Instead of new image ... a NAS?

graemev

graemev

New Member
One thought I had. If you can't install a custom image, might another approach be to have the Streams recorded onto a NAS and then access the content direct from the NAS.

Given that, might the HB-1000S be better?

Of course all this hinges on being able to use an external NETWORKED disk rather than eSATA/USB anyone know if tat is possible?
 
However that's exactly what my DreamBox ( DM500HD ) does ... and it's using NFS which has write performance issues (idempotent operations e.g inodes) fast to read but slow to write. It writes HD content (unencrypted) just fine.
 
I comment based on our experience with Humax HD-FOX and custom firmware - the HDR-FOX will only record to the internal drive; the HD-FOX has no internal drive but can record to a USB drive; custom firmware can persuade either to view network storage as if it were a USB drive or a folder within the "standard" area, but AFAIK nobody has managed to make a recording across a network.

Extrapolating these observations to the HDR-1000S / HDR-1010S (did you really mean "HB-1000S"?) should give some idea of the difficulties.

The data rate required for a single HiDef feed is not particularly dramatic, but the HD/HDR-FOX are not designed for network recording. The DreamBox clearly is. Can it do more than one though? I have had 5 simultaneous HiDef streams running to/from the HDR-FOX drive.
 
I was thinking of the Humax HB-1000S (http://www.humaxdirect.co.uk/product.asp?ProdRef=10114)
...I'm coming to this 'cold' I have a FoxSat HDR ... I was just looking to see if they did a FreeView+FreeeSat , My TV does both , I find it useful and the channel sets are different.

In terms of recording, the DreamBox does nothing special. It's a Linux box, all you do is mount (NFS or SAMBA) a filesystem over the location where transport streams and it gets written remotely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top