I’m in a bit of a pickle here. I have an Atom 330-based tiny computer which I use as my HTPC. It performed its job fine running Windows 7 and Boxee, and over the past few months, it ran Mac OS X Leopard with Plex. Now, however, I want to try Linux as an HTPC operating system, but I kind of ran into a roadblock there with Ubuntu 9.10 – so the question is: what is a good HTPC Linux distribution?
Since my preference in distributions lies with Debian-based systems, and Ubuntu in particular,I obviously went for the latest Ubuntu release, version 9.10. Sadly, Ubuntu 9.10 has major issues on Atom 330/Intel 945GC+ICH7 chipset machines; no matter what I do, it will always crash during installation. Sometimes even before starting the installation (while still in live CD mode), sometimes during. It’s not the installer that crashes – the entire operating system hangs. I tried both USB and CD as installation source.
Google is not helpful in providing a solution, but it did reveal that I’m not the only one experiencing problems. A lot of people on Atom 330 machines, or machines with the 945GC+ICH7 and GMA950 video chip, are having problems similar to what I’m experiencing.
So, it’s time to find another Linux distribution which would work well on this machine, acting as an HTPC. The specifications in more detail:
- Foxconn 45CSX mini-ITX motherboard
- Intel Atom 330 processor (dual-core, 2×1.6Ghz)
- Intel 945GC+ICH7 chipset
- Intel GMA950 graphics chip
- Realtek ALC662 audio chip
- Realtek RTL8100C ethernet chip
- 2GB of DDR2 RAM
- 160GB SATA hard drive
- Aureon USB sound card with optical out (all audio is optical in my house)
I do have a few needs when it comes to this one. Most importantly – this HTPC is also my media server. All my media files (TV shows, mostly) are stored on an external hard drive attached to this system via USB. The Linux distribution for this machine must be able to share this drive easily with the Windows machines in my network, with as little hassle as possible. On top of that, it needs NTFS-write access to this drive, too, since I download my TV shows (legal in The Netherlands, don’t worry) on my main desktop, and then transfer them over the network to the drive.
It must be able to run Boxee very well. Boxee is available for Linux, so that shouldn’t be a problem. An equivalent may be acceptable, but I at least need a good and clean interface, and support for downloading show metadata over the internet. This last bit is crucial, as I want show descriptions, episode guides, etc. on my HTPC. Curiously, TV support is not required (I don’t record TV).
Note that anything Ubuntu-based is out of the question, as I don’t want to encounter that bug again the next time I run an apt-get dist-upgrade. Easy codec installation would be nice, and some way to install and update Chrome would be very welcome too (my friends and I often watch YouTube music videos or live performances while enjoying a few drinks).
Well, fire away. Lemur2, I’m counting on you providing at least 15 links. For once, I won’t be annoyed by your link comments!
http://linuxmce.com/
Is also a good domotic center
A live CD
http://geexbox.org/en/index.html
XBMC is the base of boxee and comes with it’s own version of ubuntu and even a live distro. Check it out at http://www.xbmc.org/
There is also a MythTV version of Ubuntu dubbed Mythbuntu which can be found here: http://www.mythbuntu.org/
I really like xbmc (still use it on my xbox) so I recommend that one. It has all the features you requested (including no TV recording
).
He really did say anything Ubuntu based was out of the question.
I myself have set up I nice HTPC with Arch Linux http://www.archlinux.org/ though it might be more work to set it up then Ubuntu or other more graphical based distrobuttions.
For read/write support with ntfs partitions check out ntfs-3g http://www.ntfs-3g.org/ (If your going for Arch Linux; it’s available in there repositories.)
Boxee is available in Arch’es AUR http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=24206
I’m planning on building an Arch Linux based media centre too. I think that Arch is perfect for these types of job (though I am a committed Arch fan, full disclosure etc.) since you can easily custom-build a lightweight, up-to-date system from scratch but I probably would hesitate to recommend it to someone who isn’t very familiar with Linux in general. You will be expected to use the command line, edit text files and all that stuff.
I’m on a similar look for a good media center setup. Mythbuntu or Knopmyth would be my first guesses. Mandriva would probably cover your hardware (2008.1 or the netbook build maybe?) abut it’s Myth install in 2008.1 was less polished. Debian Stable would have been my first pick to try. Ubuntu 9.10 is based on Debian’s testing brand I believe. Lenny wouldn’t give you the latest version numbers but may give you a stable system with the bits your looking for. The few odd drivers and codecs where dead simple to setup.
