|
||||||||
Successor to Foxsat HDR |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
Which just goes to show you have no idea how this was actually coded.
Please stop before you embarrass yourself further. The code I included is pseudo code that represents what is happening, not how it was written. Quote:
The algorithmic approach is not the only way to skin this particular cat.
That's nothing more than purest gobbledegook.It's a digital computer. By definition anything that it does must be representable by an algorithm. Quote:
Do you even know if it was coded in a high-level language and if so what effect changes would have on memory usage for this hardware architecture?
This is also meaningless gibberish.It doesn't matter how it was written. Eventually it will end up as machine code that the processor obeys. And whatever method was used to write it, simplifying the algorithm is not going to increase memory usage. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,537
|
Quote:
It's a digital computer. By definition anything that it does must be representable by an algorithm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
The algorithmic approach is not the only way to skin this particular cat
Quote:
It's a digital computer. By definition anything that it does must be representable by an algorithm.
Quote:
Having established your true credentials in this area
Quote:
I rest my valise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,537
|
Actually I will pick up the valise again as I forget to check some factoids with you. You are aware of course that all FF / RW speeds are very approximate? That these estimated speeds are greatly affected by the bit-rates used by different programmes on different channels? Of the way the bit-stream is formed in packets and stored on the PVR? Of how a statistical analysis of the bit stream could show up some curious artifacts depending on the disk cluster size chosen and how that affects the choice of notional FF/ RW speeds that is it reasonable to offer? Of course you are.
(I am also wary of anyone who claims to programme in assembler and machine code) |
|
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 207
|
Quote:
Quote:
The initial HDR release was so unstable that I eventually just turned it off. That issue was solved in the second (?) update and it has been stable since then.
How quickly the Samsung bugs are fixed will allow an informative comparison with the Humax (lack of) effort. Release Notes - Includes Improved Over The Air (OTA) download support. - Allows future Foxsat-HD and Foxsat-HDR OTA downloads to be broadcast simultaneously. - ITV HD recording improvements. - Resolved OAD failure when using 1 satellite feed. - Resolved listings on Customisable channels. The next change was to V11 which amongst a lot of changes added support for BBCi player, the first Freesat box to do so. Foxsat HDR 'freezes' every day or two requiring power cycle to fix it Humax HDR - I few things I wished were different IF Humax can't / won't fix, should we go to Watchdog? FOXSAT HDR really getting to me now Humax Foxsat-HDR freeze up Humax Crashes a lot |
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
Actually I will pick up the valise again as I forget to check some factoids with you. You are aware of course that all FF / RW speeds are very approximate? That these estimated speeds are greatly affected by the bit-rates used by different programmes on different channels? Of the way the bit-stream is formed in packets and stored on the PVR? Of how a statistical analysis of the bit stream could show up some curious artifacts depending on the disk cluster size chosen and how that affects the choice of notional FF/ RW speeds that is it reasonable to offer? Of course you are.
Trying to do accurate time calculations with anything that does not have a fixed correspondence between time and position in the datastream is, shall we say, interesting. However, it isn't that much of a stretch as the PVR must necessarily supply frames to the TV at a fixed rate and FF is only a matter of omitting various proportions of those frames. FR is a little more demanding. Anyway, that is nothing more than a red herring in this instance because Humax seem perfectly capable of handling ~2x ~4x ~16x ~32x and ~64x. If they can omit 3 frames in ever 4 and 15 frames in every 16 then there is no reason why they can't omit 7 frames in every 8. Quote:
(I am also wary of anyone who claims to programme in assembly and machine code)
Presumably because you don't know the difference. ![]() If you really want to demonstrate the paucity of you knowledge, just ask and I'll explain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 207
|
Quote:
(I am also wary of anyone who claims to programme in assembler and machine code)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,537
|
Quote:
However, it isn't that much of a stretch as the PVR must necessarily supply frames to the TV at a fixed rate and FF is only a matter of omitting various proportions of those frames.
Of course I know the difference between coding in assembler and machine code. It is a subtlety that is lost on most and not something worth willy-waving about. And I would not want to scare the horses by talking about what we used to do to live, running, online banking systems. |
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
Now you are guessing again.
How else do you suppose that you would show the picture at a different speed? This is the absolutely standard way to speed up any moving image on a digital computer. Something of which I have first hand experience. Quote:
Of course I know the difference between coding in assembler and machine code.
