172 replies to this topic

[Eragon]

 

We want to do it right!!!

 

Hi littelesat,

I understand your and OpenPLi team's point of view and I substantially agree with you.

 

But now I've a question: supposing that unfortunately VU+ would never release the bug fix, does this also mean that OpenPLi users will never have a working standard PiP on 2160p (I honestly don't care about QuadPiP) on their Solo4K and Ultimo4K (like me)?

 

Or after some time (months?, years?) are you eventually going to release a "dirty" bug fix?

[Frenske]

This is purely hypothetically. 'If this then do that' isn't the way our developers like to work.
But on the other hand, life is full of surprises so who knows what will happen somewhere in the future.

[nor50]

I tried BlackHole, but I hate menues. My normal use of menues is just one or two clicks in OpenPli, but 5-10 in BH. And no download of softcam is also horrible.

[nor50]

Anybody having an email-adress to someone at VU+ that we can ask for a fix for the PIP-problem in 4K? I tried to contact them with no luck.

[колбаскин]

I already wrote, the ordinary person could made QuadPiP on ATV
I am not interested in work of PIP on 4K, I want QuadPiP on 1080p, at least also as at VTI and BH
You don't even try to make and all have already got used to it.

Nobody asks to make you something impossible. Make at least as at others.

[WanWizard]

I think you have a very big mouth and are very demanding towards someone who does this for free, in his spare time.

 

As long as you don't pay for both time and effort, you have to live with what you are given. For free, remember?

 

If you don't like that, you are free to move on, no hard feelings. But posts like this will not motivate people to want to help you out.

[колбаскин]

You constantly repeat about what to you isn't paid.
So you don't want to do something for what reason? You aren't able? You are don't want? Don't you want to do it free?
Whether have asked you a question will work QuadPiP on your image or not.
And all understand, that the list of receivers to you gets to support not just like that.

I don't try to offend someone.
I want to understand the reason why you have undertaken support of this model and you don't carry out it for 100%

[WanWizard]

We do everything for free. If we want it. When we want it. How we want it.

 

We see QuadPiP as a nice to have feature, so it isn't high on our very long todo list.

 

And if we implement it, we will implement it properly. So working, not half-working, and working on every box that has multiple video decoders, not hacked in and worked around like others do. We either do things properly, or we don't do them. The VU+ plugin is total crap. It is implemented wrong, it requires workarounds in Enigma that conflict with hardware from other manufacturers, and it interferes with the standard PiP functionality in Enigma. So that code is utterly useless.

 

So, while we implement it? Don't know, probably. When will we implement it? Don't know, when it is ready and we're happy with it.

[bogdanm]

@колбаскин ; change to BH and you will be happy becouse is QaudPiP and FCC too.

 

If developers PLi no can add or work on this future his choice.

No care maybe he add but in 2019 when VU+ fix .

If you look in all answered developers Pli he alvays write  about wait to VU+ fix and never add by himself any futures.

 

Look to iptv epg he write about illegall streams and no add suport epg.

But he suport iptv on his image; wht if iptv is illegall in 99% used streams.

[WanWizard]

Is this directed to me? If so:

 

I don't add features since I am not a Python and C++ developer. It's as simple as that. 

 

OpenPLI doesn't support anything illegal. If we technically support streaming, or softcams, or anything else, and you decide to do anything illegal with it, your choice. You can also buy hammers and baseball bats in the shops. It is however very illegal to kill someone with it. Again, your choice.

 

OpenPLi does not provide EPG.

[Pr2]

The advantage of open sat boxes is that there are many images available for them. So if you dislike OpenPLi, or want features not (yet) supported by OpenPLi you are free to flash another image and then go this other image support forum.

 

OpenPLi is open-source, if QuadPIP is so important for you then propose a patch of your own to OpenPLi to integrate it.

If you don't have the skill to do it yourself, please respect people that spent their free time to give to other an incredibly reliable image.

 

Not all people talking about IPTV/streams are using illegal servers, there are many IPTV channels totally free available on the internet and I'd like to have EPG attached to them.

So please stop thinking that people talking about IPTV or softcam are all doing illegal activities.

[bogdanm]

The advantage of open sat boxes is that there are many images available for them. So if you dislike OpenPLi, or want features not (yet) supported by OpenPLi you are free to flash another image and then go this other image support forum.

 

OpenPLi is open-source, if QuadPIP is so important for you then propose a patch of your own to OpenPLi to integrate it.

