# TiVo Desktop Why Are You So Horrible??



## bigl31 (Mar 27, 2011)

Why oh Why is TiVo Desktop software so terrible??

Now that Im running 7 its even worse...ugh

It takes 5-10 min to start and then I have to wait constantly to do anything and its not like this is my main puter. I have it behind my TV just as a server tower for my digital A/V/P. 

Everytime I upgrade it seems to get worse. Come on TiVo programmers publish some software that really works as it should. Please!


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

bigl31 said:


> Why oh Why is TiVo Desktop software so terrible??


Product development at Tivo seems to involve doing everything to the lowest possible standard. Example: the Tivo Premiere, which still has an unfinished HDUI and probably never will be (nor will we likely be seeing that mythical second core any time soon).

I'm surprised Tivo Desktop has the loadtime that you listed... 5-10 minutes? What kind of computer are you running on? It's been a long time since I used Tivo Desktop, but I can't imagine any app on my PC taking that long to load. Is it a load delay, or is it bottlenecked communicating with or discovering the Tivos?

If you're just using desktop to serve up content to the Tivos, then pyTivo is a very good alternative.


----------



## CuriousMark (Jan 13, 2005)

bigl31 said:


> Why oh Why is TiVo Desktop software so terrible??
> 
> Now that Im running 7 its even worse...ugh
> 
> ...


If it is taking that long to load, there is something wrong. It loads up in 30 seconds or so for me. I suggest you try the some of the resets that it offers. Be careful, the full on reset everything deletes all the *.tivo files.

Another thing you can try is to move all the files out of the my tivo recordings folder, or other linked folders. if it starts imediately that way, then perhaps one of the file is corrupted, try putting them back a few at a time to identify the corrupted file and then just get rid of it.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

bigl31 said:


> Why oh Why is TiVo Desktop software so terrible??
> 
> Now that Im running 7 its even worse...ugh
> 
> ...


Are you waiting until the computer itself has fully finished booting before starting TD?

Having recently moved from 98SE to XP, I've noticed that there's now a considerable difference between appearing to have fully booted and actually having done so, and wouldn't be surprised if this behavior has continued through to 7.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

Do you have the very latest version of TDT? Don't rely on the update feature in the menus. Go to the TiVo website.

I'm running it on Win7 64bit and don't have those problems.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

CuriousMark said:


> If it is taking that long to load, there is something wrong. It loads up in 30 seconds or so for me. I suggest you try the some of the resets that it offers. Be careful, the full on reset everything deletes all the *.tivo files.
> 
> Another thing you can try is to move all the files out of the my tivo recordings folder, or other linked folders. if it starts imediately that way, then perhaps one of the file is corrupted, try putting them back a few at a time to identify the corrupted file and then just get rid of it.


it's the same for me. It loads in under 30 seconds(The OS drive is a Velociraptor 10K rpm drive) on a Win7 64bit machine I have dedicated to TiVo Desktop. I use a RAID 5 array for storage of my TiVo files. 
I do have the plus version but that should not matter.


----------



## windracer (Jan 3, 2003)

Try clearing the TiVo Desktop cache ... once that folder contains a few thousand files TD takes a long time to load. Clearing that out once and while keeps it snappy for me.


----------



## vurbano (Apr 20, 2004)

smbaker said:


> I'm surprised Tivo Desktop has the loadtime that you listed... 5-10 minutes? What kind of computer are you running on?


IBM XT or a 286 sounds like.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

vurbano said:


> IBM XT or a 286 sounds like.


I've still got an XT around here somewhere, do you really think I could run XP on it? (XP being the minimum TiVo says TiVo Desktop will run on)

And will XP fit on that old 20MB Seagate?


----------



## MrSkippy53 (Jan 27, 2011)

unitron said:


> I've still got an XT around here somewhere, do you really think I could run XP on it? (XP being the minimum TiVo says TiVo Desktop will run on)
> 
> And will XP fit on that old 20MB Seagate?


Dude, you know that was a joke right.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

MrSkippy53 said:


> Dude, you know that was a joke right.


Whooosh!


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

TiVo Desktop is actually developed by a 3rd party, not in house at TiVo. In fact I talked to their head of engineering a few years back about possibly taking over development myself. However I had just started working at VideoReDo and didn't have time to commit to it.

Unfortunately it seems that all engineering at TiVo has fallen to the wayside over the last few years. Even their main product, the Premiere, is buggy and half finished a YEAR after it was release. I think they've just given up on development and have become a company who's main focus is on litigation and making deals with MSOs.

Dan


----------



## vurbano (Apr 20, 2004)

Tivo desktop isnt great but I find it works adequately.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Yes. It does what it's designed to do very well. I've been using it for the last few years and it allows me to reliably transfer shows automatically to the PC running TiVo Desktop for permanent storage and/or transfer back to another TiVo.

Then add VideoReDo in the mix and I'm able to take the recordings and easily add them to my media library.


----------



## cadmium (Nov 14, 2007)

I can't say pyTivo was the easiest to set up, but once I tried that, I never wanted to go back to TDP.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

pyTiVo is a PITA to setup. Plus there are a dozen branches out there with different features, so it's hard to figure out which one to even use. However once you get it setup it works much better for transferring files back to your TiVo from your PC.

In fact there are several tools written by members of this forum which do parts of what TD is designed to do, but better. The problem is that there is nothing in a consolidated, easy to install/use, package that can do everything TD can do.

Dan


----------



## MitchW (Jun 5, 2002)

unitron said:


> I've still got an XT around here somewhere, do you really think I could run XP on it? (XP being the minimum TiVo says TiVo Desktop will run on)
> 
> And will XP fit on that old 20MB Seagate?


My Dell came with 1.5 Terabytes last July. My TRS-80 in 1979 was upgraded to a 20 MB IBM in 1981. It used to use cassette tapes for storage and had just 16 Kb memory in 1979.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> pyTiVo is a PITA to setup.


pyTivo is a breeze to set up, especially compared to the nightmare that is TiVo Desktop. Last I checked (maybe they've fixed this by now?), TD wouldn't even run properly in a non-Administrator account. I fought with it endlessly. The first time I tried pyTivo, I had it working perfectly in about a minute.

The main problems people have setting up pyTivo are a) wanting to use it in Windows, and b) wanting it to work in a Windows way. The result is convoluted instructions that have you overlaying an obsolete "Windows Installer" with newer code from a repository. But really, all you need is this:

1. Unzip the archive.
2. Edit pyTivo.conf.
3. ./pyTivo.py (or "python pyTivo.py").

Now for Windows, it's slightly more hassle, because Windows doesn't come with Python or FFmpeg installed. Also, many people want to run pyTivo at startup (not me, BTW -- this is another of my annoyances with TD, that it _has_ to run portions of itself on startup), which under Windows means additional steps not required with other OSes. Still, it's not that complicated.

Those who find the experience unsatisfactory are encouraged to improve it. Here's the latest such attempt. I think he went in a pretty weird direction with it, but it's interesting.

I'm really not a Windows guy, so it can't be up to me.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> TiVo Desktop is actually developed by a 3rd party,


Oh, that's a shock. [/sarcasm]



Dan203 said:


> not in house at TiVo.


It shows. The software on the TiVo is tight, elegant, and functional. TDT is a dog turd. That's usually the way of 3rd party software. It's usually either terrific or horrific.



Dan203 said:


> Unfortunately it seems that all engineering at TiVo has fallen to the wayside over the last few years. Even their main product, the Premiere, is buggy and half finished a YEAR after it was release.


Frankly, I'm not sure what their thinking was with the Premier. The legislative and economic environment are both far too volatile to make the development of any real advances worth the risk, and the deployment of a fractured product will only minuscule advances on-board seemed to me a poorly considered move from the get-go. I expected virtually nothing from the Premier - why anyone expected anything is beyond me - and TiVo delivered in spades. It's almost more of a dog than the S2.



Dan203 said:


> I think they've just given up on development and have become a company who's main focus is on litigation and making deals with MSOs.


That fails to explain it. Why deliver a new platform at all, if that were the case? Why deliberately hamstring it? Most of the crippling of the Premier is deliberate.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> pyTiVo is a PITA to setup.


No, it's not. It took me all of 20 seconds, every time I set it up.



Dan203 said:


> Plus there are a dozen branches out there


That is an exaggeration.



Dan203 said:


> with different features, so it's hard to figure out which one to even use.


William's branch is probably fine for most people.



Dan203 said:


> In fact there are several tools written by members of this forum which do parts of what TD is designed to do, but better. The problem is that there is nothing in a consolidated, easy to install/use, package that can do everything TD can do.


Nonsense. First of all, the available tools can do far, far more than TDT can. Galleon, in particular, does a great many things TDT doesn't even begin to do, including the ability to select shows for transfer from any TiVo in the house to the server while sitting at any TiVo in the house or any PC running virtually any OS in the house - or even the internet.

The tools are also far more flexible. I wrote a simple Curl script that allows anyone with rights I assign to transfer files from my server to a TiVo from the internet using pyTivo. This way, friends and family who will be visiting me can queue up any number of shows from the server and have them ready and waiting to watch when they arrive. It took me about 20 minutes, including the web interface and the Curl script, and I had never even written a Curl script before then.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

wmcbrine said:


> pyTivo is a breeze to set up, especially compared to the nightmare that is TiVo Desktop.