I’m actually leaning towards Mandriva too. I’m going to figure out if it makes it easy to install Boxee and Chrome.
Yes, install Mandriva, then VirtualBox and install Ubuntu 9.10 in VirtualBox and then install Boxee. Then run Boxee in Ubuntu in VirtualBox in Mandriva.
The Ubuntu problem should not exist in VirtualBox and you can still have a familiar distro with everything you like.
Seems like a little over kill of Boxee runs natively under Mandriva though. I’m also waiting for two developments in Virtualbox:
– True “bridged” network devices without scripting tunnel devices by hand. Bridged in addition to NAT networking should have been in the first draft on that one.
– Start at boot support for VMs. I run a groupware server VM guest under my workstation. I need that VM to autoboot when the host system reboots. This has to be possible without scripting and juggling between account priviledge.
Those are not impossible issues; they just keep me from being able to replace VMware with Virtualbox for my needs.
VMware Server on Debian Lenny has it’s own issues related to the SSL enabled web interface. I’m able to use it an access my older VMs through the http:// interface but no https:// and the related service hangs shutdown and restart (system or VMware services).
Now, VMware Server under Mandriva never gave me issue. Should such a complicated setup be needed, VMware should play nice with your Mandriva and autostart a bridged VM for Ubuntu or one’s preferred choice.
Hi, I haven’t touched that in ages with VirtualBox. It just works in recent releases. I can’t comment about your other problem, but bridged mode is just a down arrow away!
It’s called Host Networking, which might trip people up. But it’s actually bridged, using the virtualbox network filter driver in the host, as opposed to a separate bridge interface.
– True “bridged” network devices without scripting tunnel devices by hand. Bridged in addition to NAT networking should have been in the first draft on that one.
– Start at boot support for VMs. I run a groupware server VM guest under my workstation. I need that VM to autoboot when the host system reboots. This has to be possible without scripting and juggling between account priviledge.
Virtual Box already does both. I have 4 VMs starting on boot on a Ubuntu Server running Virtual Box. All of them connected with bridge networking (without scripts).
Try mandriva. The latest version 2010.0 is about to be released that way you could also review it and if you try it don’t forget to add the plf repository for all the legally encumbered stuff.
Search “easyurpmi” and you should end up at the right place to add network and PLF repositories.
Obviously, what you want is Ubuntu 9.04, or Ubuntu 8.04 since that is what you are familiar with.
Or, you could just try to install Ubuntu 9.10 in text mode.
Otherwise, you should try any of the big distros and choose what you like best. Or, if you really don’t know what would be good for you, try this distro chooser:
http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/index.php
Anyway, you should open a bug in launchpad or whatever bug tracking system Ubuntu uses.
Edited 2009-10-30 13:17 UTC
Sabayon linux might be something to look into.
http://www.sabayonlinux.org/
It is based on Gentoo but provides also binary packages instead of compiling everything from source.
So no debian package management, but portage is similar.
Sabayon comes with XBMC. I think you could even choose to have it boot directly into XBMC during the installation. At least with the previous version.
Artwork is also very polished.
I second Sabayon. It implements a true BSD style ports tree where you have both pkgsrc and pkgadd except pkgsrc is Gentoo’s emerge and pkgadd is equo. It’s my first choice for any job.
There is one other thing I hadn’t considered: I could try the 64bit variant of Ubuntu (yes, I really prefer a Debian-based system over others. Sue me
). The Atom 330 is 64bit, but I never bothered because it doesn’t accept more than 2GB of RAM anyway.
Keep on suggesting though, as this might not work.
Have you tried the alternate text installer? If not, really you should. It’s not the same kernel as the liveCD one. Moreover, that the installer is crashing does not mean the system will crash afterward. Again, it’s not the same kernel.
I create my USB boot things with unetbootin, but that one doesn’t include the text installer option. On top of that, people are reporting the same problems with running systems – it’s not just the live CD kernel that fcuks up. It’s all a bit of an epic fail.
I’m kind of bummed. 64bit didn’t work either.
Err, the Atom is a low end-chip. So no AMD64.
That is market segmentation for you.
Edit:Sorry, I was wrong. Only the Z and N don’t have 64bit.
But with less than 4GB 64bit is toally pointless. You waste a lot of CPU cache for nothing. The system will be way slower.
