since the addins are allowed, that opens a lot of different possibilities to the product. If we accept that it could be a Blog Server, a Home Automation system, why not a Media Center that even more in line to its dutys (since even Microsoft keeps adding media features to it)?

    The concept is not to have all those HTPCs running in order to serve xboxes or whatever extender you might like while theres another machine seeting idle most of the time (even with home automation, my WHS hardly goes over 25% of CPU, even during backups). So now I have to have two machines (HTPC + WHS) running with very low CPU usage during most of the day and consuming electricity.

    I also save my recorded TV on WHS btw, what makes eve more insane for me to have a machine there (HTPC)  just so I can use the xboxes as extenders. I'am wasting that computer for very little. Very little that the WHS could be doing since its idle.

    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:30 AM
  • I wouldn't worry about it. The amount of electricity you use on a HTPC or on the server is minor at most. And personally I wouldn't be happy with my server recording tv, playing movies, serving files AND protecting my data. 
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:36 AM
  • But if WHS was solelly dedicated to being a server, the entire AddIn concept is flawed. Since the addins are allowed, that opens a lot of different possibilities to the product. If we accept that it could be a Blog Server, a Home Automation system, why not a Media Center that even more in line to its dutys (since even Microsoft keeps adding media features to it)?

    The concept is not to have all those HTPCs running in order to serve xboxes or whatever extender you might like while theres another machine seeting idle most of the time (even with home automation, my WHS hardly goes over 25% of CPU, even during backups). So now I have to have two machines (HTPC + WHS) running with very low CPU usage during most of the day and consuming electricity.

    I also save my recorded TV on WHS btw, what makes eve more insane for me to have a machine there (HTPC)  just so I can use the xboxes as extenders. I'am wasting that computer for very little. Very little that the WHS could be doing since its idle.

    Media playback is not something I expect to do with a "server", to be honest. Streaming the media to a playback device, sure. With the addition of DLNA, the ability to "play to" devices would be included. But using the server as a tuner/DVR/DVD player? Nope, not something I want to do.

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:40 AM
    Moderator
  • Thats the point. I have an extra MediaCenter machine running and consuming power because HomeServer doesnt have the media center functionality on it. Thats what was requested so many times on foruns and connect.

    But you might be right, MS might be in the DNLA bandwagon and maybe that also means MCE is doomed.

    Well, anyway. No MediaCenter on Vail, no access to my files on other machines, no plugins working. Guess Vail is really not for me. Another let down (as a MediaCenter user, I should be used to that comming from Microsoft).

    A)  I'm not sure what you mean by "no access to my files on other machines" (unless you're referring to RD only connecting to certain versions of MS OSes, and if so, the WHS team has no control over that).

    B)  There are no add-ins for Vail yet (the beta version of the SDA kit was only released today).  None of the V1 add-ins will work on Vail.


    A) One of the great things of WHS for me is that I could manually work with the files. Check if dupplication was OK, find the files manually on the subsystems and more than once I accessed the files from the disks on my Windows 7 machine during migrations/troubleshooting. Thats gone with Vail, since the new Drive Extender disks wont work outside vail as it seems. That was my point.

    B) Exactly, so my home automation (mControl), AV (Avast) and other plugins will not work and based on how fast EmbbededAutomation and Avast are developing/enhancing their WHS offerings, it migh take a good while to have them on Vail. So until there, Vail is not for me.

    Granted I dont use remote access, if I wanted my media online I would go for different solutions, but maybe thats good for someone.

    Honestly, besides the facelift, I see very little point on uprading to it.

    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:42 AM
  • Media playback is not something I expect to do with a "server", to be honest. Streaming the media to a playback device, sure. With the addition of DLNA, the ability to "play to" devices would be included. But using the server as a tuner/DVR/DVD player? Nope, not something I want to do.

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)


    Concept is the same. On DNLA, server is the streamer and the end device is the renderer. Very close to what the MediaCenter/Extender model is.

    Xbox is playing/rendering UI. HomeServer/MediaCenter is handling fileaccess and stream.

    Thats whats being asked for ages. Not the MediaCenter interface on WHS (since its headless). Just for it to be able to handle the mediacenter sessions so xboxes could play the files.

    So now it is going to be a streamer, just not for MediaCenter. Maybe the problem is not the concept, but the renderer not being the primary focus for Microsoft anymore.

    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:49 AM
  • I wouldn't worry about it. The amount of electricity you use on a HTPC or on the server is minor at most. And personally I wouldn't be happy with my server recording tv, playing movies, serving files AND protecting my data. 


    Well, that depends on the priorities right? I dont trust home server to protect my data, I trust the backups (to external disks). And loosing a tv recording is worse for me than loosing a backup window. So it all depends on the priorities, altough I understand it migh be different for you.

    As low as the machines can consume in terms of energy, they are still consuming twice of what it would be needed if the software were available.

    The way I see this is like saying I have to buy a TV and DVD player to put beside my computer to watch a movie just because nobody coded a DVD player software for a PC since its not meant to be use to watch movies. It might feel right and comfortable for some people to do that and feel safer that watching a movie on that other equipment wont interfere with documents on the computer.

    It migh just seem like a lot of waste to others. ;)

    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 5:03 AM
  • But using the server as a tuner/DVR/DVD player? Nope, not something I want to do.

     

    But Ken, You are not us, and whilst you are perfectly entitled you your view, that view is not held by thousands of WHS customers who are still waiting for MCE/Extender support. This feature has been the *most* requested feature since the first beta of WHS v1. I feel like we have been ignored, and thats not a nice feeling.

    Why should we be forced to run 2 machines to record TV in a WHS / Media Centre / Extender environment? Its crazy. Its also poor design.

    I won`t be touching vail for this reason.

     

     

     

    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 8:38 AM
  • WHS *SHOULD* support Windows Media Center extenders.   The concept of a home server is to provide a service @home.  This service is to centralize, manage and provide digital resources.  That is exactly the concept of a "home server".  "Home Servers" aren't merely  dumb shared disks or backup devices - they serve a purpose.

    Right now I have a Windows 7 machine running WMC with 2 HDHomeRun Tuners AND WHS server doing shared volumes and some transcoding (HP) and i would LOVE to merge these two systems since I run 100% "headless" with Xbox 360 extenders.  The power savings over the lifetime of a product is significant enough, especially after being slapped with PA rate hikes.  We're also planning a solar power installation so the last thing i want is another PC or 2 running just because MS can't provide a complete eco-system or support the ones millions of people have already bought into.

     

    WHS should support MCE over xbox 360s and other extenders


    -byron
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 12:55 PM
  • Microsoft is aware that Media Center (i.e. WMC) in the product, which is required for a media center extender to function as an extender, is a highly requested feature, possibly the #1 feature request (though I think there are other contenders for that honor :) ). Never mind that I don't want it; I know perfectly well that a large minority of all Windows Home Server users do , and even though I don't want it to be a priority I think it would be cool and useful if it were there.

    That it's not there does not mean that you are being ignored, it means that there are forces at work (market, OEM partner, internal to Microsoft, project constraints, technical issues, I honestly can't say for sure) that are preventing the inclusion. You can continue to lobby on Connect for Media Center in Windows Home Server, but honestly I don't think it's going to do a lot of good. (I've voted a lot of those suggestions up, BTW...)


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 2:08 PM
    Moderator
  • I agree that Vail should act as both a home server and a media center server.  With the advent of the 4/6 tuner CableCard's comming out as well as xBox's becoming so cheep it would save me money in the long run to remove all of my cable company's equipment from my home and replace them with an xBox. 

    I currentlly have a WHSv1 and a HomeBrew EXSi 4.0 server running in my basement.  In order to support my vision of removing the cable boxes I will need a 3rd machine running 24/7 to act as a media center.  This not only will increase my power bill, but I will be on the virge of needing a biger circit to my basement as well as a large UPS.

    This is close to being a deal breaker for me, I really am hoping that Microsoft will work on making the Windows 7 Media Center code work with Vail and allow me to use it as such.  They also need to make a software version extender for the PC so I can fireup a MCE Extender client to connect to my WHS server and watch one live TV. 

    I would love to work on that project, Microsoft please hire me. 

     


    Pugsly0014
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 2:31 PM
  • @Pugsly0014 - It's called Media Player .  v2 it will act as a DLNA server apparently which Media Player will connect to so you can stream your videos/music to any computer.  It looks like it will provide the same functionality WebGuide did.  MS hired the WebGuide developer .. tho sadly, it doesn't appear to have been improved so much .. note, I haven't seen v2 myself, just read the reviews.


    While I have no interest in WHS being a HTPC, I can completely understand the desire for other folks.  Especially those who buy something like an HP WHS (who makes a decent mediacenter pc btw).  My 4U case with it's fan wouldn't looks good in my living room.  Umm... on second thought, it would look sweet in my living room :)  But *sound* bad, heh.

    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:25 PM
  • ..
    My 4U case with it's fan wouldn't looks good in my living room.  Umm... on second thought, it would look sweet in my living room :)  But *sound* bad, heh.

    (Ken imagines trying to hear a movie over the Hoover in the corner, winces, and shakes his head sadly...)

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:33 PM
    Moderator
  • I understand that part, I have WMP11 running on my WHSv1 currentlly and stream to all to my xBox, PS3 and other PC's.  What this can't do however is act as a "Media Center Server" 

    I want a headless 'Server' that has a 4 or 6 tuner CableCard tuner imbedded in it to where I can use a xBox and software client to 'act' as a cable reciver.

    It should allow watching & recording on all 4 tuners independently so if I was watching a live TV program off one channel of the tuner I can record off another channel while my kids watched yet a 3rd channel in the playroom.  The recordings would be stored on my WHS then later be able to be steamed using DNLA to any device that supports it.

     

    This is what I wanted Vail to be, a headless Home Media Server.  Sitting in my basement with 3 connections.

    Power
    LAN
    Cable/FIOS

    Done and Done


    Pugsly0014
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:38 PM
  • "The amount of electricity you use on a HTPC or on the server is minor at most..."
     
    Live in a country (Korea) with a progressive electricity household rate structure and you will care.  Anything between 500-999 KWH per month will run about 35¢ per KWH, over 1000 KWH runs about 75¢ per KWH.  Granted, if you keep it below 300 KWH per month, electricity is only pennies per KWH, with 300-499 running about 25¢ per.  There is also a hefty peak demand charge for those using above 1000 KWH per month.

