Martin, I didn't detect any sarcasm in BeatleUK's comment about your continued references to the legality of keeping recordings, nor did he in his initial comment refer to a point of view "which I don't actually hold". It does seem on a casual read that you have made a lot of references to the legality of recordings and there really doesn't seem to be much point, it's academic at best.
The problem is with you Martin, is the posts of yours I read just started with this whole legality stuff, it wasn't constructed and detailed very much. So people obviously jumped to the wrong conclusion. Maybe some people know you better than others, but like I didn't know you before this forum, there are plenty of people who don't know you but I still stand by my claim that the reason it wasn't implented wasn't due to copyright law as they made it possible to store all the recordings on the box for eternity.
It really is a shame that this forum doesn't enable private comments. Then perhaps some of these posts which seek to set the record straight might take place in private. Martin and BeatleUK, can we please now draw a line under this dialogue?
It really is a shame that this forum doesn't enable private comments. Then perhaps some of these posts which seek to set the record straight might take place in private. Martin and BeatleUK, can we please now draw a line under this dialogue?
If you read carefully I didn't post in here for some time, even when being repeatedly prodded and trolled.
When I tackled a liar desperate to misrepresent my position it cried like a bleating child. But the best way to avoid being denounced as a liar is not to lie and not to misrepresent people.
It really is a shame that this forum doesn't enable private comments. Then perhaps some of these posts which seek to set the record straight might take place in private. Martin and BeatleUK, can we please now draw a line under this dialogue?
It really is a shame that this forum doesn't enable private comments. Then perhaps some of these posts which seek to set the record straight might take place in private. Martin and BeatleUK, can we please now draw a line under this dialogue?
okey dokey, I'll be too busy tomorrow when my YouView box comes anyway. Thanks for the debate.
>> I didn't mean to make anyone angry, I just wanted to put in my 2 cents. I feel like I should have kept my mouth quiet.
Not really.
Would have been nice had you not jumped in and rushed to judge me and make sarcastic comments about a PoV I don't actually hold. But that's not the same as refraining from posting at all.
Martin, the ignore option cuts both ways. Be careful what you wish for.... :-)
‘Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful’ Wm Morris
>> I didn't mean to make anyone angry, I just wanted to put in my 2 cents. I feel like I should have kept my mouth quiet.
Not really.
Would have been nice had you not jumped in and rushed to judge me and make sarcastic comments about a PoV I don't actually hold. But that's not the same as refraining from posting at all.
Roy
I wouldn't give a fig if I was added to yours and everyone else's ignore list.
OTOH I won't tolerate liars misrepresenting my views and posts merely to try and make themselves look cleverer than they're ever likely to be.
>> I didn't mean to make anyone angry, I just wanted to put in my 2 cents. I feel like I should have kept my mouth quiet.
Not really.
Would have been nice had you not jumped in and rushed to judge me and make sarcastic comments about a PoV I don't actually hold. But that's not the same as refraining from posting at all.
What this forum really needs is a button to report abusive posts.
>> I didn't mean to make anyone angry, I just wanted to put in my 2 cents. I feel like I should have kept my mouth quiet.
Not really.
Would have been nice had you not jumped in and rushed to judge me and make sarcastic comments about a PoV I don't actually hold. But that's not the same as refraining from posting at all.
You can email the mods to report any threads you don't like.
The best way for those offended at being called a liar to spare themselves any upset is not to tell lies about others. What cannot be allowed is for repeated lies to be accepted by the community only for folk to get holier than thou when the liars are denounced for what they are.
>> I didn't mean to make anyone angry, I just wanted to put in my 2 cents. I feel like I should have kept my mouth quiet.
Not really.
Would have been nice had you not jumped in and rushed to judge me and make sarcastic comments about a PoV I don't actually hold. But that's not the same as refraining from posting at all.
Martin 10 hours ago
...For now I have nothing more to say on the topic.
>> I didn't mean to make anyone angry, I just wanted to put in my 2 cents. I feel like I should have kept my mouth quiet.
Not really.
Would have been nice had you not jumped in and rushed to judge me and make sarcastic comments about a PoV I don't actually hold. But that's not the same as refraining from posting at all.
Don't want to go to far down this path but I'd be very surprised if there is ever a hacked version of YouView as the software is only available to the boxes, not via a website.
Also, if a hacked version did get out I'd expected YouView would just block boxes running it from accessing their servers in order to provide the protection they promise the broadcasters and content owners.
Sure it's not open source so there's another hurdle to overcome, but it's not beyond the wit of mankind to think someone will reverse engineer code of some form for it.
If these boxes get as popular as Lord Sugar want's them to get, various versions of hacked firmware will soon follow that.
I could see the USBs being opened up to allow the box to be used as a media player. I could also imagine the day when some form of DLNA/uPnP client is added.
Both would be low priority. As they both mean that you'd be watching your own stuff rather than being tempted by anything extra you might be persuaded to subscribe to or buy on-demand.
What I think you'll never see on YouView is the ability to pull off recorded content onto USB or have it served over uPnP technology. As, because the whole project is a joint venture that includes all the UK's major networked channels as partners, it would compromise their own, and their supplied, programming and reduce sales of things like box-set series.