Not only that, it actually works, as opposed to TDT, which just doesn't in any reasonable fashion.



wmcbrine said:


> The main problems people have setting up pyTivo are a) wanting to use it in Windows


I would say wanting to use TDT in anything but Windows is a much bigger problem than anything normally encountered when using pyTivo. Of course, the easiest and most sensible thing to do is to chunk Windows, whether one wishes to run pyTivo or not.



wmcbrine said:


> Now for Windows, it's slightly more hassle, because Windows doesn't come with Python or FFmpeg installed. Also, many people want to run pyTivo at startup (not me, BTW -- this is another of my annoyances with TD, that it _has_ to run portions of itself on startup)


What's annoying is what those portions do. I'm running pyTivo on a server, so of course it and every other app (other than diagnostics) on the machine runs at boot time. Oh, that's another annoying thing. Startup vs. boot. A Windows app essentially has to be written as a server - or at least with a server wrapper - to run as a service under Windows. Under Linux, one merely chooses to load the app via the init utility or not, an it is entirely up to the admin, not some idiot developer who should never be allowed to make such decisions in the first place. (That's not directed at you, William. You're not an idiot. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of all developers.)



wmcbrine said:


> Those who find the experience unsatisfactory are encouraged to improve it.


Absolutely. I submit the best way to make such an improvement is to dump Windows, and of course TDT.


----------



## Chris Gerhard (Apr 27, 2002)

I haven't used any of the independently developed applications like pyTiVo but I do use the basic free version of TiVo Desktop and think it is easy to use and works well for what I need.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

Chris Gerhard said:


> I haven't used any of the independently developed applications like pyTiVo but I do use the basic free version of TiVo Desktop and think it is easy to use and works well for what I need.


Not only that, I think TD 2.8.2 has been the most stable version I've used (version was at 2.6 when I first started using TD).


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

wmcbrine said:


> ... this is another of my annoyances with TD, that it _has_ to run portions of itself on startup...


What portions of Tivo Desktop have to run at startup?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> Not only that, it actually works, as opposed to TDT, which just doesn't in any reasonable fashion..................
> 
> .


TiVo Desktop works perfectly fine in my setup. I've used it for many years with no issues. And I also use kmttg.


----------



## ggieseke (May 30, 2008)

unitron said:


> What portions of Tivo Desktop have to run at startup?


Bonjour or TiVo Beacon, depending on which discovery method you use.

Everything else runs when the user logs on, not at startup.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

ggieseke said:


> Bonjour or TiVo Beacon, depending on which discovery method you use.
> 
> Everything else runs when the user logs on, not at startup.


But doesn't that only happen if you check the start server at startup box?


----------



## brettatk (Oct 11, 2002)

I run PyTivo in a windows environment and I can see how for some it can be a struggle to set up. But once you have it set up, you'll never use TD again.


----------



## Chris Gerhard (Apr 27, 2002)

Using TiVo Desktop and VideoReDo is a great way to make DVD-Vs from unprotected programming but I don't want DVD-Vs scaled down from HD programming. I would be happy with AVCHD written to DVD media and if VideoReDo can add that application and make it as simple as the DVD-V process is, I would have what I want. I have read some about roundabout ways to get a TiVo Desktop HD program to AVCHD and haven't discovered anything I want to mess with.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

ggieseke said:


> Everything else runs when the user logs on, not at startup.


And that's the flip side of the problem -- you can't run it without logging in. You can't win. Seriously, the design of TD makes me ill.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

wmcbrine said:


> The main problems people have setting up pyTivo are a) wanting to use it in Windows, and b) wanting it to work in a Windows way.


Like it or not, 95% of people use Windows so it's reasonable for them to expect it to work in Windows and in an "Windows way".

One thing you forgot to mention about the pyTiVo install process is that before you do any of that you have to first install Python, and just figuring out which version of Python is compatible with pyTiVo can be tricky. (or it was the last time I installed pyTiVo)

TiVo Desktop may have it's issues and shortcomings, but it's much easier to install by comparison. It's also much easier to use with regard to transferring programs from TiVo to PC, setting up automatic Season Pass transfers, etc...

Don't get me wrong I think pyTiVo is great, but I'd never suggest my Mom use it.

Dan


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> One thing you forgot to mention about the pyTiVo install process is that before you do any of that you have to first install Python


No, I did mention that. (And I see it as a shortcoming of Windows, since Linux and Mac OS X come with Python already.)



> _and just figuring out which version of Python is compatible with pyTiVo can be tricky._


Simply put, you want the latest version of the 2.x series. (2.4 is the earliest that will work.) This is true for 99% of Python software, since 3.x is... not exactly experimental, but not yet mainstream. Python.org could perhaps do a better job of explaining that, but it's in the pyTivo docs. The exception is with the outdated "Windows Installer", which was never updated to recognize Python 2.7 -- one of many reasons I don't recommend it.



> _TiVo Desktop may have it's issues and shortcomings, but it's much easier to install by comparison._


Sorry, I can't agree. (Note my earlier comments about non-admin users. That wasn't a theoretical issue for me. I realize that a lot of Windows software is (or was) broken in this way, but that doesn't make it any less broken.)



> _It's also much easier to use with regard to transferring programs from TiVo to PC_


How so? Seems very easy in pyTivo...



> _setting up automatic Season Pass transfers_


Well, I'll give you that one, since that's not a pyTivo feature.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I'm not trying to criticize you here, but the entire pyTiVo "UI" is a web page. And not a very nice one. TiVo Desktop uses a traditional Windows UI which is easy to navigate and easy to understand for anyone that has ever use a Window app before.

Like I said before pyTiVo is, functionally, a superior program. It's just lacking in the user friendliness department.

Dan


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Actually I find the TD UI quite odd, and not really like a standard Windows app. Every time I come back to it, I have to think "How do I add videos to this again?".


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> I'm not trying to criticize you here, but the entire pyTiVo "UI" is a web page. And not a very nice one. TiVo Desktop uses a traditional Windows UI which is easy to navigate and easy to understand for anyone that has ever use a Window app before.
> 
> Like I said before pyTiVo is, functionally, a superior program. It's just lacking in the user friendliness department.
> 
> Dan


I went to the website - found the win installer version
read the short blurb on Python and version to get - followed the link downloaded the python and installed
then downloaded pyTiVo and installed by double clicking

I agree that desktop has more functionality and a tighter, form based UI but I am just not seeing why you think pyTiVo is hard to install. And while plain - the UI for pyTiVo is also easy to use

Also PyTiVo got me through the desktop versions where the TiVoserver.exe bled memory and simply could not be left running

I am now back to running both PyTiVo and desktop though desktop still has that crud about blowing a memory gasket if too many songs are in the folder(s) I want to shuffle play


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> Like it or not, 95% of people use Windows so it's reasonable for them to expect it to work in Windows and in an "Windows way".


I consider that foolishness of the worst sort. Perpetuating bad habits just because they are habits and people are comfortable with them is not a proper way to approach things. Neither is catering to people who don't like technology (mostly who are too lazy to bother to learn) at the expense of those who can make best use of it.



Dan203 said:


> TiVo Desktop may have it's issues and shortcomings, but it's much easier to install by comparison.


Statements like this really annoy me. It's only "easier to install" if one does not mind that after it is installed, it doesn't work. More fundamentally than that, I consider it ridiculous to consider installation as a significant metric in the first place. For the most part, what does it matter whether it takes two minutes or two days to install something? One must needs only do it once on any given machine, and then if things go well never again. Ten hours or so for installation - a very generous estimate - is irrelevant compared with thousands of hours of usage for any truly useful program. What's with us? Has everyone developed ADHD? Who on Earth ever came up with the notion that instant gratification is an acceptable substitute for long term efficiency and efficacy? It doesn't matter if it is lousy as long as I can have it right now?

Oh, hell, there you have gone and pushed one of my buttons. Getting back on track...

Maybe they have fixed this in later releases, but as of 2.8.2, TDT could still not serve content from or save content to a NAS or other SMB share. It still does not work properly with symlinks. It still does not have a Linux port. It's slow, buggy, and bloated. Its design is pathetic, from its application engine all the way to its interface. It implements a sort of fake client-server architecture that is just stupid. It pretends to be a server without having any of the attributes of a proper server.



Dan203 said:


> It's also much easier to use with regard to transferring programs from TiVo to PC, setting up automatic Season Pass transfers, etc...


Compared with Galleon, where the user can do it from the TiVo itself, or any PC in the house?



Dan203 said:


> Don't get me wrong I think pyTiVo is great, but I'd never suggest my Mom use it.


So... you would be unwilling to set it up for her? Considering only the GoBack function, would she even know the difference? Considering the ToGo function, she prefers being limited to a single PC, rather than being able to do it from the TiVo(s) or any PC she wants (using Galleon)?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

wmcbrine said:


> Actually I find the TD UI quite odd, and not really like a standard Windows app. Every time I come back to it, I have to think "How do I add videos to this again?".


I agree. Of course, I find all Windows apps odd, and I don't ever actually use it, but the UI is even quirkier than the average, run-of-the-mill Windows app.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> I'm not trying to criticize you here, but the entire pyTiVo "UI" is a web page. And not a very nice one.


By that, do you mean "pretty"? Who freakin' cares?!?! I (rarely) use the web tool to manage pyTivo, not to watch the content. See below.



Dan203 said:


> TiVo Desktop uses a traditional Windows UI which is easy to navigate and easy to understand for anyone that has ever use a Window app before.


Hold on. Properly speaking, the UI for both pyTivo and TDT are on the NPL of the TiVo, and they are almost identical. The *MANAGEMENT APPLET* for both is a PC client. PyTivo's is a web page, so it is available on any platform, and on any PC like device, including a smart phone or a web enabled TV, anywhere in the house. It's also completely optional. Galleon's management client is a Java applet, and since Java is available on virtually every platform, the same is true of Galleon's management applet, including its being optional once Galleon is set up. It also has the unique advantage of being in part available right on the TiVo. TDT has the very real disadvantage of only being available on the PC running the "server", limited strictly to computers running Windows and (I think) OS X.



