[Floppie]

After further network examination yesterday, it looks like my issues are with processing rather than bandwidth. It looks like my only choice is to throw more hardware at it

This doesn't change the fact that it would be useful to have larger buffers, so I'm still going to look into coding this at some point.

[ashlar]

Thanks Floppie. I'm on gigabit but I really like the attitude

[AnalogKid]

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.

I don't believe anybody is expecting developers to drop what they are doing. This is a gross exaggeration.

Furthermore, there are plenty of situations where cable installations are not a feasible option.

Poor bandwidth won't be helped by buffering. This is not what buffering is for. Buffering is used to smooth out fluctuations in bandwidth, something EVERYBODY experiences to a greater or lesser extent.

It 'feels' like some people reject the notion of a buffer because they make this false assumption about it being used to overcome poor bandwidth.... on that basis (of the false assumption), it's quite right to say "forget it, it's pointless". On the basis of the correct assumption that buffers DO resolve bandwidth fluctuations, then the debate becomes a matter of someone having motivation enough to implement it - which is an entirely different matter.


Fluctuating network bandwidth = 'substandard equipment' is simply a false assumption.

[Finchy]

I don't know if it's been asked before, but would it be possible to implement an option for XBMC to fully cache a file locally before playback? With video files getting larger and wireless connections being pretty flakey (and homeplug equally unreliable), it'd be pretty useful if you had an option for XBMC to copy over the file you want to play in full to a local temporary folder before playing back so there is no chance of stuttering. I'm having problems keeping a good connection on an 11N connection despite being able to transfer files over to my Revo pretty quickly. I'd rather have to wait a ten minutes for a file to fully buffer before playing if it was going to guarantee full and smooth playback.

Just a thought!

[xeonicxpression]

It seems like this would be terrible from a user experience prospective. I guess it could be tossed into advancedsettings, but I can't imagine it ever making it's way into the standard settings menu. I can just see people checking that box and then coming here complaining that their movies take too long to start.

[procrastinator]

This has been discussed before. See this thread:
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=79673

[Finchy]

Ah ha, hadn't realiise, sorry! I guess the reason I asked is because my current setup (rented accomodation) does allow me to easily set up a wired network and personally I'd be happy to wait 5-10 minutes for a movie to load to watch it in full without glitches. I'll jump onto the back of that thread (although at a glance it was getting a bit nasty!)

[Finchy]

Hey guys

I'm pretty new to XBMC but really impresed with it.

I'd like to just add comment to this (as I started a new thread not noticing this one).

I've read through this thread and, whilst I understand why a lot of people don't think caching should be a feature, I still think it might be really useful to some users (like me!) and would like to add comment.

The reasons I've seen for not having caching are generally that it's not the responsibility of the software to make up for shortcomings in peoples hardware (ie wifi) set ups and that peeople will moan if they're waiting for long periods of time for a video to fully buffer.

I've always liked to think that, in general, applications are design to be flexible, to meet needs and to try to help make up for shortcomings that maybe can't always be dealt with by other means (as in, if it can be done, make it an option).

I've seen a number of [sometimes quite blunt!] comments as to why caching should not be an option - it's not the software's fault, wifi is crap, run a wired network, etc. However, not everyone is in a situation as to be able to do all of these. I'm living in rented accomodation in a house of flats in London*, where it's just not feasible to run a wired network as it would look ugly (as in not girlfriend accepable!) as there's no way of hiding cables (I can't chase out walls, fix trunking or lift up floorboards). I'm also in a flat where, on scanning for networks, I'm sharing the airways with between 4 and 7 other wireless devices at any time, so the connection quality varies a lot.

