Linux or Windows
#1
I have an xbmc center working with Windows 7 and everything works fine, my data is stored on the htpc, but i do pull some from my regular computer and all that works fine. I keep reading a lot of folks are using Ubuntu though or Live and am wondering what the advantages of these are over windows. One thing i do not like about my htpc is that it seem to PC'e if that makes since, i would much rather it just use the xbmc gui, although i do use boxee some for their live tv app.
Reply
#2
Linux has the advantage of being free. Also, many people, as a rule, don't especially like Windows. That's the main advantage of Linux.

With that said, if you don't like logging into Windows or experiencing that "PC" feel, you are definitely welcome to give XBMC Live a go. With XBMC Live, the entire experience is more like just turning on a incredibly awesome and powerful dvd player and going.
Reply
#3
Depends on you hardware. For NVidia, Linux is an easy to install and maintain OS, especially with Openelec. For Intel/AMD it requires more time and skills (should be as easy when ppa's, openelec and xbmclive are fixed for VAAPI).

Windows should be a hassle-free, but not free, solution.

Quality and ease of XBMC is equal on both platforms.
Reply
#4
The other reason I was wondering what because of myth tv, i have a tv tuner and right now have just been using wmc for the live tv channels. For hardware I have a gigabyte mobo with an ati chip for graphics or I have a ati 4500 gpu. Both run through hdmi to my projector. I have a SSD 30gb as the boot drive. I do have iMON screen on my case too. Once i get this all going the only thing left is to get a good remote to program, but i think ill probably get a rii.
Reply
#5
Win7 MCE, because it can do DTS-HD/TrueHD pass-through and it has a lot of cool remotes control for MCE too. I leave MCE on 24/7, and it can wake up on a dime with a button on MCE remote control. I never have to see the desktop. Since it is Zacate (I used eskro suggestion to build it), it is barely expose in the entertainment center.

Oh one other note, it's better than any HD media player that I owned (Boxee Box, Xtreamer, Roku, etc). I don't have to deal with all the HD audio playback issues that all the media players posses anymore. I have full control of the settings, instead of rely on Boxee, Xtreamer, etc to fix it for me. They never get their HD audio to work correctly yet!
Reply
#6
Tow simple reason for me to use Windows on the HTPC:
1. full BluRay support
2. no hacking and messing around with lowlevel stuff on the console

I gave Ubuntu several tries, I even have it as dual boot playground on my notebook and in a VM on my desktop pc, but I always had issues with it - be it blacklisted drivers I had to spend hours to get them working, no LAN because I wasn't able to set the connection to 100Mbit FD (gigabit fails on my wireing), easy automounting of smb shares etc. You still need to be a little techie and mess with the console to use Linux - although it already got a lot better.
Reply
#7
I used Ubuntu for a good long time and then I had a hard drive failure. It took months for me to get my Ubuntu install with XBMC working the way I liked. I decided I didn't want to go through that and installed Windows when I bought my new ssd.

I do work in tech support. I work with Windows systems all day long. If anything goes bad in Windows I know how to fix it. With Ubuntu I spent a lot of my time Googleing. It took me roughly two hours to install Windows, install popper drivers, optimize it for the SSD and and install XBMC.

Linux was a great experience and I'm glad I gave it a try but I'm glad to be back on Windows where I'm comfortable.
How to use Git
| AMD Athlon II X3 Triple Core Processor 2.9 GHz |GIGABYTE GA-MA785GM-US2H Mobo 2GB DDR2 Ram | MSI N430GT |
| Logitec Harmony Smart Control Remote| 52" Sharp Aquos LED TV | Denon AVR-X1000 |
| Freenas Server with 18TB ASRock Intel Avoton C2750 |
Reply
#8
htpc guy Wrote:I used Ubuntu for a good long time and then I had a hard drive failure. It took months for me to get my Ubuntu install with XBMC working the way I liked. I decided I didn't want to go through that and installed Windows when I bought my new ssd.

I do work in tech support. I work with Windows systems all day long. If anything goes bad in Windows I know how to fix it. With Ubuntu I spent a lot of my time Googleing. It took me roughly two hours to install Windows, install popper drivers, optimize it for the SSD and and install XBMC.

Linux was a great experience and I'm glad I gave it a try but I'm glad to be back on Windows where I'm comfortable.

+1.

I Love Linux and i hate windows but but when it comes to easyness of installation and make everything work, windows is ahead of linux. I tried Openelec too, but the image was stuttering in random times and there was a bug with stuttering when the first two subtitles hit the screen, so i went back in Windows.