Edited 2009-10-30 16:59 UTC
Strictly speaking, don’t the kernel tradeoffs begin above around 800MB? Bounce buffers and such? And don’t forget all the extra registers that come with X86_64.
Personally, I think that 64 bit kernel with 32 bit user space, with individual 64 bit apps deployed strategically, is really optimum for many situations. The kernel has all the memory management advantages of 64 bit. But without the memory hit of 64 bit user space pointers, except where 64 bit can really help. As it *which* 64 bit apps to strategically deploy, if any… I’m not certain. And, of course, it depends upon the exact situation.
Yes, you are right. 64bit kernel and 32 bit apps would be optimal in most cases.
AFAIK modern CPUs get their speed from running stuff in cpu cache and 64bit pointers etc take way more cache memory.
I don’t know that much about CPU design, but I think the current design of X86 and AMD64 has a lot of limitations because of backwards compatibility.
Maybe when FOSS gets more popular AMD or Intel will introduce an “X86 unleashed” mode where you have can 16 64bit registers and 32 bit pointers and GCC and go wild with its optimizations. Might be just a brainfart, though.
My impression is that the main problem with x86 was its register-starved nature, and lack of 64 bit instructions. Both fixed by X86_64. The rest of the complaints about x86 seem pretty ivory tower. On a computing power per dollar basis, X86_64 looks to be sweeping pretty much all the competition either into the dirt bin, or into little niches in the corners.
Would some other instruction set be a little better in some way? Does it matter?
You don’t need any changes to the processor to do this. As I understand it, a few different JVMs can operate in this mode (32-bit pointers stored in memory, plus some base offset). FWIW, Itanium actually has special instructions to make 32-bit pointer size systems fast, so Intel has clearly thought about the strategy.
Definitively give 64-bit a shot. I have an Intel board with the same chipset for a media backend, and it runs ubuntu-server-amd64 without a hitch.
You could also give the netinstall (mini.iso) a shot.
Finally, try unplugging the sound card during install. It should not make a difference, but there is a chance that that card’s module is causing your problems.
Another thing to consider: If you are using your HTPC as a mythtv backend, you may want to stick to 9.04. Karmic has updated the mythtv packages to 0.22, and they are not backwards compatible.
Edit: Posted before reading the RE[2]: 64bit. Still, consider unplugging the sound card.
Also, do you have a chance of checking the error logs? It would help narrow down the issue.
Finally, I know you said it ran ok on Win7, but have you run memtest?
Edited 2009-10-30 14:58 UTC
then why not try Debian? Not sure if you have tried it or not or if it has the same problems that Ubuntu does.
PS: I am a FreeBSD/Debian user.
I would try the Alternate install first for Ubuntu. My old P4 refused to install Ubuntu without it. I’m actually running Xubuntu with XBMC installed on that system now.
I’m currently running XBMC on Slack 13(x86) and it runs very nicely. I plugged in my wifes Dell MC remote and it worked instantly. Yes, it has more setup time but also has less overhead out of the box. I installed XBMC using a Slackbuild but there might be a pre-built package out there. No idea how it would run on a nettop.
Edited 2009-10-30 14:14 UTC
I’m quite confident that the problems I’m having stem from the Intel integrated video chip (GMA950 in my case). On the Ubuntuforums, people with integrated Intel chips are reporting problems with random freezes and crashes, both during normal use and during installation.
My god what an epic, epic fail. Intel’s integrated video chips are ridiculously popular. It probably has something to do with the architecture switch in the Intel video driver.
Big bummer.
Edited 2009-10-30 15:00 UTC
And the main reason why I am mostly on Windows nowadays on the desktop and leave Linux on the server room.
I would gladly be on MacOS X, if they weren’t so expensive in Europe.
I am a Linux user since the kernel 1.0.9 days, and nowadays have more interesting things to do with my life that spending endless hours with such configuration issues, or broken releases. My desktop should just work.
If you want a desktop to just work, you should only use stable software, man.
People use testing software, which are advertized as testing software: for tests, which means: “please help us test this software, which probably is buggy” and then they complain that it does not work!
Man, if Windows development was open and they had a portal where you could download all their testing stuff, you would probably be crying!
People complain and they don’t even use the bug tracking system.
Well, maybe linux is not for you. It’s open and documented but if you can’t read, it won’t help you.
Since when is Ubuntu 9.10 testing software? It’s a full-on release, last time I checked.