    --
    ______________
    BullDawg
    Associate Expert
    In God We Trust
    ______________
     
    "fandibus" <=?utf-8?B?ZmFuZGlidXM=?=> wrote in message news:027959aa-726f-4cbf-adfa-e4aab25f7b60...
    I wouldn't worry about it. The amount of electricity you use on a HTPC or on the server is minor at most. And personally I wouldn't be happy with my server recording tv, playing movies, serving files AND protecting my data. 

    BullDawg
    Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:40 PM
  • Can someone from MS please comment on Vail having tuner support?
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 7:01 AM
  • Vail is not going to have tuner support. If a third party wants to write an add-on media package that supports tuners and provides the appropriate drivers then more power to them.

    Plus, Microsoft just announced today Windows Media Center on set-top boxes. See this press release for more info. Therefore, again I say, Vail will not have tuner support. It obviously does not fix Microsoft's strategy.


    http://www.tomontech.com
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 8:56 AM
    Moderator
  • So MC isn't in Vail when it has to be one of the most requested features!

    Simple question to MSFT. Why isn't MC part of Vail? As many have pointed out this is a 'HOME SERVER' and for example if people have Xbox 360 and the like would like to use that Home Server and Xbox to its full capability without having to have another PC running to provide the MC experience. All these 'poor man' media capabilities you keep adding like streaming do not cut it!!

    I for one will no be upgrading my current WHS to Vail based on proposed feature set Vail doesn't offer me any COMPELLING reason to upgrade as the new capabilities are very weak in my opinion. Makes me wonder whether MSFT really see a future in WHS when its taken so long to offer anything new and what is on offer is weak at best.

     

     

    • Merged by Ken WarrenModerator Wednesday, April 28, 2010 12:05 PM effectively identical question
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:12 AM
  • I understand that watching TV isn't what a "server" is designed for. It would be extremly nice though, to have the ability to record and stream TV and therefore have your tuners inside the WHS.
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:31 AM
  • I understand that watching TV isn't what a "server" is designed for. It would be extremly nice though, to have the ability to record and stream TV and therefore have your tuners inside the WHS.


    Not that bothered personally with having tuners in my WHS just the ability to have the better MC GUI experience with all the cover art, etc that MC offers would be a start. As tuners in a PC/Server don't offer anything near the capabilities of a seperate set top box

    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:39 AM
  • So MC isn't in Vail when it has to be one of the most requested features!

    Simple question to MSFT. Why isn't MC part of Vail? As many have pointed out this is a 'HOME SERVER' and for example if people have Xbox 360 and the like would like to use that Home Server and Xbox to its full capability without having to have another PC running to provide the MC experience. All these 'poor man' media capabilities you keep adding like streaming do not cut it!!

    I for one will no be upgrading my current WHS to Vail based on proposed feature set Vail doesn't offer me any COMPELLING reason to upgrade as the new capabilities are very weak in my opinion. Makes me wonder whether MSFT really see a future in WHS when its taken so long to offer anything new and what is on offer is weak at best.

     

     


    v2 will be adding DLNA capabilities and so the thought is, Xbox will have a software upgrade that enables it to act as a DLNA client/agent.  I would think/hope this is the direction MS is going.  This definitely doesn't make everyone happy.  I won't even say it's a reasonable comprimse, MS is not adding the functionality strictly for political/money reasons.  Maybe someone will come out with something that will turn v2 into a media pc ... couldn't you install xbmc or something???
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 2:52 PM
  • I guess  that people dont look at HomeServer at the Home Theater or the living room. Just at it serving the content to a extender-like devices. Thats why I think the concept of having it serving a xbox with mediacenter is not that different as from serving trough DNLA.

    MediaCenter on embedded platform actually could reinforce the need of tuner sharing on a HomeServer, instead of moving the concept away.

    I'am yet to see a DNLA client that looks half as good as MediaCenter on a xbox. MediaCenter vs the builtin music/video/photo software on the xbox dashbord is beyond comparison.

    I always tought MS could do something  like:

     "This simple experience is what you have when xbox is connected to a regular file sharing. This awsomeone is when its connected to a Windows Home Server"

    This would clearly show how much better would be to keep inside the ecosystem (like apple does with its products).

    But, from an xbox perspective, use HomeServer or any other shared storage with media sharing has the same impact. And that is a wasted opportunity. And not to xbox, but to HomeServer marketing.

     

     

    As a Side note: For the entusiast market, Microsoft would do enough just to let the software there, accessible trough the local console or remote desktop, so entusiast could launch it an use it (like we can with notepad, calculator and etc). I guess that would already make a lot of people happy, even tough it would not be officially supported.

    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 3:22 PM
  • Tom is correct.
     
    This post is "AS IS" and confers no rights.
     
    "Tom Ziegmann" wrote in message news:82aeea14-1bf3-4a63-9f50-2fd3f3be294b...

    Vail is not going to have tuner support. If a third party wants to write an add-on media package that supports tuners and provides the appropriate drivers then more power to them.

    Plus, Microsoft just announced today Windows Media Center on set-top boxes. See this press release for more info. Therefore, again I say, Vail will not have tuner support. It obviously does not fix Microsoft's strategy.


    http://www.tomontech.com
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 4:00 PM
    Moderator
  • Does DNLA support DRM?  If not, then it's completely useless.
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 4:53 PM
  • Does DNLA support DRM?  If not, then it's completely useless.

    Look here . My best guess, though, is that you will see huge amounts of fingerpointing and handwaving, along with much shouting, since there are many conflicting DRM schemes and I doubt that there will be any interoperability between them. Case in point: Apple's DRM. Only devices "authorized" to play your FairPlay protected content will be able to play it, even if another device can stream it.

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 5:54 PM
    Moderator
  • I was just curious if your Recorded shows are copy protected.  There are a lot of shows I like to record and play back, but I won't be able to if they're transferred to the WHS because only the computer that recorded them can play them back.
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 8:28 PM
  • http://www.geektonic.com/2009/09/microsoft-media-center-announements.html

    I use an ATI Digital CableCard tuner and everything I record is able to be viewed/watched/transfered to other devices to watch them. 

    Again... It is still my hope to somehow install the "Windows 7 Media Center" code into Vail to make it work as a media center server as well as a WHS.

    I know there is a community of people out there who were trying to make the "Windows Vista Media Center" work on WHSv1.  If anyone is interesed in trying to make this work, please let me know I am willing to contribute my expertise.


    Pugsly0014
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 8:52 PM
  • I know there is a community of people out there who were trying to make the "Windows Vista Media Center" work on WHSv1.  If anyone is interesed in trying to make this work, please let me know I am willing to contribute my expertise.
    The Vista Media Center will probably never work on Windows Home Server V1, since V1 is based on Windows Server 2003, which has much in common with XP and little in common with Vista. They should try for XP MCE 2005...

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, April 28, 2010 11:23 PM
    Moderator
  • There was one project to port MCE 2K5 to 2003 and that worked.

    There was another projet to port Vista MCE to 2008, but that did not work due to some policy restrictions at the time. Dont know hows that going now.

    http://www.win2008workstation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=61

     

    Thursday, April 29, 2010 4:31 AM
  • While I can see the need for Vail to be able to serve out to an Xbox or other Extender.  The need for and other criteria (Tuners and What ever else) should not be coded or any other way plugged into the Vail system or any Server OS.  It is a server NOT a freakin workstation.  If you want a work station there is Windows 7 that works perfectly for all the reasons most everyone in this thread is discussing.  Just like WHS-V1, everyone wanted it to make coffe and take out the trash.  It can but THAT is not its job.  The job for Vail is to SERVE as in files being served to other nodes on the network and for storage of said files.  I do realize everyone has there own visions of what Vail should be but that is your vision and not mine.  Anyway a server is a server is a server.  BTW, does anyone here know why they don't typically have a keyboard and monitor on a Linux Server or Windows server?
    jd
    Thursday, April 29, 2010 5:18 AM
  • While I can see the need for Vail to be able to serve out to an Xbox or other Extender.  The need for and other criteria (Tuners and What ever else) should not be coded or any other way plugged into the Vail system or any Server OS.  It is a server NOT a freakin workstation.  If you want a work station there is Windows 7 that works perfectly for all the reasons most everyone in this thread is discussing.  Just like WHS-V1, everyone wanted it to make coffe and take out the trash.  It can but THAT is not its job.  The job for Vail is to SERVE as in files being served to other nodes on the network and for storage of said files.  I do realize everyone has there own visions of what Vail should be but that is your vision and not mine.  Anyway a server is a server is a server.  BTW, does anyone here know why they don't typically have a keyboard and monitor on a Linux Server or Windows server?
    jd


    Yeah, you don't get it, or you didn't read. 

    I don't want to use it as a workstation, nor use it to 'Watch' TV.  I just don't want to have to keep up two machines 24/7 so that I can 'serve' up all media types to my home.  Adding Media Center functionality to the server will allow me to have all of the following with just one 'headless' machine running 24/7.

    Music
    Movies
    Documents
    Pictures
    Live TV
    Recorded TV

     


    Pugsly0014
    Thursday, April 29, 2010 1:33 PM

  • Yeah, you don't get it, or you didn't read. 

    I don't want to use it as a workstation, nor use it to 'Watch' TV.  I just don't want to have to keep up two machines 24/7 so that I can 'serve' up all media types to my home.  Adding Media Center functionality to the server will allow me to have all of the following with just one 'headless' machine running 24/7.

    Music
    Movies
    Documents
    Pictures
    Live TV
    Recorded TV

     


    Pugsly0014

    Pugsly, I do get and FULLY understand what you are wanting to do.  That is still not part of the server role to function like a Media Center.  The more you have to mess with the server the more you could be putting the server inline with the server failing at the MOST inopportune time.

    jd

    Thursday, April 29, 2010 4:05 PM
  • Pugsly, I do get and FULLY understand what you are wanting to do.  That is still not part of the server role to function like a Media Center.  The more you have to mess with the server the more you could be putting the server inline with the server failing at the MOST inopportune time.

    jd

    The reliability argument is a nonsense. Microsoft pulled MCE support in Vail for strategic (DLNA)  and project management (time) reasons, not because the concept makes WHS inherrantly unstable.

    Vail would probably have taken (much) longer to come to beta with MCE support included, but it *can* be done. MS *chose* not to include MCE, and I for one am rather unhappy with that choice.