What seems more obvious, would be support for a WiFi dongle. Other than that, I think they were included just in case they needed them sometime in the future in all honesty.
Having just read this thread completely, I am concerned that there is still no way of using the USB connections either for WiFi or playing content from another disk or dongle. It really is a must have feature for any PVR worth having. It seems strange that after all this time there does not seem to be any reply from YouView on this subject, unless I have missed something.
Having just read this thread completely, I am concerned that there is still no way of using the USB connections either for WiFi or playing content from another disk or dongle. It really is a must have feature for any PVR worth having. It seems strange that after all this time there does not seem to be any reply from YouView on this subject, unless I have missed something.
If it helps to give an idea of time scale; the Humax HD Fox T2 had a press launch in Autumn 2009 (late September if I remember correctly) At that stage they announced the single tuner box would be able to record to a USB hard drive. It was subsequently launched onto the market in May 2010 without that feature. It was eventually added in a beta release just before Christmas that year with the OTA release in January 2011.
My constant complaint is that USB functionality is required for both using a wifi dongle and to play media from external devices, both of which form part of the base YouView specification. Recording to a USB device is "not required" but neither is it prohibited by that spec so individual makers could implement it as part of the machine specific menu/options that are also allowed for in the spec.
The thing is that unless Youview get thier act together with this and all the other suggestions that are being posted, there will shortly be no unique selling point to these boxes as all the smart TV's that are being introduced will have it all without the need to purchase an addon box
I could see the USBs being opened up to allow the box to be used as a media player. I could also imagine the day when some form of DLNA/uPnP client is added.
Both would be low priority. As they both mean that you'd be watching your own stuff rather than being tempted by anything extra you might be persuaded to subscribe to or buy on-demand.
What I think you'll never see on YouView is the ability to pull off recorded content onto USB or have it served over uPnP technology. As, because the whole project is a joint venture that includes all the UK's major networked channels as partners, it would compromise their own, and their supplied, programming and reduce sales of things like box-set series.
What seems more obvious, would be support for a WiFi dongle. Other than that, I think they were included just in case they needed them sometime in the future in all honesty.
Why pray would something that forms part of the base specification for all YouView boxes (playback from USB) be a low priority? If anything, completing basic functions described in the specs should be an extremely high priority and producing an iPhone/Pad app to imitate a Sky function should have been put on the back burner until they had these in place.
seriously i'd love to be able to wifi tether this and get rid of the old ethernet cable, next id love is to play . AVI .MKV etc... videos i presume its down to the sooftware licenses, royaltees etc... but yeah its a crippling feature rather than a useful one
I and others have found the TP Link TL-WR702N to work well and it only costs about £15. As per the first thread linked above there are various other options that people have found to work well too.
It should work for any wired ethernet device (so in particular YouView boxes of any type) since the TP Link is configured to form a wireless bridge so from the perspective of the device it is just a wired ethernet connection (and then the clever wireless bit is entirely down to the TP Link device). So basically you can do this to provide a wireless connection to a wired device that cannot do wireless itself.
At least they have power going to them, useful so I can power a small portable router configured to work as a wifi dongle (whoops, another thing that is mandatory as part of the base specification but no current box complies with!)
Comments
Then perhaps some of these posts which seek to set the record straight might take place in private.
Martin and BeatleUK, can we please now draw a line under this dialogue?
When I tackled a liar desperate to misrepresent my position it cried like a bleating child. But the best way to avoid being denounced as a liar is not to lie and not to misrepresent people.
For now I have nothing more to say on the topic.
I wouldn't give a fig if I was added to yours and everyone else's ignore list.
OTOH I won't tolerate liars misrepresenting my views and posts merely to try and make themselves look cleverer than they're ever likely to be.
The best way for those offended at being called a liar to spare themselves any upset is not to tell lies about others. What cannot be allowed is for repeated lies to be accepted by the community only for folk to get holier than thou when the liars are denounced for what they are.
If these boxes get as popular as Lord Sugar want's them to get, various versions of hacked firmware will soon follow that.
Both would be low priority. As they both mean that you'd be watching your own stuff rather than being tempted by anything extra you might be persuaded to subscribe to or buy on-demand.
What I think you'll never see on YouView is the ability to pull off recorded content onto USB or have it served over uPnP technology. As, because the whole project is a joint venture that includes all the UK's major networked channels as partners, it would compromise their own, and their supplied, programming and reduce sales of things like box-set series.
What seems more obvious, would be support for a WiFi dongle. Other than that, I think they were included just in case they needed them sometime in the future in all honesty.
My constant complaint is that USB functionality is required for both using a wifi dongle and to play media from external devices, both of which form part of the base YouView specification. Recording to a USB device is "not required" but neither is it prohibited by that spec so individual makers could implement it as part of the machine specific menu/options that are also allowed for in the spec.
http://community.youview.com/youview/...
http://community.youview.com/youview/...
I and others have found the TP Link TL-WR702N to work well and it only costs about £15. As per the first thread linked above there are various other options that people have found to work well too.