Dan203 said:


> Like I said before pyTiVo is, functionally, a superior program. It's just lacking in the user friendliness department.


I turn on the TV, I go to the NPL, I press <Play>. How is that user-unfriendly? If I want to manage pyTivo, I edit the config file and restart the server.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

wmcbrine said:


> No, I did mention that. (And I see it as a shortcoming of Windows


Yeah, imagine that. A shortcoming of Windows. 



wmcbrine said:


> Simply put, you want the latest version of the 2.x series. (2.4 is the earliest that will work.)


You know, it's funny. I don't recall that I have ever even checked on the python version on the servers. They've been upgraded many, many times, so I'm sure the version has changed over the years, but I've never had an issue between a python version and pyTivo. For that matter, I've rarely had any issues with pyTivo, at all.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

unitron said:


> But doesn't that only happen if you check the start server at startup box?


Nope. I believe TiVoNotify.exe and TiVoTransfer.exe run even if the server is stopped. Certainly there is a control widget on the task bar even when TDT is not running.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> TiVo Desktop works perfectly fine in my setup. I've used it for many years with no issues. And I also use kmttg.


OK, let's sit back and consider for a moment:


The main functionality of the proposed system is that of a server.

Server applications are best run on servers, for a number of reasons, not the least of which are servers are designed from the ground up to run server applications and it isn't a terribly good idea to run a server app on a machine that is going to be shut down or acts as a primary workstation.

Client-server architectures are commonplace, and the paradigm behind them has been well established.

The files being served by the system are vast.

It is obligatory the system work over a LAN.

Now, add all these things together and stir, and a handful of different, semi-independent, obvious solutions float to the top.

NAS

Linux-RAID

SMB server

Portable client (if for some reason the server is not portable - which it should be)

My personally selected solution mix is: Headless = Debian Linux = RAID6 = SAMBA = rsync backup = AMD Dual 64 = Gigabit Ethernet.

TiVoDesktop, on the other hand, sinks to the bottom like a turd in a septic tank. Will it work in a limited fashion for some people? Obviously.  Is a limited functionality acceptable for some people? Surely. Does the fact it has some functionality or the fact some people don't feel they need anything better mean it is a good application, let alone the best? 'Not on your Aunt Nellie.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> I consider that foolishness of the worst sort. Perpetuating bad habits just because they are habits and people are comfortable with them is not a proper way to approach things. Neither is catering to people who don't like technology (mostly who are too lazy to bother to learn) at the expense of those who can make best use of it.


umm, you do realize that TiVo inc. is selling to the general market, right? Are you implying that TiVo should only sell to folks who hold LINUX certification of some sort?

Dan said some controversial things but in general - TiVo Desktop is intended mainly for those that just want to install something on their PC to transfer some shows, likely to a laptop or mobile device.

How many copies of a LINUX enabled TiVo desktop do you think would be downloaded?

there is a group think here that there are many people like the forum members using TiVo that are not on the forum, that is not the case and I really do not think people are lazy simply because they do not want to take media storage and viewing to the highest technical peaks.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm, you do realize that TiVo inc. is selling to the general market, right? Are you implying that TiVo should only sell to folks who hold LINUX certification of some sort?


Well, first of all, I don't hold any Linux (or any other *nix) certifications, despite the fact I am a professional *nix administrator. A certification is nothing but a piece of paper. Secondly, no, I am not saying anything of the sort. What I *AM* saying is it is unacceptable to negatively impact the productivity of those of us who are experts just to accomodate the laziness of those who can't be bothered to learn.

Please read that last sentence carefully. I'm not saying accomodations should never be made for the neophyte or even the willfully ignorant - although I am decidedly disinclined to offer any help to the latter. I am saying that if and whenever such accomodations are made, they should never impact the expert's productivity. This has great advantages for the neophyte as much as for the guru. It allows the neophyte to become a guru, or at least an advanced user. It's one thing to create software that works well for experts and then make accomodations for duffers or even idiots, but it is a very different thing to write sofware that requires one to be an idiot. Far too much software is written that is idiot-retentive.



ZeoTiVo said:


> Dan said some controversial things but in general - TiVo Desktop is intended mainly for those that just want to install something on their PC to transfer some shows, likely to a laptop or mobile device.


My point is, no software should ever have such an intent. Its intent should be to be as powerful, flexible, and broadly deliverable as possible. Once accomplished, making accomodations for those at the low end of the technical spectrum is all to the good, and enhances the marketability of the product, perhaps spectacularly so.

In the specific case of TDT, the application could / should have been written as a fairly standard client-server suite on a cross platform development system. It could be written in Java, python, PHP, whatever. The server shoud run on whatever platform the user chooses. In the case of Windows, this probably would mean taking the trouble to create a service wrapper so the server could run as a Windows service. The client should run on any machine - well, within reason.

Oh, and just for the record, I am not all that familiar with Linux. I do have about a dozen machines running Linux (including 5 TiVos), but I'm more familiar with HP-UX and Solaris than Linux.



ZeoTiVo said:


> How many copies of a LINUX enabled TiVo desktop do you think would be downloaded?


I have no idea what "Linux enabled" means. I do know what "cross platform" means, and the answer is, "More than would ever be downloaded of a platform-specific version." In every case of any sort of software, platform-specific software will only be used by those willing to limit their scope to a single platform, whatever it may be. By contrast, the same software developed as a cross-platform application will be potentially used not only by every user who is willing to be limited to a single specific platform but also to every user who is not. Whether that is 1,000,000 + 1,000,000 users or 1,000,000 + 1000 users, it is still more users, and is better for all the users, whether they realize it, or not.

To be more succinct, the choice is not between a Windows version and a Linux version, but between a Windows version and an application that runs on any platform, Windows included. All else being equal, you don't seriously think an application that will run on every platform will sell less than one which only runs on one platform, no matter what the specific platform may be, do you?



ZeoTiVo said:


> there is a group think here that there are many people like the forum members using TiVo that are not on the forum, that is not the case and I really do not think people are lazy simply because they do not want to take media storage and viewing to the highest technical peaks.


First of all, I was speaking more generally, and secondly, it's not a matter of climbing the highest peaks. It's a matter of making enough effort to step out of the sewer.

I don't mind that users don't have an intimate knowledge of hardware at the component level or exactly how TCP handles traffic congestion, but I get mightily tired of being asked repeatedly, "Do I double-click or single-click?" Give me a break!!

The point, however, is that those of us who are willing to climb that mountain should not be forced to sit in the sewer. Don't make the software so it can only run in the sewer. Make it so it can run well on the mountaintop, and then give it the ability to work in the sewer, as well.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Just don't have any logins and it runs fine. Although I have a PC dedicated to TiVo Desktop which is why I don't have multiple logins so TD boots when windows 7 starts.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> OK, let's sit back and consider for a moment:
> 
> 
> The main functionality of the proposed system is that of a server.
> ...


I've used TiVo Desktop with multiple machines running multiple versions of Windows. It has worked great on the 8+ windows machines I've used it on. It does exactly what I need. Automatically transfer my my Series recordings to a PC for permanent storage on on hard drive/array or for transfer to another TiVo or for burning to BD or for transcoding for my Zune player.
I can also use VideoReDo for other things with TiVo files.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

ggieseke said:


> Bonjour or TiVo Beacon, depending on which discovery method you use.
> 
> Everything else runs when the user logs on, not at startup.


That's not entirely true. TiVo Desktop runs about 4 or 5 programs when Windows boots up, but only two of them (Bonjour(*)/TiVo Beacon and TiVoNotifier) keep running. The others exit after doing their processing. Unfortunately their processing can bog down the boot time which is why a lot of people remove the startup items from the windows registry.

Unfortunately, for reasons that are known only to the programs, The TiVo Desktop executables won't run without being in the startup registry. There's no logicial reason for this, it's simply an artificial limitation.

That lead to people creating their own startup scripts for TiVo Desktop.

I used to also have to modify the windows registry to change the codec filter priorities after installing TiVo Desktop because TiVo Desktop would set it such that Windows would use the codecs installed by TiVo Desktop for playing back most video files (MPEG-2, MPEG-4, etc), but thankfully this was "fixed" in TiVo Desktop 2.7. Now TiVo Desktop only uses the codecs for playing back TiVo files and transcoding.

(*) - Technically Bonjour is an Apple program. It is also installed with iTunes and is pretty much required if you use any Apple hardware products.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I've used TiVo Desktop with multiple machines running multiple versions of Windows. It has worked great on the 8+ windows machines I've used it on.


That's not specific enough to determine fully what your architecture was, but in any case, it is a very limited architecture. I feel compelled to add that I would feel positively incensed to have spent upwards of $1200 for OS software on those machines and wound up with something as badly broken as Windows. Meanwhile...

Assuming you still have at least 2 Windows machines in the house, try the following:

If machine A is the one running TiVoDesktop, go to Machine B, create a folder on the hard drive, and copy one or two video files to it. Set the folder to be sharable on the LAN.

Now go back to machine A, and map a network drive from the shared folder on machine B, say drive Y:. Bring up the TDT GUI, go to Preferences, and try to publish Y: as a target for the TDT files.

Once that's done, go to machine B and try to select a video to transfer from your TiVo to machine A. While that is transferring, select a video to transfer from machine A back to the TiVo.

Once you have that working, go to your TiVo, and select a program to transfer from the TiVo to machine A. If you have two TiVos, then from TiVo A select a program to transfer from TiVo B to machine A.

Come on back once you have all that figured out, and I will agree you have the *BASIC* functionality of what TDT should be working. Then we can talk about all the advanced features it should have (that other programs do have) before I would really consider it "working". I won't hold my breath though.

