[nwhitfield]

Originally Posted by tdenson

That's a bit condescending of Mac users Just because one is gifted technically doesn't mean you would necessarily choose a PC. As a long standing PC technical user I am very attracted to switching to Mac in the future, partly becasue I am just fed up fiddling with Windows

Indeed; I make most of my living writing for PC magazines and though I have a PC on the desk for doing software reviews, screen grabs and so on, when it comes to doing my day to day work, I use a Mac. It needs less nurturing, doesn't have such an annoying interface and compatibility really isn't a problem these days.

Nigel.

[ico.]

Originally Posted by wgmorg

Haven't got any point with you... philsy wanted some advice!!!

I gave it ... he wants a PVR that can be accessed by a MAC so get a Topfield ... simple.

I suggested that a page or two ago as well... sorry if the last post sounded shouty it wasn't really directed at you but an effort to say the entire Mac/ PC argument would be null and void if they kept the OTA uptodate. Well I'd still have the old loader but you cannot have everything.

Not all TAPS are Mac compatible from what I remember and I'm not sure that it is Mac friendly out of the box, but there has been a healthy development or TAPs and so on as I think the source code was released or uses an of the shelf version that allows users to write their own TAPs.

Humax have not and will not give the source code away so everything comes from them. Although there have been problems with some TAPs causing conflicts with each other so you have to pick carefully which to choose. That is the reason I went for the Humax in the end, I just wanted a quality PVR that would be updated for me OTA with new features. What I have got is a PVR that has been updated once, and has a nasty tendency to drop programmes if the wife selects recordings in the wrong order. I've had the TISR triggered 3 times and I know how it's triggered so god knows how Joe Public who doesn't read forums is getting on.

Applogies if the Topfiled info is wrong or anything it's been a while since I looked into it, just before I bought my Humax.

[ico.]

Originally Posted by wgmorg

OFF TOPIC FOR THIS THREAD.

With repect to OTA...

It appears people are buying new 9200Ts with 1.00.08 or 1.00.10 on them ... HOW.

If Humax are loading it in the factory... then your question wrt 1.00.08 or 1.00.10 not being released OTA is valid.

I got mine with .04 only Machines bought in the last few months have the newset software. If it's good enough to put on machines leaving the factory it's good enough for an OTA.

[andro101010]

Originally Posted by ico.

If it's good enough to put on machines leaving the factory it's good enough for an OTA.

Sadly not if you must subsequently do a default reset to avoid the disk use bug. Not everyone would do this and then you'll have a lot of lost disk space!

[wgmorg]

Which disk use bug ... the one related to the use of PIP during playback which can't be corrected by reset?

Originally Posted by andro101010

Sadly not if you must subsequently do a default reset to avoid the disk use bug. Not everyone would do this and then you'll have a lot of lost disk space!

[Philsy]

I must admit it seems odd to me that that a device for recording TV programmes needs to be connected to a computer to enable software updates.

I mean, even computers (Mac or Windows) can update themselves automatically over the internet, without having to connect them to another computer!

Out of interest, how are the OTA updates broadcast? Does Humax have an arrangement with the BBC or something?

Phil

[wgmorg]

http://www.dtg.org.uk/retailer/download_schedule.pl

Originally Posted by Philsy

Out of interest, how are the OTA updates broadcast?
Phil

[KingKerouac]

I think the very fact that this debate has raged on for so long and bought in so many contributors, clearly shows that there are obviously a lot more MAC users than certain people seem to not want to believe.
The fact also that MAC sales and usage are set to rocket.
Also I agree with all the MAC users here that we are famously early-adopters of new and superior technology, so presumably we will make up a bigger percentage of Humax owners than the amateur mathematicians would like you to believe.
Also, it is ridiculous to offer an upgrade as a download and not OTA, I don't care if it's full of bugs. Don't release it all then.
I'm sure some kind of consumer rights are being affected here, why should someone using an inferior and, frankly, dated OS benefit whilst another customer is disadvantaged,.
And finally, if it is true, as we keep hearing , that people are buying new 9200T with nwer versions already loaded, why are we not being offered these OTA?
Humax need to pull their fingers out sharpish.