     

     

    Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:02 PM
  • The votes for this suggestion are increasing rapidly within the last days:

    https://connect.microsoft.com/WindowsHomeServer/feedback/details/503076/i-would-like-to-have-media-center-in-whs

     

    Saturday, May 1, 2010 7:09 AM
  • The votes for this suggestion are increasing rapidly within the last days:

    https://connect.microsoft.com/WindowsHomeServer/feedback/details/503076/i-would-like-to-have-media-center-in-whs

     


    It's not going to happen in Vail, no matter how many suggestions it gets. As I stated before, it is not in Microsoft's strategy to have WMC in WHS at this time. That may change down the road, however, it will be without WMC at this time.
    http://www.tomontech.com
    Monday, May 3, 2010 6:20 AM
    Moderator

  • It's not going to happen in Vail, no matter how many suggestions it gets. As I stated before, it is not in Microsoft's strategy to have WMC in WHS at this time. That may change down the road, however, it will be without WMC at this time.
    http://www.tomontech.com
    Regardless of what may be decided by the powers that be, we will continue to lobby for MCE / Extender support in vail. Thats the whole point of connect.
    Monday, May 3, 2010 8:17 AM
  • I know this is a common request, and I have interest in it, but I don't see how from a technical standpoint it would ever be possible.  Right now, the mediacenter foundation requires CODEC based support + DirectX10 support structure to get the Windows7 MC up and running, which is required also for extenders.

     

    The issue with that is that the server platform doesn't have DirectX acceleration in this format in that it's specifically denied.  The links to foundation are also denied.

    So, the problem is the platform that WHS is built on is completely contrary to ever supporting Media Center, no matter how much we want it to.  Unless MS decided to completely undo WHS or build it on a different platform then Server, I can't see a way possible that MCE would ever work.

    Monday, May 3, 2010 8:20 AM
  • Maybe thats true, maybe its a red herring. Generally anything is possible if you throw enough resources at it. But WHS runs recorded TV and Extenders right now, from SageTV.

    If a 3rd party can do it, I`m sure Microsoft could (if they wanted to).

     

     

     

     

    Monday, May 3, 2010 8:30 AM
  • ... Generally anything is possible if you throw enough resources at it. ...

    To be blunt, we're in the "9 women can't have a baby in a month" phase of this project. Microsoft has a schedule for Vail RTM, I'm sure. That schedule may slip, but if it does, it will be because of issues found in this and possible future beta versions, not for the addition of a whole new set of features. Media Center added to Vail would be a large undertaking, and would push the schedule by months (possibly a year) I'm pretty sure.Could Microsoft do it? I'm retty sure tha answer is yes. Will they do it? I'm equally sure tha answer is no.

    So, as Tom has said, don't look for it in this version. Do continue to suggest it on Connect, and to vote on suggestions, however. :) With enough feedback, Microsoft might choose to add Media Center to a future version of the product.

     


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Monday, May 3, 2010 12:16 PM
    Moderator
  • Ken, I do appreciate the situation in terms of the current beta programme. If you take a look, I actually mentioned the time aspect myself earlier on in this thread.

     

    If you don`t ask, you won`t get - So we`ll continue to ask, much to MVP`s irritation I`m sure ;-)

     

     

     

     

    Monday, May 3, 2010 6:16 PM
  • WHS is a HOME Server.

    It is supposed to incorporate the technologies that we use (or rather should be using) in the home - storage, backup, media.

    Media is a primary function of WHS that does not simply get relegated to the storage area. Microsoft is heavily invested in media interests and to exclude WMC integration is truely an epic fail.

    They either need to spill the beans on what they are intending to do with the impending convergance of Zune/WMP and give us some direction or lose customers for this product.

    Frankly, I see alot of people both here and at WGS that seem to be using WHS as a hack-job, low budget SBS and treating it as such. That is not what this product is advertised as nor is it the intent.

    Thursday, May 6, 2010 1:00 PM
  • Ken, I do appreciate the situation in terms of the current beta programme. If you take a look, I actually mentioned the time aspect myself earlier on in this thread.

     

    If you don`t ask, you won`t get - So we`ll continue to ask, much to MVP`s irritation I`m sure ;-)

     

     

     

     

    So, even though the question has been asked an answered, you will continue to ask for something you won't get, just to ask and to be annoying? That makes no sense. Microsoft has already said no Media Center in Vail. If you want to keep asking do it somewhere else. There are people here with legitimate issues and concerns, not those who've has their questions answered, and are keeping on asking just to see if the answer will change. Please, try to understand this. Vail will NOT at any point include Media Center.
    http://www.tomontech.com
    Thursday, May 6, 2010 6:38 PM
    Moderator
  • WHS is a HOME Server.

    It is supposed to incorporate the technologies that we use (or rather should be using) in the home - storage, backup, media.

    Media is a primary function of WHS that does not simply get relegated to the storage area. Microsoft is heavily invested in media interests and to exclude WMC integration is truely an epic fail.

    They either need to spill the beans on what they are intending to do with the impending convergance of Zune/WMP and give us some direction or lose customers for this product.

    Frankly, I see alot of people both here and at WGS that seem to be using WHS as a hack-job, low budget SBS and treating it as such. That is not what this product is advertised as nor is it the intent.

    Can you tell me how many true consumers use Media Center? Can you tell me how many people use Satellite TV (not supported by Media Center)? how about those internationally, where the standards are different? Do you see my point? How many consumers are going to understand TV standards, and how many of them will be in an area where they would get a lot of use out of Media Center? By the way, Microsoft doesn't need to tell you anything. They are a company with a strategy, that they've actually talked at much length about. It is well within your right to stop using Microsoft products, if you so choose. Why don't you instead of threatening to stop using MS products, direct your frustration to the real culprit, and that is the Media Center team.
    http://www.tomontech.com
    Thursday, May 6, 2010 6:44 PM
    Moderator
  • Can you tell me how many true consumers use Media Center? Can you tell me how many people use Satellite TV (not supported by Media Center)? how about those internationally, where the standards are different? Do you see my point? How many consumers are going to understand TV standards, and how many of them will be in an area where they would get a lot of use out of Media Center? By the way, Microsoft doesn't need to tell you anything. They are a company with a strategy, that they've actually talked at much length about. It is well within your right to stop using Microsoft products, if you so choose. Why don't you instead of threatening to stop using MS products, direct your frustration to the real culprit, and that is the Media Center team.
    http://www.tomontech.com


    No, and I'm pretty sure you can't. And also, no I have no idea where you were going with that or how it is in the least bit relevant.

    You can, in fact, put down the k3wl-a1d and get a grip. I am merely stating a fact. An updated 2008 back-end is not worth upgrading at all. What's the point unless there is value added.

    Microsoft is trying to appeal to a certain market, the home market. Limited interface, simple operation. That is also how the VARs are trying to market this niche product.

    If they are not going to incorporate their own well established technologies then what is the point? Oh, here we go - lets throw out 10 years of development for something completely new for devices that hardly anyone owns.

    Good plan.

    Another great plan is developing 3 products that do pretty much the same exact thing just slightly different.. that's another good plan.

    Let's not talk about the plans for the future though, hush hush - we're competing with 2 other internal teams..

     

     

    Thursday, May 6, 2010 7:36 PM
  • Can you tell me how many true consumers use Media Center? Can you tell me how many people use Satellite TV (not supported by Media Center)? how about those internationally, where the standards are different? Do you see my point? How many consumers are going to understand TV standards, and how many of them will be in an area where they would get a lot of use out of Media Center? By the way, Microsoft doesn't need to tell you anything. They are a company with a strategy, that they've actually talked at much length about. It is well within your right to stop using Microsoft products, if you so choose. Why don't you instead of threatening to stop using MS products, direct your frustration to the real culprit, and that is the Media Center team.
    http://www.tomontech.com


    No, and I'm pretty sure you can't. And also, no I have no idea where you were going with that or how it is in the least bit relevant.

    You can, in fact, put down the k3wl-a1d and get a grip. I am merely stating a fact. An updated 2008 back-end is not worth upgrading at all. What's the point unless there is value added.

    Microsoft is trying to appeal to a certain market, the home market. Limited interface, simple operation. That is also how the VARs are trying to market this niche product.

    If they are not going to incorporate their own well established technologies then what is the point? Oh, here we go - lets throw out 10 years of development for something completely new for devices that hardly anyone owns.

    Good plan.

    Another great plan is developing 3 products that do pretty much the same exact thing just slightly different.. that's another good plan.

    Let's not talk about the plans for the future though, hush hush - we're competing with 2 other internal teams..

     

     


    I agree with you Jeff.  Switching to Vail just for the 2008 R2 backend and web streaming is not enough incentive for me.   With Media Center included this would have been the perfect solution and I would have paid double whatever they were going to charge for an upgrade license.

     


    Pugsly0014
    • Proposed as answer by VitkoK Thursday, May 6, 2010 11:02 PM
    Thursday, May 6, 2010 8:36 PM
  • So, even though the question has been asked an answered, you will continue to ask for something you won't get, just to ask and to be annoying? That makes no sense. Microsoft has already said no Media Center in Vail. If you want to keep asking do it somewhere else. There are people here with legitimate issues and concerns, not those who've has their questions answered, and are keeping on asking just to see if the answer will change. Please, try to understand this. Vail will NOT at any point include Media Center.
    http://www.tomontech.com

    I get the message that MCE isn`t going to make it into Vail RTM. Really, I do. Honest. That doesn`t mean that people cant lobby for the feature to be included at a later time, and it doesn`t mean that the request is any less valid.

    How do you know that we won`t get MCE integration or a subset of that at a later time? We certainly won`t get anything at all if we don`t let Microsoft know how valuable we think this feature is. Hence this thread, and hence the reason why the "I would like to have Media Center in WHS!" suggestion is the 3rd most popular suggestion on the Vail connect feedback page.

    Those customers, like me, who feel strongly about this topic, will not lie down and stop lobbying for features we think should be in the product, just because you tell us to. Fine, MCE won`t be a feature in Vail RTM, but please, don`t interfere with the customers right to lobby for the features they want to be included in the product going forward. 

    • Proposed as answer by VitkoK Thursday, May 6, 2010 11:02 PM
    Thursday, May 6, 2010 8:42 PM
  • I'm unsure if this will work but has anyone attempted to use VMWare to run Vail and Windows7 on the same systems? This is a HORRIBLE work around but may be the best option for actually getting a HOME MEDIA SERVER.

    Vail with integrated Media Center couldn't come out at a better time. With CPU integrated graphics within a year, 6+ core CPU's going mainstream, FCC recommending software based decoding for encrypted digital cable by Fall 2010, and Intel Q3/4 release of 22nm SSD's Microsoft has a real opportunity with Vail to create/corner the market on the Home Media (this includes TV) Server yet Microsoft has chosen not to do so.

    As for everyone else complaining servers shouldnt have additional features, beware history. People always want more and will go to whom ever offer it... in 1921 Henry Ford's model T had 60% of the market but by 1926 had plummeted to 36% due to Chevrolet offering more with their products.   