Out of curiosity, how much luck have you had running a 5 drive RAID6 array built of 3T hard drives on those Windows machines?



aaronwt said:


> It does exactly what I need. Automatically transfer my my Series recordings to a PC for permanent storage on on hard drive/array or for transfer to another TiVo or for burning to BD or for transcoding for my Zune player.


Which is all very basic stuff which can be handled much more quickly and effectively by other applications.



aaronwt said:


> I can also use VideoReDo for other things with TiVo files.


Which is not relevant to TiVoDesktop. Indeed, I use VideoRedo daily. I heartily wish there were (and have repeatedly asked for) a Linux port of the application, because Windows behaves so utterly dreadfully, but I still do use it to run QSF, eradicate commercials, and trim padding from the programs I store on the video server. I do not use TiVoDesktop, although I do have it loaded and disabled on one machine.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

OK we get it. You hate Windows, you think UIs promote "bad habits" and you think having to manually edit a "config file" and "reboot the server" to change an option is easy. Obviously me, and most of the rest of the world, have a different opinion of "easy" then you do, so we'll have to just agree to disagree on that one. 

As I've said many times before pyTiVo is a great program. I just think that it's difficult, relatively, to install and that the functions beyond PC->TiVo transfers are more difficult to access and understand then the official TiVo Desktop software. Personally I use pyTiVo to transfer PC->TiVo because, in my opinion, it's better then TD at that task and I use TD to transfer TiVo->PC because, in my opinion, it's better then pyTiVo at that task.

No one should allow my opinion dissuade them from attempting to install pyTiVo. Just take it as a gentle warning that it's more difficult to install then a typical Windows program. If you're not they type that likes to, or is capable of, manually unzip files or edit config files to setup a program, then it may not be for you.

Dan


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> .......I use TD to transfer TiVo->PC because, in my opinion, it's better then pyTiVo at that task.......


Does pyTiVo now do that? Have I lost touch that much? I know kmttg and TivoPlaylist do it.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dlfl said:


> Does pyTiVo now do that? Have I lost touch that much? I know kmttg and TivoPlaylist do it.


It does, but honestly it's not the best choice for that functionality. It's OK, mind you, and there is something to be said for the fact it is a web based utility. It's also nice that it can save the metadata to text files with the transfer, but other programs have superior functionality, most notably in my estimation Galleon. As it happens I use TyTool or mfs_ftp, but those require a hacked TiVo.


----------



## ggieseke (May 30, 2008)

morac said:


> That's not entirely true. TiVo Desktop runs about 4 or 5 programs when Windows boots up, but only two of them (Bonjour(*)/TiVo Beacon and TiVoNotifier) keep running. The others exit after doing their processing. Unfortunately their processing can bog down the boot time which is why a lot of people remove the startup items from the windows registry.
> 
> Unfortunately, for reasons that are known only to the programs, The TiVo Desktop executables won't run without being in the startup registry. There's no logicial reason for this, it's simply an artificial limitation.


For most people with only one user account and no password the difference between startup and logon is negligible, but there is a difference. Bonjour and TiVo Beacon are the only components that run at startup. TiVoNotify (the system tray icon), TiVoServer, TiVoTransfer & TranscodingService run from the "HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run" registry key only when that specific user logs on, and shut down when they log off.

Those 4 programs are just standard Windows programs that don't happen to have a visible interface. Writing them as true Windows services probably wouldn't be impossible, but it's a lot harder than you would think. Desktop also uses nearly a dozen public domain libraries developed by other people (see section 7 of the ReadMe), and any one of them might not play nicely with an actual service.

I agree that requiring the registry entries is stupid. Earlier versions like 2.5 didn't have that limitation and it was a lot easier for people who don't want it to run automatically to write their own startup/shutdown scripts.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> OK we get it. You hate Windows


Did I say that? Well, OK, I did, but not more than 50 times a day, every day. A large portion of the daily frustration in my life is due to the poorly written code that is Windows. Another fair chunk is due to poorly written code under Windows.



Dan203 said:


> you think UIs promote "bad habits"


That depends on the UI. Many not only promote them, but enforce them. In every case, they limit functionality by intent. They narrow down the options available to the user and provide only the functionality the developer - who is likely an even bigger idiot than I am, or even than the user is - decides should be good for the user. It's paternalistic and frankly highly offensive. Who the Hell is *HE* to decide what *I* should and should not be able to do? In more practical terms, it means that not only are complex and sophisticated features forbidden the user, but often simple, common, and obvious features are, as well.

A simple example: Try using Windows (not cmd.exe) to create a copy of every file on the hard drive with an extension of .mpg, replacing the .mpg extension with .bak.



Dan203 said:


> and you think having to manually edit a "config file" and "reboot the server" to change an option is easy.


Not easy, trivial:


```
vim pyTivo.conf
/etc/init.d/pyTivo restart
```



Dan203 said:


> Obviously me, and most of the rest of the world, have a different opinion of "easy" then you do


Well, first of all, "easy" is not my primary concern whenever I seek to do something. I am exceedingly lazy, but even I am not that lazy. Getting the job done and getting it done right are my primary consideration. "Easier", is something more of a consideration, since I generally would indeed like to take the path with the least trouble. Inherent in that consideration, however, is it is not easier to take a path that prevents one from getting the job done effectively. It is also self-deceptive to take a path that seems easy today but whose habitual use will tend to prevent me from taking more effective routes in the future. I even find myself falling prey to this fallacy sometimes. There are some common tasks I habitually perform in an inefficient manner and afterward realize once again there was a better way, if only I had developed the habit of using the "more difficult" method.

Secondly, WRT an application, I define "easy" to mean that every function anyone would ever seek to implement under the application are readily and speedily accomplished without a great deal of trouble. Spending hours on end to circumvent the limitations of a brain-dead application is never my idea of easy, no matter how simple a subset of limited functions might be. I am also not quite so arrogant as to suggest an application is "easy" because it meets my limited needs and not those of a more sophisticated user. It definitely does not qualify if it meets my needs day one but then fails to allow me to grow as time goes by and my needs WRT the application expand. Again, instant and temporary gratification vs. long term efficiency and efficacy. An application is "easy" only if it saves more time and effort two years from now than it does today.

Also, any functionality is "easier" if there is more than one way to do it. People seem to get flummoxed when presented with a decision for which way to approach an issue, but it is foolish to feel so and unacceptable to insist the alternate options be removed. It is often precisely those alternate options that allow the user to become more efficient and to take less trouble with getting the job done as his familiarity with the system increases.



Dan203 said:


> As I've said many times before pyTiVo is a great program. I just think that it's difficult, relatively, to install


It just isn't, period, especially not compared to TivoDesktop. I have TDT loaded one one of my PCs, but by my definition it is not installed, because it does not work, period. I may be mis-remembering, but I vaguely recall there may be a way to get it to work if I go in and edit the registry. How is that "easy"?

While I am thinking about it, I had to recently go in to the registry and edit it to make VideoRedo work. Now, no offense, because other than the fact there is no Linux port for VRD, it is a great program, but how is that "easy"? I certainly would never have had to do such a ridiculous (not to mention potentially dangerous) thing under Linux, but I have to wind up doing it all the time in Windows, despite the fact I avoid using Windows.

The Windows registry is just one more example in a long, long list of utterly stupid ideas embedded in the very foundation of Windows.



Dan203 said:


> and that the functions beyond PC->TiVo transfers are more difficult to access and understand then the official TiVo Desktop software.


So I should have written my Curl script to use TiVoDesktop, rather than pyTivo? It would have been easier? You'll have to explain that.

I'm not being sarcastic just to be argumentative, here. The point I am making is whenever anyone considers an application or especially reviews it publicly, one should evaluate the features from a wide perspective, not a limited one, and should avoid sweeping statements.

I would also take it as a personal favor if you would take a bit more care when using "then" and "than" in your posts. Improper use of the two is one of the things that drives me nuts. The use of "me" as a subject also makes me want to throttle the speaker (typist).



Dan203 said:


> Personally I use pyTiVo to transfer PC->TiVo because, in my opinion, it's better then TD at that task and I use TD to transfer TiVo->PC because, in my opinion, it's better then pyTiVo at that task.


I find that hard to justify, since in a very broad set of architectures, TDT does not work, period, and even in those in which it does work, it does not work well in general, its efficacy at this one task notwithstanding. When one adds in the fact there are a number of other applications available which handle the feature much better than either pyTivo or TDT, then I fail to see how one can recommend TDT at all under any circumstances.



Dan203 said:


> No one should allow my opinion dissuade them from attempting to install pyTiVo.


Unfortunately, that is precisely what a large fraction of the populace will do. The moment they hear or think "difficult", they throw up their hands and refuse to even try. The fact something isn't in reality difficult at all and may be in fact, quite fun, seems not to matter in the least.



Dan203 said:


> Just take it as a gentle warning that it's more difficult to install then a typical Windows program.


Statements like this really torque my nards. It is just horse pookey. Typical Windows programs are *NOT* easy to install. Most are balky, finicky, and highly prone to failure. If the user is quite lucky, the program may be only slightly more difficult to install than a complementary Linux program. The fact a Google search for the phrase "tivodesktop install" brings up 155,000 results strongly suggests the installation of TiVoDesktop in particular is not as simple as you imply.

Two weeks ago my housekeeper called me because her printer had stopped working. Ultimately, she realized it was because she had a faulty ink cartridge, but in the mean time she had uninstalled the printer, and now the software would not re-install. I told her to bring the PC and printer to me, which she did. I worked on the PC for 12 hours. I uninstalled all the printer drivers and all printer related software. I edited the registry. I updated all the system elements. I browsed the web searching for similar problems. I tired every available version of the software from Hewlett Packard, but no matter what, the installation would proceed to a point, and then automatically back out, removing all the software. 'No error logs, no indication of what was failing, no choice to freeze the installation and pinpoint where the failure was occurring. I was never able to get it working. I manually loaded the printer driver and apologized that I could not get the application suite working.