My setup is that my movies and TV shows are stored on a NAS, connected to my router via gigabit ethernet. I then have a laptop and HTPC that connect to the router by 11n wireless. The average connection is around 150Mbps. My laptop streams pretty comfortably. However, I don't want to watch movies on that and (unfortunately), due to the HTPC (Revo)'s wireless adapter being frankly pretty shite, the speed of connection varies widely, so at times it's plenty much fast enough for streaming, but at others it craaaaawwwwllllls to almost a standstill, before setting off again. This causes glitches in playback over wireless, despite the fact that I can transfer the same files over to the Revo in considerably less time (ie 5 mins for a 40 mins TV show, 10 mins for a movie) - in theory it should stream at a canter, but in reality it doesn't wotk like that, as many people will know.

I understand why some people may argue that every set up should be of sufficient spec to be able to deliver a good streaming experience, but my arguement is that if it is possible, then why not make it an option? Users are quick to flame anyone who criticizes if there are any problems, so anyone selecting full caching and then complaining about the time they have to wait will surely get burnt to oblivion anyway (well, maybe after being first told to untick the settng!)

So personally, whilst I don't for an instant blame XBMC (or any other similar media software for that matter) for the lags in my streaming, adn am fully aware that it's due to wireless being completely flakey, if it had an option that would fix this problem at the cost of me having to wait to view a program or movie, then I would happily use that option knowing the downsides to using it, and be more happy that XBMC allows me the flexibility to use that option.

My two pennorth spent for tonight!

*according to a recent newspaper article, Londoners have the smallest average living accomodation in Europe, and they seem to be getting smaller and smaller!

[darkscout]

When I watch movies over .11n and NFS from my Solaris machine, I ALWAYS do
mplayer -cache 10240. It smooths everything out like my neighbor's microwave and makes it so that I never have any buffering.

Without it, I'll buffer at least 2-3 times a TV show just because that's how stuff works.

[procrastinator]

I'm also in a flat where, on scanning for networks, I'm sharing the airways with between 4 and 7 other wireless devices at any time, so the connection quality varies a lot.

Have you tried scanning the channels used by those other networks? If you can find a clearer channel you might get a better signal. Try this online Java applet to do a scan:
http://tools.meraki.com/stumbler
alternatively download and install a bit of software like NetStumbler which will do the same thing.Of course finding a free channel using one of these tools doesn't guarantee that other appliances won't interfere on that channel (my microwave used to basically shut down the whole wireless network when it came on!)

My setup is that my movies and TV shows are stored on a NAS

Presumably your NAS runs a uPNP server (most come with one pre-installed). You could play your media via uPNP. This is far from ideal as it doesn't let you take advantage of the XBMC library, but given the lower overhead of uPNP vs. SMB then you might at least get smooth playback, which is the main thing after all. I did this in my last rented house where it was impossible to watch anything over SMB, but uPNP always gave flawless playback.

(unfortunately), due to the HTPC (Revo)'s wireless adapter being frankly pretty shite

By the sound of the 150Mbps connection speed you mentioned - which I'm presuming you've read on your Revo rather than extrapolating from your laptop - it sounds like your Revo's wireless adapter is inconsistant at holding a connection rather than actually getting a decent speed off of that connection. So its worth asking whether the drivers are up to date?

I have read a couple of other pages suggesting that the wireless N adapter in the 3610 (I'm guessing that's the model you've got) are not up to the job. See here:
http://www.theacerguy.com/forum/topic/as...ess-80211n
That adapter is only capable of wireless N over 2.4GHz network, so if you've got a dual-band router that only does N at 5GHz then you're only going to get 802.11G.
Also stumbled across this quick video tutorial to boost your Revo's WiFi signal by installing a high gain antenna - it is new hardware, but it comes in at under a tenner so... y'know: cheap!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9QRXobiF_k

Hope some of that comes in useful. Good Luck!