    Thursday, May 6, 2010 11:34 PM
  • Hi!

    I've tried to Install Win7Ultimate in VMWareWorkstation 7 and connected a Linksys-Media-Extender to the included WMC. The menu is a little bit slow on my Intel Atom330-Platform but streaming DVD an recorded TV works acceptable.Vail was integrated into the Media-Library of the Win7. I added a-Batch-File to startup for the virtual machine an use autologon for different reasons. Tried VM-Ware Server for starting the VM as a service, but VMWare Server doesn't have 3D support for the VM, so MediaCenter didn't work for me.

    Monday, May 10, 2010 9:36 AM
  • This could be an interesting link for all tv tuner fans:

    http://www.wegotserved.com/2010/05/18/transform-your-vail-whs-into-a-media-center-pc-part-1/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wegotserved_rss+%28We+Got+Served%29

    I'd prefer MediaPortal

    http://www.team-mediaportal.com/

    http://forum.team-mediaportal.com/installation-configuration-support-53/how-install-mediaportal-windows-2008-r2-x64-only-81774/

    • Edited by joit.de Wednesday, May 19, 2010 2:42 PM updated URLs
    Wednesday, May 19, 2010 8:10 AM
  • I can record an ATSC show on mce2005 machine, move it to whs and then watch it on 7mce.
    Wednesday, May 26, 2010 11:07 PM
  • Tom is correct.
     
    This post is "AS IS" and confers no rights.
     
    "Tom Ziegmann" wrote in message news:82aeea14-1bf3-4a63-9f50-2fd3f3be294b...

    Vail is not going to have tuner support. If a third party wants to write an add-on media package that supports tuners and provides the appropriate drivers then more power to them.

    Plus, Microsoft just announced today Windows Media Center on set-top boxes. See this press release for more info. Therefore, again I say, Vail will not have tuner support. It obviously does not fix Microsoft's strategy.


    http://www.tomontech.com

     

    Vail may not have tuner support but it should integrate with Win7MC on the same Home Network better. I agree keep the Server and HTPC seperate (Good Luck virtually!) I can't get the HOME TV Archiving to work. I just built a Win7MC QuadCore Q6600 and WHS Vail on a Core2Duo. The W7MC has it's own 500Gb for Recorded TV. How can I get the W7MC to record to the WHS after it fills it's own drive up first?

    I also have AT&T U-verse which has MCE on it's set top boxes.  I had Nero Liquid TV but the IR Transceiver never worked. The W7MC flys rings around Tivo, WinTV, and EyeTV. It even beats the MCE version on the AT&T settop boxes. However it requires lots of tewaking, codecs, etc. I would keep all that off a Server.

    Besides offloading files from W7MC to WHS, can't WHS inventory, migrate, metatag, and manage all the media files that the W7MC is collecting? Then stream it to everyone's PC, Game Console, Smart Phone, and/or portable media devices? I know that is the goal, and hopefully the RTM will deliver it.

    Thursday, June 3, 2010 8:06 PM
  • I personally take Vail as a slap in the face.  all the talk of stability is ____!  I have run whs v1 for as long as I can remember with multiple add ins, as well as Sagetv and Magicjack even.  I've done multiple recoveries to my desktops, stream live tv to multiple family members, AND use it to talk on the phone!  My home server v1 has been rock solid and I was hoping for MCE support so that I could cut out third party apps and use Vail as my whole life Media HUB.  I was figuring that they would incorporate MCE, and maybe some kind of family messaging and group calendar that we could all post to.  it should have allowed me to remote in to stream tv and schedule recordings on top of music, pictures, and videos.  to be honest, with my addins and third party software, my version 1 kicks Vails ____.  the only thing I can't do that Vail can is stream and even that I think I could get around with some work.  I will not be upgrading, and I cannot believe that they not only ignored our requests, but seem to think we should be amazed and gratified that they have given it a shiny interface!!!  do they think we are stupid that we would just be distracted by something shiny instead of new content that we asked for?  I am so upset and disappointed by the lack of customer concern I can hardly express myself.  and to think that I was singing WHS praises for the past two years and eagerly awaiting Vail.  I can sum it all up to what one of my IT colleagues said. 

    me:"Look!  Vail is here"

    him:  "so, what does it do now?"

    me:  "um, its prettier?  and it can stream?"

    him:  "was it worth the wait?"

    sadly MS... it was totally not worth the wait. 

    Michael

    Thursday, June 3, 2010 10:05 PM
  • Vote... it may help to get it included:
    https://connect.microsoft.com/WindowsHomeServer/feedback/details/557815/include-media-center

    Art (artfudd) Folden
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    "michaelreed" wrote in message news:ccc04404-91e3-474e-b106-3bda501f8f37@communitybridge.codeplex.com...

    I personally take Vail as a slap in the face.  all the talk of stability is __!  I have run whs v1 for as long as I can remember with multiple add ins, as well as Sagetv and Magicjack even.  I've done multiple recoveries to my desktops, stream live tv to multiple family members, AND use it to talk on the phone!  My home server v1 has been rock solid and I was hoping for MCE support so that I could cut out third party apps and use Vail as my whole life Media HUB.  I was figuring that they would incorporate MCE, and maybe some kind of family messaging and group calendar that we could all post to.  it should have allowed me to remote in to stream tv and schedule recordings on top of music, pictures, and videos.  to be honest, with my addins and third party software, my version 1 kicks Vails __.  the only thing I can't do that Vail can is stream and even that I think I could get around with some work.  I will not be upgrading, and I cannot believe that they not only ignored our requests, but seem to think we should be amazed and gratified that they have given it a shiny interface!!!  do they think we are stupid that we would just be distracted by something shiny instead of new content that we asked for?  I am so upset and disappointed by the lack of customer concern I can hardly express myself.  and to think that I was singing WHS praises for the past two years and eagerly awaiting Vail.  I can sum it all up to what one of my IT colleagues said.


    me:"Look!  Vail is here"


    him:  "so, what does it do now?"


    me:  "um, its prettier?  and it can stream?"


    him:  "was it worth the wait?"


    sadly MS... it was totally not worth the wait.


    Michael

    Thursday, June 3, 2010 10:50 PM
  • Vail in the state as we "consume" it now is rather limited indeed. It's even less then what we see/get in V1.
    Not talking about "under the hood", because I consider that bugfixes of things I shouldn't be concerned about anyway.
    Heck, I'm a average Joe with little tech knowledge ;-)
     
     

    Vote... it may help to get it included:
    https://connect.microsoft.com/WindowsHomeServer/feedback/ details/557815/include-media-center

    Art (artfudd) Folden
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    "michaelreed" wrote in message news:ccc04404-91e3-474e-b106-3bda501f8f37@communitybridge.codeplex.com...

    I personally take Vail as a slap in the face.  all the talk of stability is __!  I have run whs v1 for as long as I can remember with multiple add ins, as well as Sagetv and Magicjack even.  I've done multiple recoveries to my desktops, stream live tv to multiple family members, AND use it to talk on the phone!  My home server v1 has been rock solid and I was hoping for MCE support so that I could cut out third party apps and use Vail as my whole life Media HUB.  I was figuring that they would incorporate MCE, and maybe some kind of family messaging and group calendar that we could all post to.  it should have allowed me to remote in to stream tv and schedule recordings on top of music, pictures, and videos.  to be honest, with my addins and third party software, my version 1 kicks Vails __.  the only thing I can't do that Vail can is stream and even that I think I could get around with some work.  I will not be upgrading, and I cannot believe that they not only ignored our requests, but seem to think we should be amazed and gratified that they have given it a shiny interface!!!  do they think we are stupid that we would just be distracted by something shiny instead of new content that we asked for?  I am so upset and disappointed by the lack of customer concern I can hardly express myself.  and to think that I was singing WHS praises for the past two years and eagerly awaiting Vail.  I can sum it all up to what one of my IT colleagues said.


    me:"Look!  Vail is here"


    him:  "so, what does it do now?"


    me:  "um, its prettier?  and it can stream?"


    him:  "was it worth the wait?"


    sadly MS... it was totally not worth the wait.


    Michael


    Have a nice day!
    Thursday, June 3, 2010 11:21 PM
  • you kidding?  the vote was the first thing I did :(

    Thursday, June 3, 2010 11:49 PM
  • Good for you... but others may not have voted, thus the link.. :)

    Art (artfudd) Folden
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    "michaelreed" wrote in message news:c11a4aa0-cda4-426b-97e6-bdec6f269119@communitybridge.codeplex.com...


    you kidding?  the vote was the first thing I did :(

    Friday, June 4, 2010 6:42 PM
  • Sorry to be late to this, but I have cast a vote "FOR" MC in WHS Vail. The rest of the story is I know that I wouldn't use it for my music anyway. I currently use Logitech Duet with the Squeezebox server running on WHS. A couple of major advantages over anything in Windows / MC is the ability to support multiple genres in the tags and full control over the Squeezebox server via a handheld remote with screen and also via a web browser on any of my PC's regardless of the OS. No, I don't work for them, but I sure do like the product.
     
    Wilkes
    "artfudd" wrote in message news:19cbe440-24e1-4964-abcb-41d6fb845236...

    Good for you... but others may not have voted, thus the link.. :)

    Art (artfudd) Folden
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    "michaelreed" wrote in message news:c11a4aa0-cda4-426b-97e6-bdec6f269119@communitybridge.codeplex.com...


    you kidding?  the vote was the first thing I did :(

    Sunday, June 6, 2010 10:50 PM
  • I have posted this on a forum where they will definitely be interested in getting MC added to Vail. It looks like it has already jumped 6 votes since I did so. :D
    Saturday, August 28, 2010 5:24 PM
  • Most people here seem eager to get Media Center included in their Home Server. Apparantly these people all want to use one or more extenders. Though I agree that the concept of Extenders is nice they are so limited when it comes to playback capabilities (for instance blu-ray disks) that I'd much rather use HTPC's throughout the house.

    DVBLogic creates some great software that allows me to virtualize all tuners on for instance WHS and share them on the network to as many HTPC's as I want. Heck, they don't even have to be certified for Media Center. Efforts are even being made to have a recording broker in Media Center that allows centralized recording.

    Friday, September 3, 2010 9:46 AM
  • Your budget must be 10x more than mine..
     
    On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 09:46:56 +0000, Berry Schreuder - Qawa wrote:
     
    > Though I agree that the concept of Extenders is nice they are so limited when it comes to playback capabilities (for instance blu-ray disks) that I'd much rather use HTPC's throughout the house.
     

    Barb Bowman

    http://www.digitalmediaphile.com

    Friday, September 3, 2010 10:04 AM
  • Your budget must be 10x more than mine..
     