Twelve hours.

A plain vanilla Dell PC running Windows XP, with very few applications loaded. (She does e-mail and browses the internet, and that's about it.)

An application suite from one of the biggest, most widely used printer manufacturers on the planet.

Typical Windows.

And this you call "easy"?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

ggieseke said:


> For most people with only one user account and no password the difference between startup and logon is negligible


That represents a major security issue, especially on a platform that has a server running on it. Far be it from me to force anyone to be safe, but I most definitely would never recommend anyone implement a password-less system. Of course, on a multi-user system, it isn't even possible. I haven't had any single-user systems since about 1995.



ggieseke said:


> Those 4 programs are just standard Windows programs that don't happen to have a visible interface. Writing them as true Windows services probably wouldn't be impossible, but it's a lot harder than you would think.


Oh, yes, making life easier for the developers of my applications is definitely my top priority in life. I mean, Gawd forbid they actually have to work for the money we fork over for the applications. 



ggieseke said:


> Desktop also uses nearly a dozen public domain libraries developed by other people (see section 7 of the ReadMe), and any one of them might not play nicely with an actual service.


In which case the developer has to bite the bullet and write his own utility instead of using an existing library. I am not a professional developer, but I have done some development. To be sure, if a library, public or otherwise, exists that does what I need off the shelf, then I hasten to use it, but if not, then I modify a published function or write my own from scratch.

I'm sorry, but the developers work for us, not the other way around. Yes, writing a cross-platform server application is far more difficult than a single-platform app, but the fact pyTivo and Galleon exist is proof it can be done. The fact they and other applications not only do it but do it better than TDT is far more than enough evidence, if you ask me, to show it should be done.



ggieseke said:


> I agree that requiring the registry entries is stupid.


The registry is stupid. Creating a single, absolutely critical, kernel space file (or virtual file) containing all the configurations for the system and every application is just stupid. Allowing / requiring every user space application to modify the file on the fly is brain dead. Making it the repository for vast and sundry trivial and highly localized and even temporary run-time facilities is downright criminal. It's inevitable such an abomination will cause wide spread and sundry problems that are difficult to pinpoint and resolve. Guess what? It does.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Every single rebuttal you had to my post just goes to prove two things...

1) You're a Linux guy who's hates Windows.

2) You're not a typical user. (typical users don't write Curl scripts to accomplish tasks)

Obviously pyTiVo was the best choice for YOU, but I don't understand why you can't admit that it may not be the best choice for EVERYONE. 

Dan


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> That's not specific enough to determine fully what your architecture was, but in any case, it is a very limited architecture. I feel compelled to add that I would feel positively incensed to have spent upwards of $1200 for OS software on those machines and wound up with something as badly broken as Windows. Meanwhile...
> 
> Assuming you still have at least 2 Windows machines in the house, try the following:
> 
> ...


I'm currently running eight WIndows 7 machines(four Premium and four Professional). The OS only cost around $250 total for all eight licenses. 
I have no need for 3TB drives right now. I currently have 56TB in a WIndows Home Server that has thirty 2TB drives and one 1.5TB drive. I also have an unRAID sever with 32TB of storage with the two, 2TB drives I just added today for $65 each. No point in paying more than twice that price for 3TB. I did that back in 2002/2003 when I got twelve 250GB drives for almost $300 each. I'm not going to do that again.

But Windows 7 supports software RAID natively and is supposed to work with 3TB drives. I've tried the Win7 software RAID with 1TB drives with no problems, but I was just testing it out. I use port multipliers for my RAIDs attached to my desktops. I only use RAID 5, RAID 1, and RAID 0. I've never messed around with a RAID 6 array. I started using RAIDs with WIndows machines in the late 90's

I wasn't aware of TiVo Desktop working with a network location.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> Every single rebuttal you had to my post just goes to prove two things...
> 
> 1) You're a Linux guy who's hates Windows.


You didn't read my posts, then. I'm not all that familiar with Linux. I've only been using it about 5 years or so. I've hated Windows since 1985. Actually, I have hated it since 1984, in the form of Mac OS. It wasn't until a year later Microsoft vomited out their version. I'm certainly not a "Linux guy", but I'm not a Solaris guy or an HP-UX guy, either. As generally poor as all those systems are, I simply realize through long, painful experience how much poorer Windows is.



Dan203 said:


> 2) You're not a typical user.


And you are? 'Last I checked, most people are not professional developers who moderate discussion websites. Most people are not lawyers, teachers, historians, politicians, assembly line workers, welders, machinists, mechanics, engineers, actors, authors, journalists, or what have you. Fundamentally, there is no such thing as a "typical user", and any attempt to make such a qualification is unacceptable. Most users are not African American, either. Does that make it OK to exclude their requirements from an application? A left handed person has no right to object if some developer writes software that can only be properly used by right-handed individuals?

In this particular case, of the users who would choose to use TDT, I suspect a fairly significant percentage will consider using or migrating to a NAS or a separate RAID system. I would say the fact TDT won't work then is more than sufficient cause not to recommend it.



Dan203 said:


> (typical users don't write Curl scripts to accomplish tasks)


It's the only one I have ever written. Prior to that, then, I was a typical user? I wrote the Curl script (actually, it is a single line inside a CGI script) because it was the best way to accomplish the feat. Without writing an entirely new application (which I considered), it may have been the only way. Barring that, the alternative was to do without. What I don't understand is how anyone can consider an application which prevents users - unnecessarily, I might add - from accomplishing their needs to be acceptable. How accomplished any particular user may be is irrelevant. Anyone who wants to is free to request my script and the associated web pages from me and I will be happy to send them along. They needn't have the ability to write their name on a piece of paper, let alone write a Curl script. If nothing else, the user can log in to the pyTivo forum and request that someone with more savvy write up an applet or a script. With pyTivo, *SOMEONE* can do it, which is what is important. With TiVoDesktop, *NO ONE* can do it, which is unacceptable.



Dan203 said:


> Obviously pyTiVo was the best choice for YOU, but I don't understand why you can't admit that it may not be the best choice for EVERYONE.


I have no problem freely admitting that, but it is not what you said. (I never said pyTivo is the best choice, either, BTW, or even that it is the best choice for me.) You said TiVoDesktop is easier to install, which is false. You implied that TiVoDesktop is a better choice for an unsophisticated audience, which is over-reaching and too unspecific to be a supportable conclusion. Finally, you are recommending TiVoDesktop. There is a big difference between acknowledging a tool may be sufficient for some users and recommending its use, especially when one enjoys a somewhat elevated status, which as a developer of VideRedo, you do. I also find it completely unacceptable to consider the phrase, "It works for me", to be in and of itself a recommendation. (In fairness, you are not one of the ones who made such a statement.)

If you had said of TDT, "It may install easily and work for some users whose needs are very basic, whose systems don't employ a NAS or SMB server, who only intend to use Windows, and who intend to only access the system from a single PC", then I would not have taken issue.

Exactly how many people would take such a statement to mean it may not be for them, I don't know, but given the explosive proliferation of inexpensive NAS systems and RAID chassis out there, I suspect the number may be higher than you think. Given the low and continually plummeting prices of hard drives and the size of your average HD video, I must say the average user of a utility like TDT or any other video app should at least consider one.

At this pont, perhaps it would be good to point out VideoRedo has absolutely no problem whatsoever dealing with NAS systems or SMB shares. As both a developer *AND* a user of video applications, why do you consider it acceptable that TDT won't work at all with them?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I'm currently running eight WIndows 7 machines(four Premium and four Professional). The OS only cost around $250 total for all eight licenses.


You must have gotten some really good deals, then. OTOH, for more than two dozen Linux licenses, I paid about $0.50 for the CDs to which to burn the network installation routine. I do admit that for my brother, whose internet provider has a hideously low monthly download cap, I decided to download the local install version on 8 DVDs. They cost me about $6.



aaronwt said:


> I have no need for 3TB drives right now. I currently have 56TB in a WIndows Home Server that has thirty 2TB drives and one 1.5TB drive. I also have an unRAID sever with 32TB of storage with the two, 2TB drives I just added today for $65 each. No point in paying more than twice that price for 3TB. I did that back in 2002/2003 when I got twelve 250GB drives for almost $300 each. I'm not going to do that again.


First of all, the cost of the drives is by far not the only part of the equation. I don't know how much you paid for your enclosures, but $70 per spindle is an excellent price, if you managed it. $150 per spindle is more likely. Since you are using Port Multipliers, then the controllers may possibly run only $3 or $4 per spindle, as compared to multi-lane systems, where it's more like $30 per spindle. Of course one takes a huge hit in performance with PMs, but the cost savings justify it in many cases. Power utilization and cooling costs also rise quite significantly when one goes beyond 10 spindles. All things considered, reducing from 30 drives to 20 drives can save you quite a bundle, even at current prices around $130, as you say. Of course, you already have purchased the 1.5T and 2T drives, so the savings are more problematical, but I am talking about the future as much as the present.

The main point here is, however, even with WHS, TDT will not work on a client machine. It can only run on the server. If one wishes to build the server using WHS, one surely can, but if the server is a NAS or Linux server, then the user is hosed, more or less. I also hasten to add the installation of TDT on a WHS server is not quite the trivial walk in the park suggested for a desktop Windows system in this thread.



aaronwt said:


> But Windows 7 supports software RAID natively and is supposed to work with 3TB drives.


