[defender013]

hey guys,

i dont want to get flamed or anything, just dropping in my 2 cents.

an option to set a buffer in my opinion is still valid (that is what I do).

i don't know if anyone is familiar with hailli media splitter, but it allows you to set the buffer to an arbitrary size. The smart implementation of it is..it does not wait for the buffer to fill before it allows playback to start.

It fills on the go. The point of this then, is to buffer up for those REALLY intense action scenes. Sure there are still some drawbacks, but in my case (my entire library is 720p), 99% of the time it gets the job done over an 11g connection

So i am of the opinion, buffer management, if implemented correctly, is still of use.

Now about just cutting holes in walls to do cables.. not everyone has that luxury..

this is probably too big a feature for xbmc to add, but just my opinion. TO get around xbmc's tiny buffer problem, i actually just use an external player (it's better anyways) and use hailli media splitter for buffering. It also gives me the option to pick default audio streams when a video file does in fact come with more than 1.

[defender013]

This is partly true, but the purpose of a buffer is never, has never been, and could never be to increase bandwidth. The purpose is to 'buffer' fluctuations in throughput in order to maintain a constant bandwidth.
WiFi networks are notorious for fluctuations in bandwidth, whilst having an overall decent bandwidth. For video streaming, it's the fluctuations that screw up playback, hence the buffering requirement.

Totally agree that a slow network's a slow network and there is no hope for that, but a 5 second dip in bandwidth should not be the cause of movie playback stuttering or even stopping.

It's untrue to say 'chances are it won't be able to keep the buffer full'. It doesn't have to. It only has to keep it from being empty. If the 'average' bandwidth of the network is sufficient, then the buffer will act as a 'dip' filter. The peaks in bandwidth act as a buffer filler.

The most prevalent issue with wireless networks as a transport for media isn't the bandwidth! it's the fluctuations.

i want to second what analogkid is saying here.

if you look at your typical 11g connection, under...non-crappy circumstances, you'll see the transfer fluctuate upwards to 20mbps. In my case for example, it'll usually average out around 12~13mbps. This is more than enough to handle any HD stream. However, the fluctuations can sometimes drop all the way to a 1 or 2, and this is where buffering really helps.

adding to my last post..this is also the place where i use media splitter to improve the situation.

before anyone starts saying im making stuff up, honest to god, this is how im running my xbmc setup. and unless i run into extended actions scenes where it's really intense for a really long period of time, the large buffering option has really helped out.

[Floppie]

I'd like to second this. I run into these same issues running hardwire - granted it's 10/100 - when I'm streaming high-bitrate 1080p videos (and let's face it, why bother getting 1080p if you're not going to go for a decent bitrate?)

Even while I'm looking at the network usage graph on my media server I see huge fluctuations in the stream. There are short periods where it'll completely saturate the physical link (and the video will stutter), and typically considerably longer periods of lull. Having a decent-sized buffer in place in XBMC's player would vastly improve the quality of my viewing experience.

Aside from that, wonderful software. I recently had to choose between XBMC and Boxee - I tried Boxee first, but the lack of ability to customize video file identification (the regexes in advancedsettings.xml) ultimately swayed me to XBMC, whose other features and interface I'm much happier with

[TugboatBill]

Why not just buy a GB switch? Here's one for under $20US:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...6833704042

[Floppie]

The media center doesn't support gigabit, and has no open PCI slots. So it would be buying a $20 gigabit switch, then picking up a new motherboard that supports gigabit, which will likely require upgrading memory and processors to match a new motherboard. So $20 + a few hundred.

Don't get me wrong, once I move to a new place I'm intending on building in a better backbone, but most other video players support a larger cache - and it does, in fact, work.

I can think of numerous times I've been watching a Youtube video and the player has quickly buffered half the video; then the network has hiccupped and it's been unable to continue downloading for several seconds. Lo and behold, the video continues playing in spite of the network issues - and when the network issues are resolved, it buffers the rest of the video.

This is an extreme example, as the Internet is hardly the epitome of reliable networks. But the fact remains that it does work, and there's your proof of concept. Based on how my network graph looks, I'd say that having even a small 64MB buffer (in memory would be fine, or in /tmp/ if using a file is easier) would resolve the issue for me.

[galets]

Why not just buy a GB switch? Here's one for under $20US:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...6833704042

It really baffles me to what levels of ignorance some posters of this thread descend. Don't get me wrong, I am very happy that you purchased a good cheap switch, invested into gigabyte network cards, installed the cabling, etc. You don't need the solution that I have suggested - good for you, but the others do. Some of us are in position to upgrade, some are not. I created this thread not for people to brag about their setup, but to suggest specific product software improvement, which would help those of us who has no gigabit networks at home.