    On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 09:46:56 +0000, Berry Schreuder - Qawa wrote:
     
    > Though I agree that the concept of Extenders is nice they are so limited when it comes to playback capabilities (for instance blu-ray disks) that I'd much rather use HTPC's throughout the house.
     

    Barb Bowman

    http://www.digitalmediaphile.com


    Realy? I wonder what makes you believe that.

    If I want the Xbox 360 (best extender there is right?) and go for the new silent(ly-ish) model it'll cost me EUR 229,95. Complete HTPC systems like the Zotac ZBOX HD will cost me EUR 209. I believe I could do it for less when building it myself.

    Though I agree that DVBLogic has it's licensing fees.

    Anyway, my point was not to have a discussion on the price of all this but to show there are other ways to achieve the same goal.

    -Berry

    P.S. Nice site you have there!

    Friday, September 3, 2010 10:37 AM
  • I already own four 2nd generation extenders..
    (thx for the kind words)
     
    On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 10:37:26 +0000, Berry Schreuder - Qawa wrote:
     
    >Realy? I wonder what makes you believe that.
     

    Barb Bowman

    http://www.digitalmediaphile.com

    Friday, September 3, 2010 12:03 PM
  • >> Though I agree that the concept of Extenders is nice they are so limited when it comes to playback capabilities (for instance blu-ray disks) that I'd much rather use HTPC's throughout the house.

     

    Won't work if you use your HTPCs to record channels with copy protection.  Only extenders can "share" DRM recordings.

    Wednesday, September 8, 2010 1:12 PM
  • Won't work if you use your HTPCs to record channels with copy protection.  Only extenders can "share" DRM recordings.


    I agree, but this currently does not affect me. I'm using DVB-T in Europe (Netherlands).

    I also believe that sharing DRM recordings within the homegroup should be allowed, not just via extenders but other pc's as well.

    Thursday, September 9, 2010 6:48 AM
  • Sorry for being ignorant/not educated enough, but I don't "get it" with this Media Center-stuff into WHS.

    I have all my movies converted to .avi (xvid-format) and stored in the corresponding folder on WHS v1.
    When I feel like watching a movie, I start up the 360 and browse to the file in question, and press Play - et violà, I'm watching a film!

    What more is it to it?

    (I have the "My Movies" AddIn, but haven't managed it to show cover art when using the 360. Haven't looked into it yet. Not even sure if it is the AddIn to use for this...)


    One WHS v1 machine in the basement with a mixed setup of harddrives in and outside the storage pool. And now, next to it, a Vail Refresh brother for beta duties.
    Thursday, September 9, 2010 9:25 AM
  • ... but I don't "get it" with this Media Center-stuff into WHS. ...
    Some users want the Media Center 10' interface and the rest of the Media Center bits so they can use their server for local playback (i.e. as a HTPC), for TV recording, and to feed their Media Center Extender devices. It's not the direction Microsoft sees this going; Extenders (other than the Xbox 360) are dead, and Microsoft doesn't envision the server as a playback device, just as a content store.

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Thursday, September 9, 2010 12:28 PM
    Moderator
  • ... I also believe that sharing DRM recordings within the homegroup should be allowed, not just via extenders but other pc's as well.
    Here in the US, the RIAA might (will) disagree with you. There are similar organizations in other locales...
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Thursday, September 9, 2010 12:31 PM
    Moderator
  • @Ken, @ChristianJohansson,

    Ken, I don't think using the Home Server as a playback device is what people want. What they do want in my opinion is to have Media Center and the physical tuners integrated into Home Server so they don't have to have a PC (or HTPC) turned on in order to have a Extender function.

    A Extender is always a client to some machine running Windows Media Center. If that machine and the machine running Home Server are the same it would make perfect sense. I'm not saying that having a seperate machine for Media Center and WHS is a bad idea, just that integrating the two in this way makes sense.

    -Berry

     

    • Edited by Berry-Schreuder Thursday, September 9, 2010 1:09 PM Type, first line said HTPC, should ofcourse be Home Server or the response wouldn't make any sense
    Thursday, September 9, 2010 12:35 PM
  • ... I also believe that sharing DRM recordings within the homegroup should be allowed, not just via extenders but other pc's as well.
    Here in the US, the RIAA might (will) disagree with you. There are similar organizations in other locales...

    might or will? I don't quite see why they would.

    If I record content or buy it the creator of that content has every right to protect it. But us humans tend to want to use that content on more than one place and that should be possible especially if you're paying for it. Limiting content to individual humans is rather difficult to accomplish technically so the content providers create solutions that limits the content in a technical way, hence per device restriction.

    If I can share a recorded and copy protected show with multiple extenders it's a pretty good solution for limitting the content to humans and I don't see why a Home Group (consisting only of devices in MY house) would be any different. It would not surprise me if this is one of the scenario's that Home Group is intended for.

    Thursday, September 9, 2010 12:48 PM
  • Berry, if you read this thread (and others here and in the software forum on the same topic) you'll find that a lot of users do want local playback, and yes, a lot want tuner use as well. Both of those functions require desktop use of the server (the Media Center interface is just a 10' GUI on a desktop application), and Microsoft very definitely doesn't see desktop use as a part of Windows Home Server. And Extenders are dead; the only one you can buy new is, as I said, an Xbox.

    Don't get me wrong; Media Center is cool and home theater PCs are a lot of fun. But DLNA is the strategic focus in this version of Windows Home Server, and I think it's the right decision, because DLNA is designed to let the devices you have today, or might buy tomorrow, interoperate in intuitive ways with your home server.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Thursday, September 9, 2010 1:14 PM
    Moderator
  • >> I don't quite see why they would.

    You obviously don't follow the U.S. news very closely :)  These are the same trade groups that consider used-record stores to be "stealing."  They singlehandedly killed technologies like DAT and Minidisc, and nearly killed the VCR and the MP3 player (suing their manufacturers all the way up to our Supreme Court).  It's hardly a new stance, either: you can go back 100 years and find the same trade groups complaining that improvements in player-piano technology are killing their sheet music business.

     

    MCX will never, ever be supported in WHS.  It was a great feature.  I still use it every day.  (Just look at all the geeks here who are begging for more proprietary protocol lock-in!  How often does that happen?!)  But time to face reality.  It's dead, Jim.  Industry standards like DLNA are the future.

    Frankly, don't be surprised if the entire eHome project gets EOL's in the Win8 product cycle...

    I just wish that DLNA / NAS clients weren't so primitive by comparison.  The best clients on the market are ~5yr behind the best Media Center plugins (eg Media Browser) in terms of interface polish, database navigation features, metadata integration, etc.  And the XBox is not even close to being the best NAS client!  Hopefully killing MCE/MCX will allow them to shift some resources toward improving the XBox.  At least the eHome team (or what's left of it) is already in E&D, which should help...

    Thursday, September 9, 2010 3:02 PM
  • Its not like we are asking for something that isn't already out there.  we are just asking for them to give a stripped down version for WHS so we don't have to have two machines running.  its no different than having a second win 7 box with a tuner running as far as rights and DLNA are concerned!  I don't see what the problem is?  even if it was going to go EOL, why not give the customers something to make them happy in the meantime, and prove that they were listening to us?  its not like we are asking them to write software from scratch even, all they have to do is strip media center down, and run it as a service!!  As I have stated before, I will not be buying vail because I feel like my needs are not met and I dislike a company deciding what they think is best for me.  this was one of the most requested features, and we were completely ignored.  sorry microsoft Vail, you will be renamed forever in my mind as microsoft "Fail".
    Thursday, September 9, 2010 5:04 PM
  • ... but I don't "get it" with this Media Center-stuff into WHS. ...
    Some users want the Media Center 10' interface and the rest of the Media Center bits so they can use their server for local playback (i.e. as a HTPC), for TV recording, and to feed their Media Center Extender devices. It's not the direction Microsoft sees this going; Extenders (other than the Xbox 360) are dead, and Microsoft doesn't envision the server as a playback device, just as a content store.

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)


    Thanks Ken.

    I've only tried Media Center briefly and as I use the Xbox360 as an extender, and watch (and record) any tv-shows of interest with a Sagem desktop box (correct term?) with a harddrive as I get tv via DVB-T.
    And those recordings are encrypted and only playable through the Sagem.

    Media Center may be for everybody else... :-)


    One WHS v1 machine in the basement with a mixed setup of harddrives in and outside the storage pool. And now, next to it, a Vail Refresh brother for beta duties.
    Thursday, September 9, 2010 6:43 PM
  • >> its not like we are asking them to write software from scratch even, all they have to do is strip media center down, and run it as a service!! 

    Well gosh, when you phrase it like that, it almost sounds easy!

    Reality check: you're talking about a feature that would've probably added an entire year to Vail's release schedule given their current resources, or ~$10M added to the budget of the release as currently scheduled.  You know that there are entire subsystems of Windows that are designed differently on server SKUs, right?  http://blogs.msdn.com/b/larryosterman/archive/2009/01/08/why-do-people-think-that-a-server-sku-works-well-as-a-general-purpose-operating-system.aspx  (yes, that's me with the equally pissy comment :))  Let's not even get into the issue of test matrices...

     

    >> I've only tried Media Center briefly and as I use the Xbox360 as an extender

    If you've only spent a brief time with Media Center then I guarantee you're not using the XBox as an extender.  Only hardcore Media Center nerds do (including me, granted).  The UX for playing media off simple SMB shares is radically different.

    Friday, September 10, 2010 3:24 PM
  • >> I've only tried Media Center briefly and as I use the Xbox360 as an extender

    If you've only spent a brief time with Media Center then I guarantee you're not using the XBox as an extender.  Only hardcore Media Center nerds do (including me, granted).  The UX for playing media off simple SMB shares is radically different.

    Maybe I'm way off understanding the different terms in use here, but I can live with that.

    I watch movies stored on the WHS via the 360.
    And it works just fine, Media Center, SMB shares, [insert term of choice here], whatever.

    It works.

    I don't need more.


    One WHS v1 machine in the basement with a mixed setup of harddrives in and outside the storage pool. And now, next to it, a Vail Refresh brother for beta duties.
    Friday, September 10, 2010 3:32 PM
  • Actually Mr Sarcastic, it really is that easy.  The company I work for writes software on a monthly basis and we only have a 6 man sofware development team.  and before you comment that we must write small programs, We are in the healthcare industry and write software that allows Doctors to dispense medication directly from their practice without having to send you to a ____.  this is very detailed work that has to be adjusted constantly to meet new laws and requlations.  Ask any REAL programmer and they will tell you that the hard part is writing the base code, after that, adjustments are easier. 

    and yes, I realize that there are entire subsystems written differently on server SKU's... but I also realize that Vail is based off of server 2008, and that is based off of windows 7, which handles media center just fine.  and as far as their testing... don't get me started, we the consumer are the test subjects as usual...  example, see windows vista.