Reportedly, yes.



aaronwt said:


> I've tried the Win7 software RAID with 1TB drives with no problems, but I was just testing it out. I use port multipliers for my RAIDs attached to my desktops. I only use RAID 5, RAID 1, and RAID 0.


'Bad idea. With more than 8 drive members, one of these days you will lose at least one of your arrays. Of course one can always do a complete restore from backups (you do have a complete set of backups, don't you?), but that's a major pain, and depending on the backup media, takes forever. With RAID6, it's much less likely you will lose an array, although with more than 12 drives it is still not at all unlikely. Your use of PMs makes the situation a bit worse. 'Another reason for 3T spindles, BTW, although admittedly the larger spindle increases the array recovery time for a failed spindle replacement, somewhat limiting the advantage.



aaronwt said:


> I wasn't aware of TiVo Desktop working with a network location.


I'm not quite sure what you mean. It will not allow network shares to be specified for the location of the recordings. Go to one of your clients, install TiVoDesktop, and go to File => Preferences. In the *File Locations* section, click on <Change>. A folder menu will pop up. Try selecting a network drive shared from your WHS server, or a sub-folder therein. The <OK> button remains greyed-out. The same thing is true, BTW, if you try installing a local hard drive, say, dedicated to the use of TDT. One cannot select the root of the drive as the share folder. One must create a sub-directory. This is much less of a serious limitation, but it is annoying.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I have no need for 3TB drives right now. I currently have 56TB in a WIndows Home Server that has thirty 2TB drives and one 1.5TB drive. I also have an unRAID sever with 32TB of storage with the two, 2TB drives I just added today for $65 each. No point in paying more than twice that price for 3TB.


Where did you find this price, BTW? The cheapest I can usually find 2T drives is around $79.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> What I *AM* saying is it is unacceptable to negatively impact the productivity of those of us who are experts just to accomodate the laziness of those who can't be bothered to learn.
> 
> Please read that last sentence carefully. I'm not saying accomodations should never be made for the neophyte or even the willfully ignorant - although I am decidedly disinclined to offer any help to the latter.


umm it is TiVo desktop that they provide for folks who are fine just installing it on the 500$ windows PC they bought at Best Buy. You act instead like this is some massive market of business professionals who should have people who know all the ins and outs. Your arguments are arrogant and spread a very negative stereotype

PS - I do agree that TD should work with NAS and network drive mappings and that not having that ability was simply TiVo not requiring it of the developers


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

lrhorer said:


> Where did you find this price, BTW? The cheapest I can usually find 2T drives is around $79.


Slickdeals.net


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

TiVo Desktop = Download installer, double click, follow prompts = Installed.

pyTiVo = Locate and install proper version of Python. Reboot. Run pyTiVo Windows installer. Stop service. Locate and download newest pyTiVo zip. Unzip over previous install. Edit config file to modify settings. Restart service.

You don't understand why I think TiVo Desktop is easier to install?

I realize that some people have issues and then have to trouble shoot them after install, but the same is true for pyTiVo. The first time I installed it I spent like 40 minutes trying to figure out why it didn't work only to realize I had installed the wrong version of Python. (I figured newest = best, but that wasn't true) And as you pointed out above I'm not a typical user, so if I had trouble like this I have to think that less capable users will as well and may never figure out the problem.

Dan


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> Where did you find this price, BTW? The cheapest I can usually find 2T drives is around $79.


Seagate Barracuda LP drives.
Amazon Warehouse deals. I've purchased at least ten of the Seagates for that price. And the warranty is better than the drives I received from Newegg for $70. Every Newegg drive I got this year was made in June/July 2010, while the Amazon ones were from November 2010 to January 2011.

The Seagate drive warranties start from the manufacture date, not from the date purchased.


----------



## ggieseke (May 30, 2008)

lrhorer said:


> Oh, yes, making life easier for the developers of my applications is definitely my top priority in life. I mean, Gawd forbid they actually have to work for the money we fork over for the applications.


What money? It's free. Zero, zip, nada.

The only charge is $25 if you buy the Plus upgrade, and if you think TiVo is getting any of that money you have never seen what MainConcept charges for their codecs.

There are things I like and things I don't like about Desktop, but going on for page after page about how horrible you personally think it is certainly isn't likely to motivate them to pour more development money into software that they give away.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

lrhorer said:


> ....... I feel compelled to add that I would feel positively incensed to have spent upwards of $1200 for OS software on those machines and wound up with something as badly broken as Windows. ........


I seem to recall you stating you've been using Windows since 1985 (?). Are you still using Windows 3.0? 

I know a software manager who is big on software metrics (not that I ever saw him apply them to anyone's benefit). He claims that by some accepted metric for measuring bug content, Windows scores better than almost all software systems of the same size. Of course the "size" qualifier may be the key here if you believe that it is needlessly bloated.


----------



## jrtroo (Feb 4, 2008)

Dan203 said:


> TiVo Desktop = Download installer, double click, follow prompts = Installed.
> 
> pyTiVo = Locate and install proper version of Python. Reboot. Run pyTiVo Windows installer. Stop service. Locate and download newest pyTiVo zip. Unzip over previous install. Edit config file to modify settings. Restart service.


This is what makes pyTiVO intimidating, and only for those who truly want to go the extra mile to use services which enhance the use of their TiVo. I don't want to learn both how to install something AND learn how to use something. Windows install is the same as any other program, and with a few dummy clicks it is done.

Now, I do use pyTiVo in order to more easily move content to my unit, but I only installed it after finally being frustrated with a movie which would not fully transfer with TDT. However, this same move it would not fully transfer with py as well (I eventually used _another _tool to clean it up prior to transferring).

Actually, it was less intimidating to upgrade the hdds on my s2, thd, and premiere. Those have easy to follow step by step guides, where I could simply follow the directions and did not have to actually LEARN anything.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

jrtroo said:


> Actually, it was less intimidating to upgrade the hdds on my s2, thd, and premiere. Those have easy to follow step by step guides, where I could simply follow the directions and did not have to actually LEARN anything.


pyTivo requires Python 2.4 or higher however does not work with the newer 3.x versions

# Install Python using instructions above.
# Download and run the pyTivo Windows Installer.

that is all I did and pYTiVo has worked great for me.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

I just don't get all the hate for Tivo Deskop. I know that it isn't all that great, hence the reason people have developed alternative programs, but I sure don't believe it belongs in the crap category.
I use TD because it was simple to set up, it's easy to maintain, and most importantly, it works for my needs.
Now if I wanted features that would require me to purchase TD Plus, I wouldn't hesitate to install one of the free alternatives instead.
But from my perspective right now, using an alternate program = more effort. Not worth the hassle.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

lrhorer said:


> Dan203 said:
> 
> 
> > and you think having to manually edit a "config file" and "reboot the server" to change an option is easy.
> ...


I think you're oversimplifying this a bit. Yes opening the config file for editing is trivial. But correctly editing the config file to make the changes you want can be pretty painful. It all depends on how well documented the config file is, or how well you know it's options.
(As an aside isn't sendmail notorious for having a huge complicated and somewhat brittle config file?)

Making your desired change might be quite easy, with inline documentation explaining every setting or option, or it might require digging into man pages, or online documentation, or sometime resorting to random google searches for other people struggling with the same issue.

Config files and command line arguments can be very flexable and ammenable to scripting (which once set up obviously makes the scripted action simple) but that flexablility often comes with a tradeoff that the few things a UI would make obvious and simple can be confusing or difficult.

Take a made up example, changing the default directory that a video server looks for video files. In a UI it would be under a settings or options page and have an option to pick the directory you want. In a config file maybe there's a entry ready to change "video directory=", but maybe default is no entry and you have to find documentation telling you what entry to add before adding the setting you want. Oh, and without the UI taking care of it for you you need to worry about escaping special characters in the new path.

Now if you're used to messing with config files none of that is very difficult, but hardly as easy for a new user as the UI.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Jonathan_S said:


> I think you're oversimplifying this a bit. Yes opening the config file for editing is trivial. But correctly editing the config file to make the changes you want can be pretty painful. It all depends on how well documented the config file is, or how well you know it's options.
> (As an aside isn't sendmail notorious for having a huge complicated and somewhat brittle config file?)
> 
> Making your desired change might be quite easy, with inline documentation explaining every setting or option, or it might require digging into man pages, or online documentation, or sometime resorting to random google searches for other people struggling with the same issue.
> ...


there is a UI for pYTiVo to manage settings 
There's also a pyTiVo Configuration plugin. This is accessible from the server at http://localhost:9032/
for your example you simply scroll to the name of your video share and edit the path or add a new one, etc,

- it is just very plain and there is not start - programs - entry to easily get to it. Basically the open source guys are getting dinged because they did not make things such that the average joe just clicks on a program from their start button menu to have an easy UI. The stuff is free though and easy to work with if you simply read the pyTiVo site a bit.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dlfl said:


> I seem to recall you stating you've been using Windows since 1985 (?). Are you still using Windows 3.0?


Using and paying for somethng are two different things. My company forces me to use and support Windows, so they pay for it. If they didn't, I wouldn't.

Also, I did not quite say I had been using Windows since 1985. I said I hated it since 1985, which means I hated it before it even existed. I hated Mac OS when it came out, and I hated it when Microsoft stole it from Apple. It wasn't until the 1990s that I was foced - kicking and screaming - to use it. My dislike of it has grown with every passing day since, along with my blood pressure.



dlfl said:


> I know a software manager who is big on software metrics (not that I ever saw him apply them to anyone's benefit). He claims that by some accepted metric for measuring bug content, Windows scores better than almost all software systems of the same size. Of course the "size" qualifier may be the key here if you believe that it is needlessly bloated.