[Martin Liddle]

Originally Posted by wgmorg

You want to access a PVR from a MAC get a Topfield anyone who's done his work would.

Originally Posted by Philsy

This is the conclusion I'm coming to..

I am not convinced. The only thing you can't currently do from a MAC is software upgrades. However if you buy a new 9200 you have a good chance of it coming with the latest firmware anyway. The situation where the OTA and download firmware is out of synch is unusual and probably will only persist for another couple of months at worst.

[Philsy]

Originally Posted by Martin Liddle

I am not convinced. The only thing you can't currently do from a MAC is software upgrades. However if you buy a new 9200 you have a good chance of it coming with the latest firmware anyway. The situation where the OTA and download firmware is out of synch is unusual and probably will only persist for another couple of months at worst.

Fair point. To play devil's advocate, then, why should I opt for a Humax rather than a Topfield?

(and that's a serious question - I really don't know which is better).

Phil

[ico.]

I have my concerns over the OTA which is way behind schedule but a new box should be uptodate anyway.

The control system takes a little getting used to on the Humax it's not as intuative as the Digifusion I had but it is a lot more reliable. I've never used a Topfield but it was a serious consideration of mine when I choose my Humax. The Topfield was a little more expensive at the time and I didn't really fancy adding features developed by bedroom coders (hello TAPs) so in the end I went with the Humax.

Now I can copy files over to the Mac to make DVD's (it's a long and complicated process) I'm mostly a happy bunny, I just wish they would OTA a bit more. The newer software features some things I've asked about before such as an alphabetical programme list. Just try and find which episode you want when they are shown in date recorded and it's a nightmare if you have programmes going back a month or two like I do. The extra recording slots I want and the option of selecting multiple programes to delete instead of having to do each one at a time.

On the hole though if you want a PVR I would think you would be happy with the Humax, although I cannot say as I've never used one if the Topfield would suit you better.

[danco]

Originally Posted by Philsy

Fair point. To play devil's advocate, then, why should I opt for a Humax rather than a Topfield?

(and that's a serious question - I really don't know which is better).

Phil

Price.

Easier availability. May not matter if you are buying over the internet, but if something *does* go wrong it's much easier to return to a local shop than to have to send it back to a distant address.

I expect there are other reasons, just as there are reasons for buying a Topfield rather than a Humax.

If I had known there was no Mac support when I bought it, I might have got a Topfield.

But whether the Topfield is as good as the Humax if one doesn't use any TAPs, I am not sure. And having to add such extras is a negative point for many users, though some will like the extra flexibility.

[Martin Liddle]

Originally Posted by Philsy

Fair point. To play devil's advocate, then, why should I opt for a Humax rather than a Topfield?

I haven't used a Topfield so am not well placed to comment. What I wanted when I bought the 9200 was a reliable, reasonably priced PVR that was easy to use. The 9200 is certainly easy to use as demonstrated by my notoriously technophobic partner who uses it with great aplomb (but never mastered programming the VCR). Last time I looked it was cheaper than the equivalent Topfield. The 9200 has been reasonably reliable for me (no hardware problems but the occaisonal software quirk) and has benefited from a steady release of software updates.

My view is that if you value the ability to add third party software buy a Topfield otherwise buy a Humax.

[nwhitfield]

Out of the box, I'd say that the Topfield supports Mac as well as it does Windows - ie there's no CD included, so you have to download something whichever platform you're on; that's either the official software for Windows, or some of the many third party options for the Mac. I can't think of any TAPs that aren't Mac compatible, incidentally - they all run on the Toppy anyway, so it's just a case of transferring them over.

Really, there's little to choose between the two; and a lot will depend on how tight the budget is, and how you envisage using it.

Things a plain Topfield has that a Humax doesn't: folders for organising recordings, unlimited number of MP3 files can be stored, USB for firmware updates, ability to transfer video from computer to PVR, no fan, available with 250Gb drive.

Things a Humax has that a plain Topfield doesn't: search EPG by title and genre, automatic timer padding. Apologies if I've missed anything else out.

And, of course, the Topfield has the endless opportunities for tinkering, web control and so forth. Both are due to be updated for Freeview Playback (which is the main reason, I think, that Topfield haven't added record padding, since Playback should render it unnecessary).