    If it takes their development team that long and that much money to do a minor rewrite, then maybe they need to cut some of the bloat from their company, because it is not that difficult!  stop being a sheep and buying into their excuses! 

    The consumers made their needs abundantly clear, and were ignored.  I for one will not settle for a shiny interface and half assed streaming. 

    Friday, September 10, 2010 3:44 PM
  • not sure why they blanked out the word ph@rmacy on me?
    Friday, September 10, 2010 3:45 PM
  • Michael, your application is, I'm pretty sure, miniscule compared to the Windows codebase. The last SLOC metric I've seen is for Vista, with an estimated 50M lines of code, and I'll assume for argument that Windows 7 is the same size. So compared to matching your software to changes in the regulatory landscape, you're looking at a whole different magnitude of effort to add something (Media Center) to an operating system (Windows Server 2008 R2) that doesn't have it, isn't tuned for it, and may not even have some of the required hooks to attach it to.

    If I had to guess, I'd say that Media Center represents somewhere around 2% to 4% of the Windows 7 codebase, between the actual Media Center application and any OS support for it. That's 1 to 2 million lines of code that require at least a hard look, which will be a major project by itself, and which must be completed before actual coding for the inclusion could begin (no point in the coding if you hit a showstopper of the "this isn't in the OS because it breaks this other required functionality" variety).

    Personally, I think Richard's estimates are high by a factor of two or three, but they're at least in the ballpark. It's certainly not technically impossible. In a business sense, I'd have to say that it is impossible; that kind of additional investment for a fringe product won't deliver Vail with Media Center bolted in, it will deliver nothing at all because Microsoft won't invest the resources.

    As for consumers' needs, no. The consumers needs are determined through focus groups, conversations with vendors (and even consumers) at trade shows ("Here's what people are asking me/us for: ..."), surveys, etc. The various "Include Media Center" product suggestions on Connect and their votes aren't consumers stating needs. They're enthusiasts stating desires. There's a huge difference.

    BTW, if I had to guess, I'd say that the word you're wondering about was stripped because often in forums it's preceded by the word "online". I.e. it's an indicator of spam...


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Friday, September 10, 2010 5:08 PM
    Moderator
  • I also stated that we had a developer team of 6...  I would assume that microsoft has lots of teams that just sit all day writing code.  I think everyone is making a mountain out of a mole hill here.  media center is already written!  it just needs tweaking to run headless.  I understand it is a not a minor undertaking, but I feel if they want us to spend money on a new operating system, then by god, give us something NEW that we asked for. 

    And what business sense does it make to put out an operating system if half of your target group isn't going to buy it because they are disappointed with being ignored?  spend the extra time to make something so good that no one can resist or compete with it!  quit putting out half @ssed software that makes the users pull out their hair waiting for fixes to stuff that should have already been there.  I'm tired of being patted on the head and told that its just not going to happen because of one silly excuse after another.

     

    this is just pure, unadulterated laziness and lack of follow through.

    Friday, September 10, 2010 7:39 PM
  • And what business sense does it make to put out an operating system if half of your target group isn't going to buy it because they are disappointed with being ignored?  spend the extra time to make something so good that no one can resist or compete with it!  quit putting out half @ssed software that makes the users pull out their hair waiting for fixes to stuff that should have already been there.  I'm tired of being patted on the head and told that its just not going to happen because of one silly excuse after another.

     

    this is just pure, unadulterated laziness and lack of follow through.

    ...and maybe there you have it - MS doesn't consider any of the ppl longing for a Media Center integration as the target group.
    Can it be that simple?

    And there are no silly excuses are there? MS hasn't stated anything official regarding this. Correct?

    Maybe I'm in minority, but I'm gonna buy - and use - Vail when it goes retail (OEM).


    One WHS v1 machine in the basement with a mixed setup of harddrives in and outside the storage pool. And now, next to it, a Vail Refresh brother for beta duties.
    Friday, September 10, 2010 9:49 PM
  • Extenders were dead, but have been given new life!

    http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/13/acer-revo-2-sports-intel-ce4100-windows-media-center-embedded/

    http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/13/asus-intel-ce4100-companion-box-with-windows-media-center-embed/

    A Windows Media Center add in definitely needs to be made Microsoft. If not someone else needs to make it for them and charge people for it. :D

    Sunday, September 19, 2010 9:12 AM
  • These are not Media Center extenders. These are stand alone PC's with Windows
    Embedded. They are 1 TV to 1 Computer. No extension/extender of any kind. They
    don't stream from another computer to the TV they are connected to.
     
    Or do you mean something else???
     
    On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 09:12:29 +0000, rekd0514 wrote:
     
    >
    >
    >Extenders were dead, but have been given new life!
    >
    >
    >
    >A Windows Media Center add in definitely needs to be made Microsoft. If not someone else needs to make it for them and charge people for it. :D
     

    Barb Bowman

    http://www.digitalmediaphile.com

    Sunday, September 19, 2010 11:32 AM
  • These are not Media Center extenders. These are stand alone PC's with Windows
    Embedded. They are 1 TV to 1 Computer. No extension/extender of any kind. They
    don't stream from another computer to the TV they are connected to.
     
    Or do you mean something else???
     
    On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 09:12:29 +0000, rekd0514 wrote:
     
    >
    >
    >Extenders were dead, but have been given new life!
    >
    >
    >
    >A Windows Media Center add in definitely needs to be made Microsoft. If not someone else needs to make it for them and charge people for it. :D
     

    Barb Bowman

    http://www.digitalmediaphile.com

    Ummm yea, I'm pretty sure all extenders are technically a computer. The xbox or old extenders are definitely a computer as well. Also these don't have windows on them from what I can tell. They just have windows media center and a other TV/streaming apps. If they have WMC they should definitely be able to stream content from another computer to the TV they are connected to.

    Honestly you could use a cheap Nvidia ION nettop as an extender and get more functionality for the price. You are then using Win 7 as the OS though. It depends on the price of these new units as to whether they will be worth the money. It still seems like a 360 slim or nettop is the best option.

    Sunday, September 19, 2010 7:26 PM
  • A media center extender can stream live tv from a different connected computer
    that has a TV tuner. That is not true (without a network tuner) of "any machine
    that has WMC".
     
    On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 19:26:33 +0000, rekd0514 wrote:
     
    >They just have windows media center and a other TV/streaming apps. If they have WMC they should definitely be able to stream content from another computer to the TV they are connected to.
     

    Barb Bowman

    http://www.digitalmediaphile.com

    Monday, September 20, 2010 10:32 AM
  • Extenders were dead, but have been given new life!

    http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/13/acer-revo-2-sports-intel-ce4100-windows-media-center-embedded/

    http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/13/asus-intel-ce4100-companion-box-with-windows-media-center-embed/

    A Windows Media Center add in definitely needs to be made Microsoft. If not someone else needs to make it for them and charge people for it. :D

    Its interesting to see windows embedded coming into this space, and I think it shows even more clearly that extenders are old, dead technology, which is being phased out.

    These new devices look like they will act like proper clients in a WHS environment, just like a HTPC.

    And, as others have mentioned, nettops can handle HTPC duties quite nicely, and are in a similar price point.

    I lobbied earlier for Vail to include extender support, but its becoming increasingly clear that this is now yesterdays technology.

    Monday, September 20, 2010 6:49 PM
  • Hi!

     

    I think the new concept of win7 embedded pcs is great. It effectlvly kills the extender market (maybe except the xbox360).

    However, one thing that I can't figure out is, how should I do with TV? If I use a thin client with win7embedded, where do I put the tv card? How do I get tv in my media center at all?

    I don't kow about USA, but in Sweden you still need a set top box with a ca modul even for IPTV, no usb sticks or pci cards exist, or media center plugins for that matter...

    How is this supposed to work?

    My idea is to have the whs as the "tv server", basically like the dvb-link works today. It has software tuners that the clients use. That is the perfect solution in my eyes.

    SOme people fear that adding extra stuff on a server make it more vulnerable to crash... surely that is a good point, but where the heck should we put the tv tuner cards then???

     

    /henrik


    Henrik
    Wednesday, September 22, 2010 1:37 PM
  • If you were to actually read the linked articles, Henrik, you would see that right now those concept PCs are using USB tuners. But a production model with a built in tuner could certainly be built, depending of course on local laws/requirements. (If it's not legal to sell them in Sweden, or if Sweden uses some HD content protection scheme that requires different hardware than the rest of the world, you're likely to be out of luck. I don't know your local laws...)

    If you want a central tuner farm, though, Microsoft clearly doesn't see Windows Home Server as the place for it. That could  go in a dedicated piece of hardware with multiple tuner cards installed, probably running Windows 7 Ultimate or similar (for the MC 10' interface and tuner handling capabilities). But in general I don't think Microsoft, or the industry, sees a central tuner farm in the home as the way of the future; they see a more distributed model, with individual tuners next to, or built in to, each playback device.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, September 22, 2010 2:46 PM
    Moderator
  • If you want a central tuner farm, though, Microsoft clearly doesn't see Windows Home Server as the place for it.d

    You should be able to use 3rd party software on vail to create a tuner farm for other MCE machines on the network to use. You can certainly do it on WHS v1.

    http://forum.wegotserved.com/index.php/topic/10663-a-tuner-farm-on-a-whs-it-can-be-done/

     

     

     

     

    Wednesday, September 22, 2010 8:50 PM
  • If you were to actually read the linked articles, Henrik, you would see that right now those concept PCs are using USB tuners. But a production model with a built in tuner could certainly be built, depending of course on local laws/requirements. (If it's not legal to sell them in Sweden, or if Sweden uses some HD content protection scheme that requires different hardware than the rest of the world, you're likely to be out of luck. I don't know your local laws...)

    If you want a central tuner farm, though, Microsoft clearly doesn't see Windows Home Server as the place for it. That could  go in a dedicated piece of hardware with multiple tuner cards installed, probably running Windows 7 Ultimate or similar (for the MC 10' interface and tuner handling capabilities). But in general I don't think Microsoft, or the industry, sees a central tuner farm in the home as the way of the future; they see a more distributed model, with individual tuners next to, or built in to, each playback device.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)


    Hi!

    I did read the articles Ken, but I was in a bit of a rush when I wrote the comment. There are lot of USB tuners already available for DVB-T, and none for IPTV (but that is a whole different issue).