"Needlessly bloated" is an understatement. What's more, I don't even know how one would quantify such a statement. I'm fairly hard pressed to think of many deliberate features in Windows that are not in and of themselves "bugs". It's really not the biggest question on the table, however. I'm virtually certain that all of the major Linux distributions have far, far more bugs in them than any version of Windows, because most of the major Linux distros include more than 12,000 applications, including analogs for almost every major consumer class appilcation out there such as MS Office, MovieMaker, Photoshop, DVD burning software, backup software, etc.

The number of bugs is not the point, however. The point is that every one of those pieces of software code can be scrutinized by anyone in the world, and problems pinpointed by anyone with an interest and a modicum of programming skills. Indeed, more to the point, every one of those applications *ARE* scrutinized by anything from 5 or 6 developers to thousands of developers worldwide, depending on the application. Rather than catching a vulnerability after several tens of milllions of users have been infected by a worm, the vast majority of Linux vulnerabilities are pinpointed and corrected within days of code bing released, before any miscreant can take advantage of the vulnerability. Less serious bugs often take a while to surface and be repaired, but the parties responsible for fixing the issues are publicly visible.

Even more salient - and much more impressive - is how available these developers are to the public. Can you name even one Windows developer? Can you contact him? I can easily name a dozen Linux and cross platform developers, starting with Linus Torvalds, and be in contact with them in a matter of hours or at most a few days. Bug fixes can often be secured within a day. How fast do you think a bug report for TiVoDesktop will result in a fix? One for Windows itself?

When I was evaluating kmttg just a few days ago, I found a bug in the application, and reported it to moyekj. I also suggested a simple feature request related to the bug. He had the bug fixed and the requested new feature implementd in just over 12 hours. The whole correcpondence is avaialble for anyone to see on this forum.

12 hours.

Do you really believe you could even reach a Microsoft developer in 12 hours, let alone get a bug fixed or implement a new feature? You would be doing unusually well to manage such a feat in 12 months. I doubt your luck with TiVoDesktop would be much better.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Jonathan_S said:


> I think you're oversimplifying this a bit. Yes opening the config file for editing is trivial. But correctly editing the config file to make the changes you want can be pretty painful.


True enough, but the same must be said of a GUI. A GUI that offers 10,000 different options is no less intrinsically bewildering than a flat text file with the same option set. It is the understanding of the meaning of the variations that can be inherently difficult. I'll give you a concrete example. Video Redo has a GUI based configuration. It has an option with a check box to "skip encoder conformity checks". It would be absolutely no less difficult to edit a text file and change


```
Conformity_Checks=0
```
to


```
Conformity_Checks=1
```
Than it is to check or uncheck that option in the GUI. How does the GUI make it easier for me to know which it should be? Answer: It doesn't. Indeed, a well written default config file will have exhaustive text right above the option explaining what it does. Of course, the GUI can also have a pop-up bubble, yada, yada. None of which answers the question, "Should I check the box, or not?"



Jonathan_S said:


> It all depends on how well documented the config file is, or how well you know it's options.


Absolutely, but precisely the same thing is true of a GUI. It adds nothing in the way of simplicity or ease of understanding.



Jonathan_S said:


> (As an aside isn't sendmail notorious for having a huge complicated and somewhat brittle config file?)


That's an understatement. It's a real Kracken of an application, with more tentacles and claws than any ancient mythical monster. Do you think a GUI with dozens and dozens of obscure pages would be better?



Jonathan_S said:


> Making your desired change might be quite easy, with inline documentation explaining every setting or option, or it might require digging into man pages, or online documentation, or sometime resorting to random google searches for other people struggling with the same issue.


Of course. The more powerful an application, the more sophisticated its controls must be.

No matter what the interface, RTFM, Rookie.



Jonathan_S said:


> Config files and command line arguments can be very flexable and ammenable to scripting (which once set up obviously makes the scripted action simple) but that flexablility often comes with a tradeoff that the few things a UI would make obvious and simple can be confusing or difficult.


Nothing is ever confusing if one understands it, and nothing is difficult when one has plenty of practice. More to the point, a UI rarely makes anyhting simpler or less confusing. Sure, it is easy to understand that checking the box enables metafarctal confrabulation while unchecking the box disables it, but if the user has no idea what metafarctal confrabulation is and more importantly how it presence or absence will affect the outcome of the work being expected of the computer, it's still meaningless. I can't count the number of applications I have come across that have just such a check box, and when one looks in the documentation - which may consist of a pop-up bubble in the GUI - one is confronted by the oh-so-helpful text, "Enables metafarctal confrabulation."



Jonathan_S said:


> Take a made up example, changing the default directory that a video server looks for video files. In a UI it would be under a settings or options page and have an option to pick the directory you want.


Let's take an example that is not made up. VideoReDo is by my estimation an excellent program, certainly by comparison with other offers in its genre, and the following is not intended as an insult to the developers, but it has just such a feature, an automated one no less, and it is one of the more aggravating and persistent problems with the program. It tries to save the info concerning the last used directory for specific functions, even when I visit a directory I don't normally use, which means I am presistently annoyed by the directory that pops up when I load or save a program. Then, when the program crashes, it reverts to all the default settings, which aren't even close. If it were in a config file that **I** control, there would not be any such nonsense.



Jonathan_S said:


> In a config file maybe there's a entry ready to change "video directory=", but maybe default is no entry and you have to find documentation telling you what entry to add before adding the setting you want. Oh, and without the UI taking care of it for you you need to worry about escaping special characters in the new path.


Or one winds up with a decision from a mentally arthritic developer to simply disallow such characters, since he knows better what the users should be allowed to do than they do.



Jonathan_S said:


> Now if you're used to messing with config files none of that is very difficult, but hardly as easy for a new user as the UI.


A person who learns to drive in a vehicle with an automatic transmission may get his license faster than one who learns in a standard, but he winds up a poorer driver with bad habits the driver who learns in a standard would never develop. They also whine when conftonted with a standard. The same is true of users who have never known anything but a GUI. The last thing this country needs is more whiners.

I categorically refute the blanket statement that UIs are anything more or less, newbie or otherwise, than a flat text file. The judgement is only valid on a case by case basis. I've seen plenty of hideous UIs and plenty of hideous config files.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

ggieseke said:


> What money? It's free. Zero, zip, nada.


I was speaking to the general case.



ggieseke said:


> The only charge is $25 if you buy the Plus upgrade, and if you think TiVo is getting any of that money you have never seen what MainConcept charges for their codecs.


The practice of gouging customers, whether end users or 2nd party developers, is encouraged by the widespread use of proprietary software. You've made an excellent point for me, here. Did you have one of your own?



ggieseke said:


> There are things I like and things I don't like about Desktop, but going on for page after page about how horrible you personally think it is certainly isn't likely to motivate them to pour more development money into software that they give away.


Why would I expect them to? Why would I want them to? There are vastly better alternatives. Even if it were good software, rather than bad software, why would I recomend it when there ar far better options out there? Even if I were an unbiased critic, why would I want them to do anything? Since I am not an unbiased critic, I'm even less motivated to care what they do.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> TiVo Desktop = Download installer, double click, follow prompts = Installed.


Bull pookey.

First of all, the Windows installers frequently fail. I don't recall whether this ever happened with TDT, but it wouldn't surprise me. Again, I'm not trying to insult you, but I do know for certain this did happen at least twice with VideoRedo. When they do fail one's only recourse is to reboot, try again, and pray. When that doesn't work, it's time to try to contact the developers. Fortunately, and to your credit, in your case it was not difficult to contact you.

Secondly, the program needs to be configured. Since the TDT configurator is badly broken, it's not simple, at all.



Dan203 said:


> pyTiVo = Locate and install proper version of Python.


I never did that. 'Didn't need to. It's hardly rocket science, though. The user also needs to locate the proper version of VideoRedo, BTW, to get TDT to "work" which is no less difficult than finding Python. If TDT is not at least partially installed, however, VRD won't "work" either, at least not in the context of extracting and editing .TiVo files.



Dan203 said:


> Reboot.


Reboot one of my servers just because I installed an application (that was already installed, no less)? No way.



Dan203 said:


> Run pyTiVo Windows installer.


Even if I were running Windows, I wouldn't do that. Indeed, I think I may have done some testing of pyTivo on a Windows platform once. I know I've done testing of Galleon on Windows systems. I never used any Windows installer.



Dan203 said:


> Stop service.


Not unless it is previously installed.



Dan203 said:


> Locate and download newest pyTiVo zip.


So one does not have to Locate and download the TDT installer? You're padding the narrative to make it look like there are more steps. It's also a straw man, because for a given height of stairway, the more steps, the easier. This analogy holds true for programs. Several simple steps are easier to accomplish than a single more complex one.



Dan203 said:


> Unzip over previous install.


Or not. I recommend not. I almost never overwrite an older install (of any application) with a new one. It's generally a bad idea. I unzip the new install to a separate directory. Either way, though, it is not like it is anything but trivially easy to unzip an archive. It's even quite easy to automate.



Dan203 said:


> Edit config file to modify settings.


More padding. If one is installing the first time, then several of your steps above are non-existent. If not, then one simply retains the exising config file, and this step is non-existent.



Dan203 said:


> Restart service.


Ooh, yeah, that's difficult. 



Dan203 said:


> You don't understand why I think TiVo Desktop is easier to install?


I understand that because you have been fortunate enough to never have severe problems installing TDT, you think it is easy. That is emphatically not the same thing as actually being easy. Give me a reasonably modern computer network of any type with any OS mix along with access to a copy of pyTivo and Python, and I absolutely gurarantee you within 10 minutes I will have pyTivo up, configured, and running. Give me a copy of TiVoDesktop and the same network, and upwards of 10% of the time I can guarantee hours of endless frustration terminated by a failure to have TDT running in an acceptable fashion, if at all. (Actually, by my requirements, it's 100% of the time, but then my network is only typical of 10 - 15% of the home networks out there.) That's not simple, and it is not easy.