It’s based on Debian testing.
Canonical releases LTS versions, which are more stable. Other versions are pretty bleeding edge. When Dell chooses Ubuntu for their netbook, they pick a LTS version, because other versions are not as stable and supported by Canonical.
If you want stable software, use Debian stable, or Ubuntu 8.04 LTS.
If you want to try new things and be on the bleeding edge, use Ubuntu 9.10, but don’t complain when there are bugs, post them on launchpad instead.
It’s the same when you use Fedora instead of Red Hat.
Edited 2009-10-30 15:40 UTC
A release is a release. There is no testing warning or whatever on Ubuntu’s site. Why are you defending such an epic fail on Ubuntu’s end? I mean come on – Intel video chips causing freezes all over the place?
That’s unacceptable.
I’m not defending Ubuntu in any way. Ubuntu is based on Debian testing.
Look, if you use Fedora, you know it’s a bleeding edge distro and it’s a testing ground for new things.
It’s your choice to use it, nobody put a gun over your head. There are bugs, yes and we all know it.
Now if you don’t like unstable software, use Red Hat and pay for support, or use CentOS, or Debian stable.
There are literally more than 500 distros to choose from. YOU make the choice, according to what YOU want. Now if you want stability, DON’T USE BLEEDING EDGE DISTROS!!! Slackware, Red Hat, Debian (stable), etc… are made just for you! use that and stop whining.
If you still use bleeding edge distro, don’t go around saying stupid things like ‘linux is buggy’, ‘Windows is stable’, etc… you just chose to use testing software.
Edited 2009-10-30 15:55 UTC
I did not say such a thing. All I said was that if the most popular Linux distribution has major problems for the second release in a row with Intel video chips, then that’s an EPIC FAIL. Bleeding edge blah blah or no, that’s just totally unacceptable.
Well, I was not replying to you in the first place, so you should put that in context.
Now, what is acceptable to you is up to you to decide. Obviously a lot of people like Ubuntu and are happy to hack under the hood to fix problems like that and to open bugs in launchpad.
If that is not acceptable to you, please either Use Debian stable, or at the very least Ubuntu LTS, but I’m sure you lie and are excited about the new features so you still accept that like most Ubuntu users.
Let’s stop whining and think. Maybe Mark’s idea of trying to synchronize things better in the FOSS world makes sense. What if projects synchronized a little. What if Xorg wasn’t in complete disarray for one distro release… and then KDE wasn’t in complete disarray for the next… and then we weren’t in a cataclysmic transition from udev to devfs2 for the next. What if every 2 years we all came together for something that didn’t resemble a Halloween party in a brown paper bag factory?
We are all in this together. All the projects. And yet each project acts as if its own schedule existed totally independent of the whole.
Edited 2009-10-30 19:25 UTC
If only there was some kind of group out there that existed, which could look through the projects and only upgrade to newer versions when they weren’t in complete disarray, and stick with older versions of the software when newer stuff broke.
Maybe we could call it a “distribution”.
I mean, is it really KDE or X.Orgs fault that Ubuntu ships broken software? Shouldn’t someone at Canonical have realized that shipping working software is more important than bumping a version number?
That’s reasonable. And yet I can’t help but feel that we could do better by adding some overall strategy at somewhat finer grained levels. What good does it do if the DE is at its peak if Xorg is in the cess pit phase of its development cycle? KDE was at an embarrassing nadir for a year of more. Xorg has been at an embarrassing mess for about a year. Shouldn’t we all at least try to come together in some semblance of order, from time to time, just to see how we’re doing? Are we a total flop? Or are we capable of getting it together when we really want?
That always sounds really nice, but think about what it is really asking. You’re talking about thousands of different developers, spread out across the globe, all working on their own timetables suddenly coming together with a single purpose. I just don’t see that happening. The proprietary world has an advantage here with the Cathedral approach to software development and a clear hierarchy.
Edit: But you could certainly try to have a few key groups release synchronously, like X + Kernel + Gnome + KDE. That’s basically happening now with them all moving to 6 or 3 month timed releases.
Edited 2009-10-30 23:52 UTC
Except that Xorg’s releases have not exactly been timed, and have been a ragedy mess when they’ve come. And KDE’s releases have been trying to recover from the disaster of the 4.0.0 release for coming up on 2 years now.
I think that greater overall coordination is, indeed, possible. We are not so close to perfection as to preclude the prospect of improvement.