    In Sweden, with a basic USB tuner for DVB-T you get like 3 free channels with public service content. In order to watch any interensting shows you need a CA-module, and such a device is almost as big as those small PCs themselves. I know happuage has developed a ca-module for USB, but that is shaky at best, so the only option so far in Sweden is to get a big tv card like the floppydtv with is almost as big as those old ISA soundblaster cards and requires a molex power source.

    I agree that MS strategy is correct, each thin client is running win7 embedded with a tuner of your choice, and then push the recorded content to the server for everyone to share. BUT, and this is a big but, this relies on adequate tv tuner support on the market and that is really lacking in sweden/europe due to the extremly limited number of free channels and immature IP-TV

    Hence my point of putting a big tv card with a ca module in the whs server and let it share the tuner using a concept like dvb-link.

     

    I hope this clarifies my earlier comment. I completly agree with MS strategy and don't want to put any more stuff in the whs than is needed, but since tv distribution is handled so differently in tdifferent parts of the world, it is a tough nut to crack, or is it?

     

    /Henrik


    Henrik
    Thursday, September 23, 2010 1:51 PM
  • It's a tough problem to solve, as you say, because distribution is handled so differently in different parts of the world. Microsoft can really only provide a framework into which vendors can fit their own solutions. As a matter of fact, Microsoft does provide such a framework; it's called Media Center, and it's part of the versions of Windows that home users actually buy for use on HTPCs (primarily Windows Home Premium, with a smattering of Windows Ultimate).

    However, Microsoft pretty obviously doesn't see the server as the tuner farm/streaming live TV hub for the average home. So don't look for Windows Home Server to have anything "in box" to support this use, and don't be too surprised if "roll your own" is harder with Windows Home Server than it would be with another version of Windows.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Thursday, September 23, 2010 5:07 PM
    Moderator
  • don't be too surprised if "roll your own" is harder with Windows Home Server than it would be with another version of Windows.

    Ken, im interested to know if you are aware of any specific restrictions on vail in this regard.

    I hope commercial 3rd party add-ins for vail are poised to plug the gap. Its a natural role for a (enthusiasts) whs to perform, especially in the absence of decent network attached tuners.

    Thursday, September 23, 2010 6:02 PM
  • I don't know of restrictions, no, but "harder" is meant in the sense that Microsoft probably doesn't intend to prevent this use, but if the easy way to solve some issue in a supported scenario is to disable some critical (for this unsupported scenario) component, that's what they'll do because it's easy. Easy = low resource use, leaving resources for solving other problems.

    I still think if you really want a tuner farm you should use Windows 7 Home Premium (or Ultimate, but HP gets the job done). There's a large community of people using that OS (or Vista, or XP MCE) to act as the head end for an IP video distribution system, and a number of vendors in that space. The Windows Home Server ecosystem is tiny by comparison. But better yet is to have a tuner at each device that will consume the media content. If you need multiple tuners in a single location, it's probably for DVR functionality. In that case, get yourself a DVR which will use an M-Card.

    As for "decent network attached tuners", they exist. The HDHomeRun is pretty good; it goes up to 720p/1080i and has two tuners in box. Just don't try to stream it to your XBox from your Media Center PC (which is a caveat for any network tuner, including a single tuner in a tuner farm that's been shared to another computer; it's not likely to work very well).


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Thursday, September 23, 2010 8:20 PM
    Moderator
  • And thats the part that everyone is annoyed at Ken.  we don't want to run two systems all the time.  I have WHS V.1 running with sagetv and it is great!  the downfall is having to buy the licenses for each computer to watch sage with, and that its not compatible with any other extenders except if you buy the one from sage.  So the WHS as a tuner farm is not only possible, but a proven method.

      if they would just do a simple server version of media center, it would run on all media centers, extenders, and I'm sure there would be some cool standalone tv's and boxes coming out that could connect as well.  We just want a simple, one-box solution that works. 

     

    Thursday, September 23, 2010 8:26 PM
  •     The thing I find the most funny about the people defending WHS for not having WMC built into is drum roll...   90%+ want it.   Why again can't they?  Because of cost?  Because it will make a server that run's millions of lines of code today unstable?  Not part of the Road Map?  Everyone here is or still wants to be a fan of  M$.   But when they don't listen, it makes it hard to keep the faith.  I want one box in my house acting as a Windows Home Server!   Meeting all my needs and the needs of anyone else who wants to use it.  

     MS Road Map:

    Windows 7 Ultimate acting as a HTPC running VMware workstation.  WHS vail running as a guest for 90% of their user base....    What's wrong with this picture?

     

     

    Friday, September 24, 2010 3:32 AM
  • I am a bit split about this whole question. For me, tuner farming in WHS would work great, I could build small Atom clients and put in every room, connect them to our gigabit ethernet and they could just work, sweet.

    But, since most other countries outside Europe don't rely on bulky ca modules, they feel that a tiny USB tuner is more than sufficient to get the tv they need, or they just watch it off the internet through the "internet tv" functionality in windows 7 (surprisingly enough, not available in sweden).

    So I guess ti depends on which part of the world you live in, how the publication of tv is handled. Personalyl I would much rather go to a shop like itunes and just buy the episodes I am interested in, rather than to record it... or watch an internet stream of the news etc on a specific channel. But that requires a ____ of a lot more bandwidth than most customers have today. Here I feel that Sweden is very far gone with 4G cellphone and 100/10 internet in many homes, But sadly we lack the services :(

    I find it surprising that MS doesn't pay a little more attention to the creation of plugins, services etc in the different countries. For example, in Sweden the public service network SVT has an extremly good website where you can watch lots of tv shows that has been aired, plus LOTS of older content for free, a huge archive. DO they provide a plugin for media center? NO. This is created by an enthusiast with some MCML knowledge. The problem is that when SVT change their website, which they do often, this plugin won't work, and it needs redoing. This app is available on codeplex. Lots of people have emailed SVT about this app, asking them to support it, they can simply buy the codebase or design a new one. Problem two, the market for media center apps is just as cold as the climate here in Sweden. I work for the largest IT consulting company in Nothern europe, and we have 0 people with MCML knowledge, and 0 requests for these skills. Here I feel that MS is an important player. Surely MS Sweden could (to promote media center) offer 100 MCML dev hours to SVT just to promote their platform. They do nothing, while everyone is developing in Flash.

    Surely, MS release the framework and it is called media center, but I think MS could do lots more in terms of promoting this to the "big players", like SVT, Spotify etc. But there seems to be 0 commercial interest for media center apps. And I have no solution to this other than MS

    1) Find out what are the most popular online services (SVT Play, Spotify etc)

    2) Develop plugins for these and offer for free

    3) See what happens.

    SOmehow the public should be made aware that media center exist in their win7 PC and it is a very nice thing... :)

     

    /Henrik


    Henrik
    Friday, September 24, 2010 6:05 AM
  • The thing I find the most funny about the people defending WHS for not having WMC built into is drum roll...   90%+ want it.
    ...

    Microsoft says otherwise.

    90%+ of the voters on suggestions on Connect, yes probably. (I haven't looked at all of them recently, but I'll accept the number.) But if you look at Connect as a whole, you will see that almost every suggestion has a 10:1 ratio (or more) of positive to negative votes. People mostly don't bother voting against stuff, they just vote for stuff that they want. And Connect is skewed very heavily in favor of enthusiasts, who will presumably want this particular feature with greater frequency than the general public.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Friday, September 24, 2010 1:40 PM
    Moderator
  • Henrik, Microsoft isn't going to do this, because you need a different soution for every region/country, and in some cases probably several solutions for a single region. Microsoft is going to develop the framework and platform, and let ISVs develop the solutions.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Friday, September 24, 2010 1:42 PM
    Moderator
  • Ken, so what I am getting from this comment is that the 90% enthusiasts, who are the most likely to buy, and the most likely to spread their opinions and word of mouth advertising, are going to be ignored? 

    correct me if I'm wrong, but the general public probably doesn't know enough about the product to make an informed decision.  thats why the enthusiasts are enthusiasts!  they know the product, and know how to make their opinions known!  and if they are anything like me, they have family and friends that ask "why can't it do this?", and all I can do is shrug and tell them that I asked the same thing...

    Friday, September 24, 2010 2:06 PM
  • Henrik, Microsoft isn't going to do this, because you need a different soution for every region/country, and in some cases probably several solutions for a single region. Microsoft is going to develop the framework and platform, and let ISVs develop the solutions.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)


    Ken, I am all for this idea and I support it 100 %. But if I where to go to the leading TV/media companies in Sweden and ask them to make any kind of plug in to media center they would most certainly ask me "why should we?" And I don't have any good answer for this.

    There was an article a while back about MS Mediaroom, as a possible platform for IP-TV. But the leading telecom companies in Sweden declined to support this since they wanted an open standard platform like IMS.

    The reality is that small countries like Sweden are "dead" in terms of windows media center services. And if MS locally don't want/bother to promote it, then it is a lost cause.

    /Henrik


    Henrik
    Monday, September 27, 2010 6:35 AM
  • Hi,

    In the Connect Vail bug forums, i came across a 'workaround' post by a guy (can't find his post anymore to credit him!) who apparently has managed to get media center functionality into vail using an app called GB-PVR.   This is a free MC replacement with the ability to record from ATSC/ClearQAM/DVB-C/DVB-T/DVB-S devices,

             but,  the important thing is that it can record as dvr-ms files!  

    Apparently it can be set up to record into the Vail Workgroup Recorded TV folder,and all the files are then accessible across your network.  Even better,  it even has a remote web interface for setting up recordings and from what i gather this can be accessed externally (i.e. over the web).  This guy has had his vail box recording all his shows (from a dual tuner pcr card), and with auto wakeup/sleep for over 2 months with no issues !

    This is EXACTLY what i have been looking for, and would love to use my 60W WHS box to record and serve all my recorded shows instead of my main 180W HTPC!   I have installed the app with no detriment to my usual vail activities, but my spare usb tuner has just died.  As soon as a replacement usb dual tuner arrives in the post i will relay my feedback.

    In the meantime  i would love to hear if anyone else had tired this program.

     

    Cheers

    darren

    Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:37 PM
  • Hi,

    In the Connect Vail bug forums, i came across a 'workaround' post by a guy (can't find his post anymore to credit him!) who apparently has managed to get media center functionality into vail using an app called GB-PVR.   This is a free MC replacement with the ability to record from ATSC/ClearQAM/DVB-C/DVB-T/DVB-S devices,

             but,  the important thing is that it can record as dvr-ms files!  