P.S. I just hope that that the Eden Live version will work out of the box, especially when it comes wih proper 24p playback.
Reply
#9
I use Linux on my desktop at home and I love it. It beats Windows hands down for the type of things I do - managing downloads, copying files, transcoding video and audio files, etc. But for the HTPC, I gave Linux a try, but ended up using Windows 7 and never looked back. Since I use the HTPC for other things than xbmc, it just made more sense. Not having Netflix was a real dealbreaker. Also, setting up bit perfect audio output using foobar2000 was a real plus (I stream to an external DAC using optical, while xbmc uses HDMI). Everything just works out of the box without any problems. Linux is great for a lot of things, but when it comes to setting up a full-function HTPC, Windows is still the choice in my humble opinion.
Reply
#10
I've just been trying out both Windows and Fedora linux on my new Dell Zino, and Windows is really the only choice that works well. I can't get hdmi audio at all from the open source radeon driver, and I can't get decent video from the closed source catalyst driver. Fortunately the Windows xbmc works pretty much perfectly for me. My full story is here:

http://home.comcast.net/~tomhorsley/hard.../zino.html
Reply
#11
On my development PCs Linux is startlingly faster to boot and shut down than Windows 7. The PCs are all identical so this is a fair comparison. Having said that, XBMC itself runs at the same speed on both platforms, or at least there's no obvious difference when I use XBMC; I haven't run any precise metrics.

But on my HTPC I use Windows for many of the reasons posted above. It's easier and I occasionally run Windows apps. The relatively slow startup is rarely an issue.

JR
Reply
#12
Use Sleep Mode and say b`bye to starting up/shutting down your PC. Both on Windows and Linux.
I`ne never restarted my HTPC or main workstation for the last month or so..
Reply
#13
I Have tied both, And I would have stayed with Linux if it was not for the fact that there is no "Blu-Ray" player software on Linux (I know I can "rip" "blu-ray" disks to the HDD but why would I want too if I have the disks to hand). And there seems to be issues getting full HD audio output. IE: "DTS" 6.1/7.1 "HD-Master audio". So until them issuse are sorted. I will stay on "Windows". Not that I want to stay on "Windows".

So for the most part. Windows is the Operating system of choice for now. Hopefully that will change.
Reply
#14
In my opinion if you asemble a PC that is fully compatible with Linux you will have few problems installing a distribution like ubuntu or xbmc-live. I think that in this case installing Ubuntu is simpler than installing Windows because drivers, basilar programs, flash, codecs are installed with OS. Obviously you need to learn new stuff about your distribution but you can't expect from a pear to be an orange.



The principal issue of Linux is that now there isn't a good support for blu-ray, 3D and HD audio.
But if we search the near future we can see:

-HD audio support will come with new Pulse-Audio (because all the other components FFmpeg, XBMC and ALSA can support it). (if you use a bleeding-edge configuration this is not anymore a problem)

-Blu-ray are now supported in real time by means of makemkv but this support lacks menus and other stuff that will be integrated in the future with NFS streaming.


After this consideration I want to point out the cost of the software in the 2 cases:

WINDOWS:

OS OEM DVD 75€
Blu ray software 100€


LINUX:

OS 0€
Blu ray software (makemkv) 0€ (Will be 60€)

So it is true that a Linux configuration now is more limited but there is 175€ of difference that is intended to increase every year when you update the OS 33€/y (if you consider that a new windows OS is relesed every 3y and it costs 100€ to update the OEM license) and the BR-player 60€/y.

This difference is 1/3 of the total cost of an HTPC system and if you don't waste 93€/y in updating you can buy 8-10 blu-rays. Or better you can donate a part of this money to open-source projects that let you to build a very good HTPC (I mean XBMC, FFmpeg, Pulse-Audio, Your linux distribution and so on).
If you crack your winOS / BR-program this speech has no sense.

In third analysis the maintenance of a working linux distribution is simpler than a windows configuration. I'll explene better reporting my example.
I have a dual boot configuration ( Vista + Ubuntu ).
I use Windows only for blu-ray but when I start windows I had to update the Anti-Virus, Java, The blu ray Player, The Adobe programs (flash), The operating system to avoid some interruption during the vision of the blu ray or only to be allowed to see dthe film (Br-player). Don't tell me to disable the auto update because I did but sometimes messages of updating come out. And a Windows configuration used for all media needs more updating for every damned program. A linux distribution has only one and central update manager that can be sheduled or disabled and let you update programs/codecs/drivers.


In the end if you like Windows use it but don't demonize linux only because you don't want to learn new things or because you don't have a compatible hardware (it's like you want to install an Apple OS on a non apple hardware).

See you soon Rofl
Reply
#15
Oddsodz Wrote:I Have tied both, And I would have stayed with Linux if it was not for the fact that there is no "Blu-Ray" player software on Linux (I know I can "rip" "blu-ray" disks to the HDD but why would I want too if I have the disks to hand). And there seems to be issues getting full HD audio output. IE: "DTS" 6.1/7.1 "HD-Master audio". So until them issuse are sorted. I will stay on "Windows". Not that I want to stay on "Windows".

So for the most part. Windows is the Operating system of choice for now. Hopefully that will change.

It is possible to play bluray's with a linux over addon.
Reply

Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
Linux or Windows0