Right, they just started their new release policy. The next one is supposed to come in 6 months, although we’ll see whether or not that actually happens (see Phoronix for details). It sounds like they want to move all the drivers back into the core as well, and if that happens it may change to 3 month releases.
Right, but what’s your alternative? The idea that the KDE folks just would have given up on KDE4 and stuck with slowly improving KDE3 releases was not going to happen. You can’t just go up to those developers and say, I’m working with Canonical and I’d like you to do what I want instead of what you want to work on. Not unless you’re paying them, that is. I’m sure your response to that is that they should have waited a couple more years before releasing it, but in the end I just think it’s a judgement call. Why should the KDE devs be forced to delay their release and slow down their transition, just because it isn’t ready to be used widely. If they want to release it, then they can, and they aren’t going to listen to you just because you think they should. Canonical and the other distros should have taken a long, hard look at what they were putting out rather than just drinking the koolaid and going with it.
No question about that. It seems to me like there has been some more coordination and cooperation lately than there used to be, but more is always better.
I ran across this blog entry the other day which shows you that some of these issues are being thought about, even if they don’t have any simple answers. It’s more about internal development than across projects, but it tends to apply to both situations.
http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2009/10/managing-time-line-mismatches.ht…
Edited 2009-10-31 04:45 UTC
Don’t use Ubuntu then. Or you use it just because it’s popular and everyone else is doing it? You’re putting yourself in the “I’m just a stupid user” position. You run OSAlert, a news site for Operating Systems and stuff. How can you be so narrow-minded?
Honestly you are both correct to a degree. Ubuntu is based on Debian as we all know, but every non-LTS release is indeed on the so-called “bleeding edge”.
While there are a lot of people trying really hard to make sure each release is stable enough for everyday use, inevitable bugs and broken functionality exist in nearly every one. This is due, in large part, to the strict six month release cycle which is tied to the Gnome desktop’s development cycle. I’ve often wondered why they don’t stretch it out and ship more stable software.
Because of this, you have a full release (as Thom correctly said) which is never quite ready for prime time (as spiderman opined). I’m on the horns of this dilemma myself, as the 9.10 release was supposed to have Grub 2 but instead seems to have shipped with Grub 1.9 beta, which refuses to do more than dump me to a grub command prompt. That is unacceptable and makes me want to stick with my old stalwart, Slackware.
I love what I saw of the Live CD, though to be honest it was a bit buggy too in other areas, but overall I’m unimpressed. Karmic was touted as the best Ubuntu yet by a large margin, but that’s a silly claim when a large chunk of your audience (gma950 users) are shut out completely.
So Thom, I’ll suggest–albeit in a less coarse manner than others–that you stick with a proven stable OS that fully supports Boxee, XBMC or MythTV, and leave Ubuntu behind for now. There are a few good Debian based ones out there (Dreamlinux springs to mind) so I know you’ll eventually find what you need.
Already did. Windows XP + Boxee.
I’m glad to see you got it going to your satisfaction. Sadly I’ve also found that Windows (7, in my case) is the best OS for my AMD based system.
Very good choice. And since you prefer debian based distros, you can still install VMWare and have Ubuntu 9.10 running in it. Anyway, Windows XP is proven software. You shouldn’t experience random crashes with that.
No, it’s based on Debian Sid (debian unstable). They rebase their packages on Debian Sid every 6 months, and then spend a couple weeks re-integrating everything, then spend a couple week testing, and then release it. It’s not that great of a release process, IMO.
Just read what linux “fanboys” just use to say: maybe linux is not for you:
http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm
I had Debian 6 Testing on my machine for a few weeks. Some of the additional software was great (OpenVAS) and I actually liked KDE4 now that it’s had a few point releases since. Ultimately, I ended up dropping the notebook back to Debian 5 Stable though. KDE4 and the additional apps did not justify some of the breakage I was getting with updates. That’s not a complaint about Debian, I knowingly ran a testing status distribution. I’ve since obtained OpenVAS through backports and KDE3 runs lighter on the system so I can wait for Debian 6 to go stable or at least much closer to stable release.
I think the point the previous poster is trying to make is this same thing; when you run a testing distro you have to accept that your using the beta of the next release. When you run an RC or Beta Windows release, you have to accept that it’s in development and may break or lack features.