So why make a pointless comment: "I am also wary of anyone who claims to programme in assembly and machine code" which rather seems to indicate that you were more than a little clueless?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,537
|
Because false immodesty is so unbecoming and a sign of desperation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Andover, Hampshire, UK
Posts: 3,624
|
Just so you know - I have coded in high-level languages (on a modern PC), assembly (on a BBC Micro) and machine code (on a Spectrum when I was bored - obviously I didn't write much because poking REM statements character-by-character was not fun :P) - and I'm only 16. So I wouldn't be so hasty to judge
![]() And I'm with Jepson on this one - even if they didn't make an algorithm and they just have a load of things like if(speed = x){ frames_to_skip = y; } - there's still not much of a reason why they would decide to miss out 8x. It wouldn't be any harder than the others. And if they did write an algorithm, it would be easier. |
|
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: kings lynn,norfolk
Posts: 1,410
|
Quote:
You were fortunate, then. That was not the experience that many of us had. Despite the musings to the contrary on this forum, it was a software, rather than a hardware, issue. There are very few, if any, reports of the issue, since the last OTA software update.
Foxsat HDR 'freezes' every day or two requiring power cycle to fix it Humax HDR - I few things I wished were different IF Humax can't / won't fix, should we go to Watchdog? FOXSAT HDR really getting to me now Humax Foxsat-HDR freeze up Humax Crashes a lot my Foxsat HDR in 2008,I have rarely had a problem. Occasionally a missed recording but they turn out to be down to the broadcaster and NOT Humax.My only real criticism of Humax is the inordinate amount of time they now take to release upgrades. |
|
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 271
|
Without wishing to delve into the finer points of programming, which is way above my head, here is a little history.
Early versions of the 9200 model did have a X8 mode. Following pressure from various forums, I seem to remember that a higher speed was repeatedly requested and eventually introduced. For whatever reason X8 was dropped to accommodate this change. There was much discussion at the time, certainly on hummy.org. Unfortunately, the hummy.org archive is lost so I cannot verify the details or reasoning behind this logic, or lack of it.. There was probably some discussion on this forum at the time, if anyone cares enough to take the trouble to search. As all subsequent Humax products have followed this pattern, I can only assume that the same module has been carried over, without any subsequent review. Of course, this may be not be the reason for the missing speed, but it sounds likely IMHO. |
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 207
|
Quote:
I have to agree with Graham on this one.Having purchased
my Foxsat HDR in 2008,I have rarely had a problem. Occasionally a missed recording but they turn out to be down to the broadcaster and NOT Humax.My only real criticism of Humax is the inordinate amount of time they now take to release upgrades. |
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,289
|
Quote:
It would appear that the stability issue related to how the HDR was used. In my case I used to record radio a lot and I recollect posts indicating a particular problem in that area. I had the box in the attic and it got to the stage where I couldn't be ar&ed going up and down to reboot it. I gave it a final "chance" after the last firmware update and it has had no stability problems since.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,537
|
Interesting. I will be starting to record Radcliffe & Maconie from tomorrow on both the HDR and my Toppy to see which gives the easiest route to getting it on my MP3 player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,289
|
Quote:
Interesting. I will be starting to record Radcliffe & Maconie from tomorrow on both the HDR and my Toppy to see which gives the easiest route to getting it on my MP3 player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,537
|
I have a USB lead permanently connected to the Toppy to run to the laptop when needed. It is more of a hassle converting the .rec format to MP3 from my previous experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,289
|
Quote:
I have a USB lead permanently connected to the Toppy to run to the laptop when needed. It is more of a hassle converting the .rec format to MP3 from my previous experience.
vlcplayer and tsmuxergui spring to mind. |
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cradley, Halesowen, W.Mids
Posts: 1,047
|
Quote:
I have to agree with Graham on this one.Having purchased
my Foxsat HDR in 2008,I have rarely had a problem. Occasionally a missed recording but they turn out to be down to the broadcaster and NOT Humax.My only real criticism of Humax is the inordinate amount of time they now take to release upgrades. Quote:
It would appear that the stability issue related to how the HDR was used. In my case I used to record radio a lot and I recollect posts indicating a particular problem in that area. I had the box in the attic and it got to the stage where I couldn't be ar&ed going up and down to reboot it. I gave it a final "chance" after the last firmware update and it has had no stability problems since.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:08.