And just to add something on-topic as opposed to just troubleshooting: I agree with the original request, and think it is completely valid. The shouting down of discussions with claims that you should just set up a wired network and end all your woes is not helpful or constructive. For many of us who live in rented accomadation (which is, for a large part, the norm in Europe - certainly in London) then setting up a wired network which doesn't have exposed wires trailing around the house is simply not an option. In this case we have to rely on a wireless set up, and it is just the nature of the beast that with this kind of setup connection can be flakey. Maybe a bigger buffer isn't the best solution overall for media over wifi problems, but where the connection is a bit flakey rather than just plain slow then it seems like the obvious solution. Of course if there are any other solutions (taking into account the inability to set up a wired network) then what are they?

[TugboatBill]

Maybe copy to file over to the XBMC box and then play it from there? Selection would be via some sort of offline library?

[tanglin]

This has been discussed before. See this thread:
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=79673

And here:

http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=90407

(Kind of a duplicate post but another reason to consider, IMO)

[Finchy]

Have you tried scanning the channels used by those other networks?

Yes, I've scanned with inSSIDer and there are quite a few people nearby with wireless networks and spread across the channels. I tried setting a specific channel but it seems faster using the 'auto' channel selecting option.

Presumably your NAS runs a uPNP server (most come with one pre-installed). You could play your media via uPNP. This is far from ideal as it doesn't let you take advantage of the XBMC library, but given the lower overhead of uPNP vs. SMB then you might at least get smooth playback, which is the main thing after all. I did this in my last rented house where it was impossible to watch anything over SMB, but uPNP always gave flawless playback.

Yes, my NAS is a QNAP TS109 which does support uPNP, but I think I'd need to stream them through the Twonkymedia thing which sort of defeats the point of having XBMC as the stylish front end (Twonky's is really basic!)

By the sound of the 150Mbps connection speed you mentioned - which I'm presuming you've read on your Revo rather than extrapolating from your laptop - it sounds like your Revo's wireless adapter is inconsistant at holding a connection rather than actually getting a decent speed off of that connection. So its worth asking whether the drivers are up to date?

Yes, I did the transfers from the Revo themself and not via my laptop. The drivers are up to date as far as I can tell (Windows reports it as version 3.1.10.0) but I'm struggling to find out which model RAlink it is and if there are any new drivers (the Ralink site is pretty shite!) The Acer UK site isn't much help as under downloads for the R3700 it says the drivers for the wireless adapter are for a Hitachi model!

I have read a couple of other pages suggesting that the wireless N adapter in the 3610 (I'm guessing that's the model you've got) are not up to the job. See here:
http://www.theacerguy.com/forum/topic/as...ess-80211n
That adapter is only capable of wireless N over 2.4GHz network, so if you've got a dual-band router that only does N at 5GHz then you're only going to get 802.11G.
Also stumbled across this quick video tutorial to boost your Revo's WiFi signal by installing a high gain antenna - it is new hardware, but it comes in at under a tenner so... y'know: cheap!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9QRXobiF_k

No, mine is an R3700, the newer version with an 11n card. It does seem that there are problems with it not being very effective though when I search about it.

And just to add something on-topic as opposed to just troubleshooting: I agree with the original request, and think it is completely valid. The shouting down of discussions with claims that you should just set up a wired network and end all your woes is not helpful or constructive. For many of us who live in rented accomadation (which is, for a large part, the norm in Europe - certainly in London) then setting up a wired network which doesn't have exposed wires trailing around the house is simply not an option. In this case we have to rely on a wireless set up, and it is just the nature of the beast that with this kind of setup connection can be flakey. Maybe a bigger buffer isn't the best solution overall for media over wifi problems, but where the connection is a bit flakey rather than just plain slow then it seems like the obvious solution. Of course if there are any other solutions (taking into account the inability to set up a wired network) then what are they?

Hope some of that comes in useful. Good Luck!

Thanks mate, appreciate your help!

[Finchy]

Hmmm. I can add source as uPNP>Twonky then sort by folder and add my relevant movie folders, but for some reason it then just hangs on 'scanning for new content'. Looks like I need to do something to give XBMC permission to acces Twonky, but not sure what. :confused2:

[procrastinator]

you can't add UPnP sources to your library. See this thread:
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=39835