Really, only you can decide if those differences I laid out are now - or might be in future - important enough to you to justify the extra cash. In either case you're getting a pretty capable machine, both built on the same core hardware.

Nigel.

[mkstevo]

Originally Posted by ico.

I'd still like to know who many man hours there would be in writing a OS10 version.

You would have to say that it should not take many hours to convert this to OS X . I would think that the updater is not much more than a windows front end on a plain terminal program , much like the old LapLink program I used to run on DOS . I wouldn't be surprised that if we knew the location of the flash memory on the Humax , something like Terminal on the Mac wouldn't be able to telnet the upgrade into the Humax .

Mind you , I have been wrong before ...

If we only had some source code to look at ...

[nwhitfield]

Source code is for wimps! You need a serial protocol analyzer, then you just sit there and watch what happens as the upgrade is done.

Nigel.

[jw75]

Originally Posted by KingKerouac

I think the very fact that this debate has raged on for so long and bought in so many contributors, clearly shows that there are obviously a lot more MAC users than certain people seem to not want to believe.

I've no axe to grind here. I was just trying to give the argument some shape. If you have better numbers, let's see them.

The fact also that MAC sales and usage are set to rocket.

You have shares?

Also I agree with all the MAC users here that we are famously early-adopters of new and superior technology, so presumably we will make up a bigger percentage of Humax owners than the amateur mathematicians would like you to believe.

Oooh. You're in danger of reinforcing the stereotype of the arty MAC user who doesn't understand technology or economics. In maintaining their closed systems (unlike IBM 25 years ago), Apple has lagged behind in PC technology, both in applications and connectivity. It seems ironic to see a MAC user criticising Humax for doing the same.

Also, it is ridiculous to offer an upgrade as a download and not OTA, I don't care if it's full of bugs. Don't release it all then.

It was done in response to customer demand. It's hard to criticise that.

I'm sure some kind of consumer rights are being affected here, why should someone using an inferior and, frankly, dated OS benefit whilst another customer is disadvantaged,.

Oh, dear

And finally, if it is true, as we keep hearing , that people are buying new 9200T with nwer versions already loaded, why are we not being offered these OTA?
Humax need to pull their fingers out sharpish.

At last, something we can agree on.

[Philsy]

And all I wanted to do was find something that would record Top Gear...

[ico.]

Originally Posted by Philsy

And all I wanted to do was find something that would record Top Gear...

Thats is exactly what mine is doing now!!

[Me]

Originally Posted by jw75

In maintaining their closed systems (unlike IBM 25 years ago), Apple has lagged behind in PC technology, both in applications and connectivity.

But that's why the world is now dominated by Microsoft, Intel and Dell rather than IBM

[nwhitfield]

I wouldn't actually say the Mac has lagged behind in connectivity; even the very first ones had networking built in. As far as I can recall, TCP/IP was standardised long before Microsoft shipped a version of Windows with it already installed; ethernet has been standard on every Mac for many years. USB was prevalent on the Mac too, some time in advance of the first shaky efforts found in Windows 98, and Firewire was there long before as well.

There have been other areas, including applications, where it's certainly suffered from being a closed platform, but I don't honestly think you could claim it suffered from connectivity issues.

Nigel.

[mkstevo]

Originally Posted by nwhitfield

Source code is for wimps! You need a serial protocol analyzer, then you just sit there and watch what happens as the upgrade is done.

Nigel.

I must be a wimp !

Someone clever enough to be able to spell 'serial protocol analyzer' must be surely able to use one ... Yes I am volunteering you Nigel . I'll look back in a couple of days and see what you've come up with ;-)

[nwhitfield]

Sadly, I don't have the time right now, since I've sold my soul to a publishing company for the next two weeks ;-)

Nigel.

[wgmorg]

So why do you need access to the MAC... any PVR would do?

Again its a simple decision you are a buyer of 'superior' products so you should get a Topfield, after all it is more expensive.

Originally Posted by Philsy

And all I wanted to do was find something that would record Top Gear...

[mkstevo]

Originally Posted by nwhitfield

Sadly, I don't have the time right now, since I've sold my soul to a publishing company for the next two weeks ;-)

Nigel.

Pity , I was looking forward to that . Perhaps I can read about your efforts ?