This should not excuse Canonical for so many having issues with such a generic chipset and GPU. It does indicate a potential cause and justify reverting back to an LTS, trying the parent distro Debian or another distro entirely.
(I have to admit I’m a fork snob also; why use a forked distro if the parent distro provides all the same functions and/or more.)
Bottom line; popularity has never indicated the quality of software. Canonical is popular but there are other distros more applicable to given tasks.
Thom, I agree. That is an epic fail. I’m very surprised that Ubuntu didn’t catch that bug during the alpha-beta-rc cycle. As you pointed out, it’s not like Intel’s integrated chipset is some kind of obscure graphics chipset. How did they miss that bug?
–Johnny
How they missed this bug?
Simple: Time based releases!
If you have a release date, you are always going to have a huge number of bugs, that is simply unavoidable.
The last Debian STABLE (lenny) was released, when the number of release critical bugs was just less than 100. Now imagine how many more bugs a distro must necessarily ship with, if debian sid is taken as a base and 6 Months of bugfixing goes into the system.
You might have hardware which works like a breeze, then it’s a very fine system. If you don’t have this hardware, you are out of luck.
In this case it seems like buggy Intel drivers are a major cause of pain.
Am I the only one who has never had any major problems with Ubuntu on the desktop? Windows gives me headaches all the time. Various apps will crash the system, I get constantly high CPU usage that overheats my laptop, the UI seems very inconsistent (once you have apps from all over the place), and I find it to be very unintuitive compared to Ubuntu. A Mac would be nice, but they’re ridiculously expensive.
And would burn your balls off on its way to your wallet, too.
Did you try the vesa driver then?
I’m waiting for the price of nVidia ION systems to come down a bit, and then building my HTPC. So far, the Acer Revo looks just about perfect.
* Dual-core Atom 330 CPU @ 1.6 GHz
* 2 GB RAM
* 160 GB HD
* nVidia 9400M graphics onboard
* HD sound onboard
* VGA and HDMI output
* several USB 2.0 ports
* gigabit NIC onboard
* wireless N chipset on board
Comes with a VESA mount, so it can be mounted on the back of monitor/flatscreen.
Now to find one for less than $400 CDN.
All the reviews online show this setup (dual-core atom + nvidia 9400) capable of doing 1080p without hiccups, and only around 30% CPU usage.
Greetings:
I can understand not wanting to run the latest Ubuntu or any of its derivatives due to the system lockup during the installation process, but looking at the postings, I’m puzzled why there’s more discussion on the OS than on the media center application. Do we have “form follows function” bass ackwards? {:-)
Taking a different approach, have you considered MythTV? The full and detailed rich FAQ is at http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions#Operating_Sys…
From the FAQ, the following distros are supported:
1. Fedora. Jarod Wilson has written what is almost certainly the best guide to getting MythTV up and running and he’s done it based on Fedora. Find out more here.
2. KnoppMyth. This is a version of Knoppix bundled with all of the stuff needed to get Myth up and running.
3. MythDora. This is a custom based version of Fedora that will install MythTV for you. Everything that you need is right on the disk along with some extras.
4. SuSE Offers an easy to use straight forward interface.
5. Ubuntu The latest releases of Ubuntu feature full support for MythTV. Its ease of installation and use has made it very popular among the LINUX desktop crowd.
6. Mythbuntu A modified version of Ubuntu comes with MythTV pre-packaged.
Also, focusing on the distro more than the application is discussed on the FAQ as well:
“This is one of the most hotly disputed topics on #mythtv-users (other than politics or religion). All Linux distributions that are capable of installing or compiling all of the prerequisites are usable. Asking for advice in choosing a distro is ill-advised as many of us have strong opinions based on our usage requirements, and these requirements will likely not match yours. However, Fedora and Debian are some of the most used, and easiest to work with.”
As for feature set, take a look at http://www.mythtv.org/detail/mythtv. It supports a number of plug-ins and themes. As for TV tuner reception and supported signals, the FAQ has this covered as well:
The Netherlands (Europe)
In the netherlands all alternatives work using a MythTV system. Following the tested setups.
* DVB-S = yes (Tested with CanalDigital)
* DVB-C = yes (Tested with Ziggo)
* DVB-T = yes (Tested with KPN digitenne)
* analogue = yes (Tested with Ziggo)
Great question and discussion starter Thom. Can we expect a write-up or comparison when you’re done?
Best Regards.