    Apparently it can be set up to record into the Vail Workgroup Recorded TV folder,and all the files are then accessible across your network.  Even better,  it even has a remote web interface for setting up recordings and from what i gather this can be accessed externally (i.e. over the web).  This guy has had his vail box recording all his shows (from a dual tuner pcr card), and with auto wakeup/sleep for over 2 months with no issues !

    This is EXACTLY what i have been looking for, and would love to use my 60W WHS box to record and serve all my recorded shows instead of my main 180W HTPC!   I have installed the app with no detriment to my usual vail activities, but my spare usb tuner has just died.  As soon as a replacement usb dual tuner arrives in the post i will relay my feedback.

    In the meantime  i would love to hear if anyone else had tired this program.

     

    Cheers

    darren

    Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:38 PM
  •   Thanks for the tip Darren.   

                 But I don't want a work around.  MS needs to take a serious look at Apple here.  They only focus on consumer devices and have MORE market capital than Microsoft and hardly touch the corporate space.    I also understand that TV is different all over the world, but there is a large amout of web content that you can also consume even with out a cable connection and could be grown.  End of the day having a consumer product being developed by the SBS team seems to be a bad match up.  Media Center is a feature in Win 7, why can't it be a feature in WHS that's based on the same kerenal?

    Wednesday, September 29, 2010 1:02 AM
  • ...  Media Center is a feature in Win 7, why can't it be a feature in WHS that's based on the same kerenal?
    Vail is based on Windows Server 2008 R2, not Windows 7. No Media Center.

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:49 PM
    Moderator
  • Just curious, I have tested dvb-link at home on whs 1 and it is working great. Isn't this what you are all looking for

    For me, this is perfect, it allow me to build Atom based media centers or Asus eee machines and use them as thin clients around the house, just configure, add the connector software needed for whs and dvblink and I am up and runing.

    The only downside is that the clients are responsible for recording, but with low power atom cpu machines I don't see that as an issue really. Why does anyone need 180 W power on any HTPC if it is used for viewing only, and not transcoding, gaming etc? The ION2 or ION chip is more than capable of rendering blu-rays.

    Before, I have been complaining lots about why MS hasn't added this and that, but then, they do have the SDK and maybe they don't want to get their hands dirty in everything but leave some development of plugins for the open market. Stuff like blu-ray, tuner farming etc. The fact that these plugins are not of the high quality one maybe had expected when MS would develop is a completly different matter. For example, the powerdvd 10 blu-ray integration is far from seamless, but that is really a cyberlink issue and not a MS issue. Clearly Cyberling put lots of development effort in their own player and release the media center addin as a bonus only. If they focused on the addin as well, it might have been a seamless integration.

     

    The only thing that I find REALLY annoying about MS and media center is that they take far too long to fix bugs and adding enhancements to the media center product. I don't want to wait for a new version of windows before they fix something.

    cheers

    Henrik


    Henrik
    Wednesday, September 29, 2010 1:29 PM
  • Hi,

    I have looked at DVB-link and it does look great, but you followup with the point that you still need a client to record, which for me means having to run my main HTPC at the same time as my WHS box = more electricity. 

    I am now resigned to MCE never coming to WHS, but if MS seriously want to compete with Apple ect on the consumer media consumption front they really need to rethink their strategy.  I have seen the forthcoming embedded MCE clients, which are very nice  would be absolutely fantastic if only MS could offer a 'media/tuner farm' box to adequate complement them.

    In the meantime i look forwards to trying GB-PVR, and hope my new usb tuner arrives soon!

    The big appeal of GB-PVR for me is that it can record in DVR-MS, a native format for MCE so the recordings made in Vail would hopefully populate the same 'Recorded TV'' folder on my HTPC as the shows recorded by MS Media Center itself and be easily picked up by my xbox 360.  I could also easily stream all the files from the WHS thru the remote website. This exactly what i expect a home server to do in this day and age!  If i only wanted a remote storage and backup space i could have saved a lot of money and hassle by buying a decent NAS, however i am willing to persevere and pay for WHS since i want the extra rich feature that hopefully forthcoming plugins can provide.

    BTW, the MCE plugin provided with Arcosft Total Theatre is actually very good and i use it to play BDs and upscale all my dvds in MCE.  I gave up on Cyberlink after v7 when their products became overly large, cumbersome and changed the product focus to gimmicks rather than picture quality.

     

    Wednesday, September 29, 2010 6:55 PM
  • The problem with this thread was that it really shouldn't of been about MCE integration but the ability to have remote tuner access. The Home server should allow tuners to be loaded in a central point and record conent to it's local recorded TV space and then allow remote HTPC's or Extenders to schedule recordings and view all the content. The concept is simple. All the data is stored on the Home Server. It maintains a database for guide and what should be recording. The remote HTPC or extender can trigger tuning remotely and then can watch the live/recorded content across the network via some kind of stream. Everything else would function as it already does with current libraries. This would require a pretty decent network setup though. Atleast Draft N 300 and probably something wired.

    This request went completely the wrong direction. A server shouldn't be used to view the content like a HTPC but it certainly should be the central point of access to it.

    I know it isn't going to happen now and my guess is that it will be a mute point after Ceton updates the InfiniTV to be network based since cable labs  is allowing it now.

    Wednesday, September 29, 2010 8:28 PM
  • A few quick things.   

    1.       Darren I think we're talking about more or less the same thing.  Record on WHS and share it out.  How that's accomplished I don't care.         

     

    2. I think MS is already looking beyond WHS...  Hence the product being in the hands of the SBS group.  I stumbled across this article today about possible Windows 8 features.  Who knows if it's fact or fiction.        Family Hub PC optimized for:

                       Web and media consumption

                       Heavier communication

                       "Media Organization and Manipulation"

                        Casual gaming.  

           http://www.pcworld.com/article/200042/windows_8_rumored_features_your_pc_your_way.html

     

    3.   Ken ither you didn't understand my comment or maybe the underlying technology.     "Windows 7 and Windows 2008 R2 are based on the same kernal".  Therefore so does WHS is based or share parts of Windows 7 and Microsoft has no good reason why they can't include Media Center in WHS or at least the ablility to record tv.

    See Slide 5

    http://download.microsoft.com/download/8/C/2/8C21BAFE-3432-48D1-962A-F7A9DD54A2AC/Windows%207%20and%20Windows%20Server%202008%20R2%20Kernel%20Changes.pptx

     

    Off topic but I'm waiting for my Win 7 Tablet with a Metro shell & OneNote or something along those lines to make the "Fruit Salad" fan boys shut up!!!

    Thursday, September 30, 2010 3:54 AM
  • Hi!

    I clearly see your point about having the WHS record since it already has the tv tuners installed. I do see some issues with this that might explain why MS are reluctant about this, or didn't see this as a business case:

    1) Tv tuner manufacturers generally don't develop server drivers for thir consumer products. Granted, some tv tuners like the ones from hauppuage 8like the nova, ministick etc) do work with server 2003, but there is no guarantee. I very much doubt the tuner manufacturers even see servers as a target for their consumer products, even if the name is windows home server. The market isn't big enough, comparing to all the millions of usb tuners they can sell to laptop users.

    2) Maybe they have a problem with the fact that the guide is stored in a central place, or maybe there are issues with the fact that some customers run win7 only and some run win7+whs. Perhaps the cost of adapting both products to work in both recoording scenarios is too big to justify development, they don't want win7 and whs to have this kind of dependency.

    I think, as long as there is a 3rd party product that does the job, then I am happy. WHS and Win7 can't do everything out of the box. COmpare with Apple, they have a more closed environment for their products, but yet people seem to like them better for some reason? How many plugins will be developed for appletv?

    The big bonus for apple is that they have the ability to market and explain their products so the average Joe will understand and maybe find a need for the product and buy it. MS does the exact opposite, they develop lots of "gems", but leave it for the user to find out by himself. I have met and talked to lots of common people with little knowledge about PC, and they had no idea that windows media center existed. BUt when they did find it, they became really excited and started thinking possibilities.

    Same for WHS, I don't see any commercials about this, but I see Steve Jobs every week talking and praising his latest products... and of course the average person will become aware of this, maybe when he is eating his cornflakes during breakfast. I see commercials (mostly in computer magazines) about two kind of products from MS, their development suites and their OS and office products, never about their media products and never in the daily press. How the ____ do they expect these products to be bought not only by enthousiasts? Beats me.

    Off topic warning on that one...

    I recommend that we use some of the energy that goes into complaining about MS into complaing to the 3rd party developers instead... Generally these are also a lot more responsive than MS about making changes.

    happy testing

    Henrik

     


    Henrik
    Thursday, September 30, 2010 6:49 AM
  • K_P, yes, Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 are based on the same kernel. However, it isn't possible at this time to transplant Media Center from Windows 7 to Windows Server 2008 R2, at least not without more effort than Microsoft sees as being worthwhile. So "No Media Center". If you think you can reverse engineeer Mecia Center to get it out of Windows 7 and into Windows Server 2008 R2, that's great. (Illegal, however; you agree not "reverse engineer" Windows or Windows components when you install. :) ) But it still won't be integrated properly with Windows Home Server. For proper integration, you will want seamless streaming afar, better handling of recording, playback, and control than you have today, information in the Dashboard, etc.

    Your off-topic comment made me laugh. Sadly, the iPad is the best of the mini-tablets on the market today or (probably) coming to market anytime soon. I don't want a full-sized tablet PC; it's heavy and bulky. I do want something with a screen larger than 7", though, which is the size all the Android based tablets seem to be targeting. Plus, it's slick-looking. Apple spends huge amounts of money on design, and it shows.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Thursday, September 30, 2010 12:30 PM
    Moderator
  • 2 things i would like to add. Ken, this may be better for you then an Iphone without a phone.

    http://h20435.www2.hp.com/t5/Voodoo-Blog/HP-s-Slate-Device-Delivers-a-Holistic-Mobile-Experience/ba-p/54735

    I like my Iphone 4 its great ... because it fits in my pocket! If i want something that large i want under the hood to play a little more. I know you can with Mac's, but really they are a great computer for my grandmother ... not for people who beta test OS's

    And Media Center on WHS .... Really? For recorded TV thats it? There is much better ways to record TV on the server without having to hack the ____ out of it. I know if your like me you may just want to do it for Kicks and giggles, but there are other solutions out there that work mighty fine.

    PS. Silverlight for Iphone ... that would really take this Homeserver to a new level. I had to use Air video server and buy the 1.99 app for the IPhone ... Its truely worth it ... but i would have given the money to MS so i can just login and stream via silverlight instead of adding another service on my server and paying 1.99 for an app.

    JD

    Thursday, September 30, 2010 4:28 PM