'Cut to the chase, here. The first time I tried to install TiVoDesktop quite some years ago, I pushed, pulled, kicked and fiddled for several hours trying to get it to work. It never did. It still doesn't, even with the most recent version. When TDT could not be made to work, I installed Galleon. It took about 20 -30 minutes, because I encountered some issues. Subsequent installs took less and less time. When pyTivo came along, I installed it in less than 2 minutes.



Dan203 said:


> I realize that some people have issues and then have to trouble shoot them after install, but the same is true for pyTiVo. The first time I installed it I spent like 40 minutes trying to figure out why it didn't work only to realize I had installed the wrong version of Python. (I figured newest = best, but that wasn't true) And as you pointed out above I'm not a typical user, so if I had trouble like this I have to think that less capable users will as well and may never figure out the problem.


All one has to do is RTFM. IIRC, the limitations of the versions of Python are spelled out in the pyTivo docs. Again, I don't intend to point any fingers or disparage your product, but I don't see anywhere in the VideoRedo docs where it mentions the possible problems that can arise if the "Skip encoder conformity checks" box is not checked in VRD. That caused me many, many hours of grief. My point is that every application has potential pitfalls, and neither pyTivo nor TiVoDesktop is an exception, but the simple fact is there are major fatal flaws TDT that cannot be circumvented, while the Python issue is trivial to fix. An extra 90 seconds to install does not even move the needle on the meter.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm it is TiVo desktop that they provide for folks who are fine just installing it on the 500$ windows PC they bought at Best Buy. You act instead like this is some massive market of business professionals who should have people who know all the ins and outs.


I already rebutted that. I am not asking anything of anyone that would not be easy for any 13 year old with a rudimentary proper education. I am also not asking the inexperienced or casual user be excluded. TiVoDesktop *IS* being provided for business professionals who know all the ins and outs, and even for computer experts who can program directly in machine code. It is also provided for the guy who knows how to e-mail and browse the web, but not much more. It is unacceptable to forget about the former simply because the demands of the latter are not as great.

BTW, excluding the RAID arrays, both of my servers cost less than $500 each, and quite a few of the parts - including some of the drives in the RAID arrays, were purchased at Best Buy.



ZeoTiVo said:


> Your arguments are arrogant and spread a very negative stereotype


The only stereotype I see here is the pervasive anti-intellectual one which insists that being stupid is "cool", while to be intelligent or worse educated is "geeky".



ZeoTiVo said:


> PS - I do agree that TD should work with NAS and network drive mappings and that not having that ability was simply TiVo not requiring it of the developers


Horse fritters. It requires a special effort on the part of a developer to determine the nature of a system resource and fail to provide a service if that resource is a network share. He had to deliberately prevent the resource from being selectable based upon an inspection of the folder properties. The only way that would happen is if he decided (or was told by the customer) that the user should not be allowed to select a network share. It was a deliberate act, and remains so.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

lrhorer said:


> Bull pookey.
> 
> First of all, the Windows installers frequently fail. I don't recall whether this ever happened with TDT, but it wouldn't surprise me. Again, I'm not trying to insult you, but I do know for certain this did happen at least twice with VideoRedo. When they do fail one's only recourse is to reboot, try again, and pray. When that doesn't work, it's time to try to contact the developers. Fortunately, and to your credit, in your case it was not difficult to contact you.
> 
> Secondly, the program needs to be configured. Since the configurator is badly broken, it's not simple, at all.


I've been using Windows since 3.0 and I can count on my fingers the number of times a windows install failed. Ones that did fail usually did because the program was using it's own installation program (or Installshield) rather than the service built into Windows. TiVo Desktop has used the Windows Installation service for a while now.

As for configuration, all I did was enter my MAK (something that needs to be done for any TiVo related program) and that was it. Seems pretty simple to me.

I'm not sure why you hate GUI's so much. There's a reason TV's, microwave and most consumer electronic devices have a GUI or touch interface rather than a keyboard and serial port attached. The former is much easier to use. Take the TiVo for example. Which is easier for the average person, using the remote button to press guide and select a channel or using a computer to Telnet to the Tivo and send an "IR" command telling the box to change to a channel?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

morac said:


> I've been using Windows since 3.0 and I can count on my fingers the number of times a windows install failed.


Then you can't have installed many applications under Windows. I'm nearly out of fingers and toes if I count the number of failed installs with which I have had to deal this year, and it is only April. Of course, how one defines "fail" may vary from person to person. I consider an in installation routine to be a failure if I have to manually intervene in any operational aspect of the program other than ordinary configuration before declaring it ready for service. This incudes scenarios where the program fails to properly configure during installation. Just four weeks ago, however, I spent 12 hours working on an installation for an HP printer that failed completely every time. I never did get it to work. The installation would proceed to a point, and then would completely back itself out, removing all the binaries and de-registering the entire application suite. If there had been a reasonable way to manually install the apps, I would have gotten them working, but since there was no such ready solution, I had to send my housekeeper back without the apps.



morac said:


> Ones that did fail usually did because the program was using it's own installation program (or Installshield) rather than the service built into Windows. TiVo Desktop has used the Windows Installation service for a while now.


In the context of this discussion, there is no difference. The discussion point here is an application that uses an installer vs. one that does not. Just for the record, the printer application suite referenced above used the Windows Installation service. If that example is not enough for you, some years ago I administered a number of HP inkjet network printers ( I don't recall the model number off the top of my head), and I even owned one myself, and so did my brother. I installed the printer drivers and application suites on over 50 Windows PCs and 8 or 10 Linux PCs. The Linux installations were both trivial and flawless. Every single initial attempt to install the apps on XP computers failed badly, requiring endless digging to get the apps working, usually requiring HP support involvement. The computers running XP Pro faired considerably better, but even a few of them failed to install the first try. Several machines running both flavors had the apps croak after a while, requiring re-installation.



morac said:


> As for configuration, all I did was enter my MAK (something that needs to be done for any TiVo related program) and that was it. Seems pretty simple to me.


Which means you allowed the developer to force you to use C:\...\My Documents\My TiVo Recordings\ as your repository for TiVo recordings. That is not acceptable. Taking your statement at face value, it also means you did not choose to publish any video files, audio files, or photos to your TiVo(s), in which case this posts' contribution is moot, since we are talking about pyTivo, here. Assuming you were exaggerating the simplicity of your installation experience, however, you evidently did not attempt to publish videos, music, or photos from a NAS or a network share, because TDT refuses to do so, or to select a network folder as the repository for .TiVo files transferred from the TiVo.

Why anyone with a LAN system would ever select anything but a network share for this (or any other shared data) is rather beyond me. Why any developer would think it appropriate to prevent such sharing is mind boggling. Considering any such application to be "good" is ridiculous.

Oh, BTW, it is not true the MAK must be entered for "any TiVo related program". Many HMO and HME routines require a MAK address, as well as the TTG functionality. Other applications do not.



morac said:


> I'm not sure why you hate GUI's so much. There's a reason TV's, microwave and most consumer electronic devices have a GUI or touch interface rather than a keyboard and serial port attached.


Those are highly specialized devices with severely limited functionality and very narrowly defined control spaces. One can turn the oven on, or off. That is the entire limit of its available states. A TV has a little more variability, but not much. One may change channels, vary the volume, select different inputs, and perhaps control picture or audio settings. The number of states available to a computer is infinite.



morac said:


> The former is much easier to use. Take the TiVo for example. Which is easier for the average person, using the remote button to press guide and select a channel or using a computer to Telnet to the Tivo and send an "IR" command telling the box to change to a channel?


I don't ever tell the TiVo to change the channel in the first place, and I most certainly never use the guide. I do, however, telnet to my TiVos very frequently and perform all sorts of functions not available to the UI. That's the whole point. A GUI severely limits the capabilities of a computer, and that is not acceptable. People insist on using the word "easy", but "easy" is not something I ever take as a primary consideration in the first place, and an application space is not "easy" if it precludes the user from taking the maximum advantage of the device at hand, in the second.

John Kennedy said it very well, "We... do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard." There is a really good chance that if something is easy, then it is not worth doing in the first place. I'm not saying I would refuse to do something just because it is easy, but if an easy path limits my choices, then I refuse to take it. When I look at any application, I ask, "Can I (eventually) accomplish everything I would ever need to accomplish with this application?" I never ask, "How quickly can I start using this application in a rudimentary fashion?"


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> Seagate Barracuda LP drives.
> Amazon Warehouse deals. I've purchased at least ten of the Seagates for that price. And the warranty is better than the drives I received from Newegg for $70. Every Newegg drive I got this year was made in June/July 2010, while the Amazon ones were from November 2010 to January 2011.
> 
> The Seagate drive warranties start from the manufacture date, not from the date purchased.


Hmm. I've been shying away from Seagates as of late. Most WD green drives run cooler and use less power, but more importantly I have had a number of Seagate failures over the last couple of years or so. Not too long ago I had 4 Seagate 1.5T drives fail simultaneously, taking down the array. I've had very good luck with Hitachi Deskstar drives the last 4 or 5 years, but they use a lot more power and usually cost more. In an application where both reliability and performance are a premium, I recommend the Hitachis. Most of my needs don't require anything spectacular in the way of performance, however, and both purchase price and power / cooling costs are always a significant consideration, so as of late I have been sticking with the WD Green drives.

Anyone want some 1.5T Seagate drives? I have four of them I will let go really cheap.


----------