I had a spare machine that I tried to run Mythbuntu on. It failed massively. In fact, the only distro I could get to work was MythDora.
But…that machine has been replaced by a Mac + Plex.
-Adam
xxxxxx
description: Desktop Computer
width: 32 bits
capabilities: smbios-2.4 dmi-2.4 smp-1.4 smp
configuration: boot=normal chassis=desktop cpus=1
*-core
description: Motherboard
product: D945GCLF2
vendor: Intel Corporation
physical id: 0
version: AAE46416-101
slot: Base Board Chassis Location
*-cpu
description: CPU
product: Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU 330 @ 1.60GHz
I have been using this board with Mythbuntu without any problems since 8.04. 9.10 has been the best one yet since I did not need to install xorg ~edgers ppa packages for the Super Video output to work. I used Mythbuntu 9.10 beta CD to install the system and have been upgrading ever since.
Why not mentioning DVB when discussing HTPC? It’s of utmost importance IMO…DVB-T, DVB-C, DVB-S, etc…It’s nice to watch TV while working on the computer at the same time, sometimes. I have a hard time finding a nice DVB player in Linux with record scheduler…
You just shot all your professional status to hell by admitting to fraud.
You sheepishly ask for help by coyly admitting you’re “in a pickle” and are asking for free advise to accomplish legally with Linux what you did illegally with a Hackintosh version of OS X?
Seriously?
Completely unprofessional.
Sue me.
From my following the recent discussions; isn’t the EULA unlawful in Netherlands indicating that his building a hackintosh was fully within local laws? Since a post sale restriction does not apply, copyright law allows for the legally purchased content to be installed provided it’s not installed in two or more places?
Agreed. But then again, OSAlert isn’t really famous for a professional image. The site is rife with dilettantism and arguing over the smallest trifles. Join us next week when someone needs advice on how to trick OS/2 into installing on a PowerMac G3 they found on the piss-stained floor of the boiler room at their small town high-school using floppies. Laugh as the entire OSAlert gang practically murders each other when six different people come up with six different ways of accomplishing the same pointless/impossible task!
Since it obviously upsets you, I’m going to go install OS X on a non-Apple PC right now – just for spite.
Hahaha!
– BallmerKnowsBest
What law did he break? An EULA is not criminally enforceable, else half the computer-using people on earth would be rotting in jail. He didn’t violate the DMCA (not that it matters in his country anyway) and he certainly didn’t steal anything. If you’d read his article on the Hackintosh process he used, you’d know that. He used a Leopard retail disc, a boot-132 bootloader (open source under Apple’s own license) and he even labeled the computer with an apple–tongue in cheek maybe, but to the letter of the EULA.
So, as a law enforcement employee for the past ten years, I ask you: What law did he break? My coworkers certainly wouldn’t arrest him for installing legally purchased software on a legally purchased computer with no circumvention of copyrighted content. In fact, they’d likely arrest YOU for false report of a crime, which is illegal.
I run Vista with mediaportal. The trick with htpc’s is not to upgrade it when it (finally) works.
Mostly because I was going to get a net top 330 + ion set. I’m wondering if this is the combo of atom 330 + 950 or atom 330 + ion as well. I have mini 110 atom n270 + 950, and have had no problems with 9.10 at all. Hope you find a solution. I have tried open suse 11.2 with no success, slooooow. Have tried pclinuxos and it runs good. elive worked nice, windows 7 rc worked ok, no mic. though. Try any of the bsd’s?
Archlinux 32bit core
AUR: XBMC (or Boxxee)
AUR: Mediatomb = DLNA/UPnP Streaming + Transcoding support for other network devices(will show up in windows media player recent versions, also on XBox 360 and PS3, etc)
Why bother with the Intel GMA950 graphics chip? I would suggest sticking with windows because of that. If it was on ion based system then linux would be the ticket
Silly but did you try Ubuntu NBR? Since ….your really running a a netbook without its head
.
If not that…..give slax a try?
Thom asks a simple question, A SIMPLE BLOODY QUESTION about how to set up an HTPC. Surprise surprise, the overwhelming response is negative.
The zealots really are easy to hate.
Debian runs fine on my ATOM 330 though I do have the ION Nvidia chipset running on it so no Intel gfx chip.
Using XBMC for HPTC.
Really? I’ve always wanted to try Debian. But I could never get it to install on anything.
Installs on whatever I throw it at here. But then I don’t use the graphical installer, maybe that makes a difference?