If you don't have the skill to do it yourself, please respect people that spent their free time to give to other an incredibly reliable image.

 

Not all people talking about IPTV/streams are using illegal servers, there are many IPTV channels totally free available on the internet and I'd like to have EPG attached to them.

So please stop thinking that people talking about IPTV or softcam are all doing illegal activities.

1) Friend i have big respeckt to developers becouse i know write something in C++ or Python is very hard and nead alot work and time. 

And i think people who made this mast have big knowlage and alot trying fix bugs.

But please look to users ask/idea/ and ask about futures too becouse all developers doing images to users no used in hiden in home.

 

2) Im see You on streamborad forum too .

You realy think people used softcam/iptv  too watch FTA chanells or free streams?

All boxes based on E2 was created to hacking tv and his sold based on he.

If no will be iptv/softcams  all will be have boxes from providers and 0 problems.

Edited by bogdanm, 15 September 2017 - 19:04.

[Pr2]

You got it wrong I have official subscription and I use OScam to read the cards that I own, not everybody using softcam is a pirate sorry.

And I choose to use my own open-source box because provider boxes are just piece of crap with many restrictions, there is no comparison possible between provider box and OpenPLi functionalities.

 

And OpenPLi is listening to customer requirement but you need to be patient and respectful with developers. I already ask for improvement and when you can prouve that this change will be useful it is finally implemented.

Edited by Pr2, 15 September 2017 - 19:32.

[WanWizard]

OpenPLi is and will never be on the bleeding edge. We value performance and stability over a christmas tree of features. So if one wants the newest of the newest, and wants it yesterday, indeed maybe OpenPLi is not for you. 

 

I think it is a common misconception that we have dozens of developers on the bench, with plenty of spare time available, all waiting for someone to give them something to do.

 

If we could find and open a tin of developers, we would gladly do so. Sad thing is that the more software development becomes a normal 9-5 mainstream day job, the more open source development and the enthousiasm for it goes into decline. As a result, more work has to be done with less people, and that slows things down.

 

Another issue that can be observed is that when people don't have a lot of spare time available, they tend to spend that time on things they care about, and not on things other people care about. Which in turn means that more niche and nice-to-have features won't get implemented, simply because nobody wants to spend their valuable time on it.

 

Sad, but it is the way it is. Go out, find talented Python programmers, and direct them this way.

[littlesat]

Hereby the pre-alpha release of the quadpip plugin for OpenPLi....

 

Actually I now understand under which conditions it goes wrong for ALL images...  that is when you select a skin with a PIG. In addition as soon you put the decoder proc in "mozaik" mode the procs to position the PIGs are non-responsive...

 

There are some audio-issues that need some investigation (that is why I called it pre-alfa release)... but for the rest it is working..And also in 2160p output mode....And of course the plugin needs some rewriting to make it al least more user friendly.

 

 QuadPip.zip   9.01KB   35 downloads

Edited by littlesat, 16 September 2017 - 08:57.

[Erik Slagter]

Does this version of the plugin still need the workarounds I made (and reverted) to enigma?

[littlesat]

Slightly different changes. I already reverted the revert and removed the extra stuff that is totally not required at all.

 

The code above is based on the orriginal plugin. It has the whitespaces removed. the QuadPiP screen class is included in the plugin... I already did optimize some small stuff, but the 'fix' for PIG skins is made quick and dirty (for now).

 

Adding more PIP windows on top of the main screen is not possible. as the output is limited to the mozaik "mode". So having more like this quadpip plugin is approx all it can do.

 

I still have issues with audio with the startup of the plugin I have no audio -I need to select a different Quad for this- and on the bottom two quads I have no audio at all.  I'm afraid this needs a deeper "dive".

 

The most wierd thing is that in 2160 mode the quadpip is positioned correctly, as we are in the mozaik mode. And the normal PIP not

Edited by littlesat, 16 September 2017 - 10:38.

[Erik Slagter]

I would have been "better" if you would have discussed this before acting.

[Erik Slagter]

Adding more PIP windows on top of the main screen is not possible. as the output is limited to the mozaik "mode". So having more like this quadpip plugin is approx all it can do.

There is no principal reason why it could not be possible, the interface is there. It may be that drivers limit it, but don't say "impossible".

[littlesat]

The wierd thing here is that the interface is not there... -or- the interface has 'some' limitations...

 

And maybe VU does not make it possible.

Edited by littlesat, 16 September 2017 - 11:08.