Oh, and: maybe if this is how you prefer to handle the software issues, you should also buy a bluray player, this way you will not be affected by XBMC shortcomings at all.

I'm sorry for being so grumpy, but it's really frustrating when people discourage something from happening just because they personally are not interested in it

[TugboatBill]

It really baffles me to what levels of ignorance some posters of this thread descend. Don't get me wrong, I'm sorry you cannot afford an inexpensive switch. Expecting developers to drop needed changes to try and code to fix substandard equipment isn't realistic.

As posted earlier in this thread. If you really want more buffering submit the code.

Sorry for being so grumpy, but it's really frustrating when people expect the developers to drop what they're doing and try and code around a hardware issue that is so easily fixed.

[galets]

@TugboatBill: I opened a feature request, it's a suggestion. I am not demanding from anybody to do anything. If devs don't feel like doing it, there's nothing I can do. You clearly are not a dev, so why are you speaking on their behalf, who put you in charge here?

I also don't understand why do you need to monkey around. Unless you are a complete imbecile, you clearly must understand that there's significantly more involved setting a gigabit network than just buying a cheap switch.

[TugboatBill]

@TugboatBill: I opened a feature request, it's a suggestion. I am not demanding from anybody to do anything. If devs don't feel like doing it, there's nothing I can do. You clearly are not a dev, so why are you speaking on their behalf, who put you in charge here?

I also don't understand why do you need to monkey around. Unless you are a complete imbecile, you clearly must understand that there's significantly more involved setting a gigabit network than just buying a cheap switch.

Reread the 1st couple pages of this thread. The developers have made it clear their thoughts. No amount of name calling will change that.

Setting up a gigabit network is tinker toy simple. The only time it gets complicated is when you have an old piece of hardware that doesn't support it, as Floppie has stated. Other than that, it is just having enough sense to plug the wires in.

[galets]

@TugboatBill: You clearly never owned a house and have no idea what's involved in installing structured wiring.

[TugboatBill]

I do and I have. All you need is a $30 crimper, a drill, and some common sense.

[galets]

I do and I have. All you need is a $30 crimper, a drill, and some common sense.

Of course, and a spool of CAT5 wire descends to you from above. What a stupid discussion am I dragged into...

[TugboatBill]

Of course, and a spool of CAT5 wire descends to you from above. What a stupid discussion am I dragged into...

[Floppie]

It really baffles me to what levels of ignorance some posters of this thread descend. Don't get me wrong, I'm sorry you cannot afford an inexpensive switch. Expecting developers to drop needed changes to try and code to fix substandard equipment isn't realistic.

No it isn't. As a programmer myself, I and my colleagues do this every day. It's called optimization, and it's done to make the most of the hardware available rather than just throwing more hardware at an issue. Is this issue critical? No, so critical bugfixes should absolutely take priority. It's a feature request, not a bug.

And, before it comes up, if I manage to locate the time I absolutely will code this. The problem with me doing it (as opposed to an existing XBMC dev) is that I haven't worked with C++ since shortly after high school, and I haven't worked with videos and buffering ever. So there are two learning curves involved.

[elpirata]

How about those of us that have limited data plans, hell, even local cable (in the caribbean where I live) now has limited its plans to 40gigs a month, speeds here are not the same as in the states, for that 40gig plan u get 4mbs which I found out is speedy enough to be able to see trailers and other streamed content with little to no buffering.

The only unlimited data plan available for me has a supposedly 3G connection, which actually is between 1 or 2Mbs and that means constant buffering. For instance, using the NascarX plugin, the thing stops to buffer up every 30 seconds or less and we're talking about 2 or 3 min videos.

The Flash player has a setting so that I can choose between 100k to 100MB then to unlimited, but something like a user selectable 5mb-10-20-50mb that works for all streaming plugins would be great. Another idea would be to have a small symbol that reflects how full the buffer is (like Hulu's).

Just for kicks, the other nite I tried the Earth Touch plugin, HD very neat, buffers every 8 seconds lol. I have to be realisitc that no HD content is going to run in this manner, but I would hope that standard 360/480p or less should.

ELP

PS: All my systems are hardwired btw, but because of the unlimited data plan I have is one of those usb broadband wireless thingies I'm stuck with a bad download speed.