which combo box ticks all boxes???

seanin4711

hi all!
I am looking (in vain) for a box that can do all of the following on a budget!
1 linux
2 HD
3 can install HDD
4 dual tuner
5 can play divx/avis from external usb/hdd
6 networked to stream media from PC.

am I asking too much for under €200?

slan
s

tomslick

Dual tuner blows your budgut out of the water. Single tuner with the above is about £250 for a clone DM800. A decent dual will cost in excess of €400.

Barack Obama

tomslick wrote: »

Dual tuner blows your budgut out of the water. Single tuner with the above is about £250 for a clone DM800. A decent dual will cost in excess of €400.

I agree with that. I recently dumped my SkyHD+ box for a DM800 clone. The DM8000 would have been ideal but it was just out and the originals were just too damn expensive! You learn to live with a single tuner very quickly.

Note that divx will not work (normally shyte SD anyway!) but mkv will, so you can play HD files to your hearts content.

JHMEG

seanin4711 wrote: »

1 linux

There is also a very big difference between linux and enigma. I wouldn't buy a linux based receiver unless it was enigma.

cormacl

there's also a difference between a clone and an original..

one is illegal, the other is not.

Lots of sales of clones can run the company that made enigma what it is into the ground. Opensource does actually depend a lot on commercial interests to fund the development.

Be clear that the image teams take a baseline that someone else worked hard to make and then add extras to it.. not to belittle that; what these teams do is great.. but they are working on the efforts of others and they readily acknowledge that.

Many of those image teams take a strong anti-clone position as a result. There are a few gob****es out there who provide hacked images to run on clones.

So, please really think about what you're doing when you buy a clone and if you think DMM originals are too expensive, at least go for one of the other legitimate enigma-based alternatives. At least doing it legally with their own designs and also contributing to the enigma code at the same time.

JHMEG

cormacl wrote: »

one is illegal, the other is not.

Not that clear cut. If copyrighted material has been copied then yes, it's illegal, but my understanding is it's only the bootloader in the DMM boxes that's not open-source. If the boot-loader hasn't been copied, and the unit is not badged to look like it's a DMM original priduct, there's no breach of copyright.

As we know, most of enigma, being Linux, is the work of other people who never got paid by DMM (or anyone else) for it.

There have also been claims that DMM are profiteering to the extreme, which if true means they have contributed greatly to the creation of the (knock-off) clone problem.

cormacl

Not that clear cut. If copyrighted material has been copied then yes, it's illegal, but my understanding is it's only the bootloader in the DMM boxes that's not open-source. If the boot-loader hasn't been copied, and the unit is not badged to look like it's a DMM original priduct, there's no breach of copyright.

The problem is that the box will not boot without a boot loader.. like a BIOS, EFI.. something needs to load the OS. The clone is using the exact same motherboard and hardware is more or less a clone. So the DMM loader would by definition work with this device.

No one has ever shown an interdependently written boot loader for these clones.. we know this because special images have to be made available that have the easter egg code*** disabled or use older non-egged versions of the proprietary loader.. either way, its unauthorised copyright infringement to use this proprietary loader.

***The easter egg code embedded in the proprietary boot loader is designed to wipe the boot loader if its detected on unofficial hardware.

As we know, most of enigma, being Linux, is the work of other people who never got paid by DMM (or anyone else) for it.

Not remotely true.. the CVS repository for Enigma and Enigma2 shows that the code was almost completely written by employees of DMM.. not by the general public. The original enigma code was hacked together by some very talented German Linux hackers, most of which either formed DMM or were original employees.

The image teams did not write enigma or enigma2.. they package it into releases with extra plugin menus or CAM support or whatnot, adding their own extension code, most of which is proprietary to them. But they did not write the original software. They do find some bugs in the CVS repository.. they do fix them and report back to DMM who will either formerly fix the issue or apply the changes provided.. but make no mistake that the vast bulk of the work and bug fixing is by employees of DMM.

There have also been claims that DMM are profiteering to the extreme, which if true means they have contributed greatly to the creation of the (knock-off) clone problem

Welcome to the real world.. if you create a great product, your entitled to sell it and make profit and as much as you can. If people feel you're overcharging, it does not entitle or justify them to break the law. Instead they should buy another cheaper receiver or create their own.

Apple makes a tonne of money on selling computers... so some smart-ass company in the US (pystar) tries to sell cheaper PCs with OSX hacked to run on them.. they are subsequently put out of existence because they broke the copyright laws. Its the same thing that is being done with these clones. DMM has prosecuted people over distributing, importing and selling these receivers.

JHMEG

cormacl wrote: »

No one has ever shown an interdependently written boot loader for these clones..

My understanding is some do, eg Eagle box. Haven't looked myself so can't prove it is or isn't true. Flashing with a 3rd party image may of course overwrite the bootloader with a copyrighted one, but that's a different story.

cormacl wrote: »

Not remotely true..

DMM use the linux kernel, busybox, samba, hardware drivers etc, none of which were written by them.

cormacl wrote: »

but make no mistake that the vast bulk of the work and bug fixing is by employees of DMM.

Just as DMM employees rely on the wider Linux community.

cormacl wrote: »

Welcome to the real world.. if you create a great product,

Of course you are, and someone else is entitled to copy the non-copyrighted bits and make a cheaper competing product. If your product has huge margins you're going to invite this sort of thing in faster than a hot snot. IBM PC anyone?

cormacl

What a sad reply... trying to dodge the fact that Enigma... the very essence of what makes a dreambox a great receiver was almost totally written by DMM. and all you can argue is the Linux kernel.

Here's another piece of fact for your clear ignorance in this matter.. The Linux distro used by the dreamboxes is based on Openembedded. You will find they have contributed many changes to that trunk also. Several of their developers, Felix Domke, to name one is one of the main developers on openembedded. So its benefitting because of their use of it. And all of the Enigma2 code is opensource.. everyone benefits from that. Ask Qbox, Vu+ etc. We can see every line of code with the exception of the tuner drivers (licenced from Philips, Alps etc) and the front loader code (DMM proprietary).

Eagleboxes are clones. They ship with modified images that have the easter egg code either removed or nobbled.. either way the boot loader is a DMM boot loader. Thats well known. You would not be able to flash the receivers with a DMM image otherwise, if they did not have the same FL copyright code inside of them.. FACT.

IBM PC?.. when Compaq built their clone, they wrote their own BIOS.. they didn't copy the IBM proprietary part. The rest of the design was based on reference designs they licenced off Intel and others. All IBM owned was the BIOS.

Seriously.. If you want to rest your conscience, chuck out your clone and either buy an original or a Vu+, Qbox or one of the other legit receivers that have built their own designs and ported Enigma2. If not, then admit you've broken the law and deal with it your own way. But stop wasting my time arguing about something you clearly know SFA about.

JHMEG

cormacl wrote: »

What a sad reply...

If you're not interested in a civil discussion that'll be the end of that.