Macworld Forums: EyeTV HD - Macworld Forums

Post your comments for EyeTV HD here

First off, I am sorry, Macworld, but I hate this new forum set-up.
Why does it need to be different from other reviews? Just because it can be?

Second, I wish Elgato still used FireWire like it did on the EyeTV 200. MIne is 4 years old and still works great. I have it daisy-chained with two external hard drives and, if I choose, my Motorola DVR that allows me to record Hi-Def directly on my Mac.

Third, since it IS a USB connection, how cool would it be if it could connect to the TV and network the video to your Mac?

TowerTone, on 11 June 2010 - 06:06 PM, said:

OK, 'shift'-'option'-'k' doesn't work to show 'Apple TV'.
And I should have said "Firewire like they did..."

Does the HD Component video source have a delay on it, or is it minimum delay like the s-video and composite sources?

bet011, on 11 June 2010 - 06:19 PM, said:

I didn't notice any delay, but it's hard to tell since I didn't have the TV on at the same time to see if the two outputs were in sync.

TowerTone, on 11 June 2010 - 06:10 PM, said:

"It" is just fine...that's how we refer to companies anyway.

I was floored that this high definition, 1080i video capture device, only records audio in stereo! What the hell were you thinking, el Gato? That's like a Porsche GT3 with 13 inch 78 series tires on 5" wheels... Yeesh...

And come on, MacWorld, you gave them a pass on this? What ever happened to "critical" reviews?

Alphaman, on 14 June 2010 - 06:04 PM, said:

I asked Elgato about the two-channel recording, and the answer I got was that the focus is on playback on Macs/iPods/iPhones/iPads, where multichannel isn't really an issue.

I did say that "Audio is limited to stereo via RCA-style analog connections." Apple TV users may miss the multichannel, but I as the reviewer didn't find the lack to be that significant in the end.

I've been an Eye TV user for many years but am curious why Elgato does not employ the same technology that allows the use of a cable company supplied card that allows the hardware to tune in the encrypted channels which the cable subscriber is paying for. TIVO DVR boxes have employed this feature ever since the FCC mandated cable companies to allow third party manufacturers to sell hardware to receive TV signals which the user has subscribed to. With the TIVO box, you simply request the card from your local cable company (some companies require a service call to install it, but most allow you to come in and pick up the card), and insert the card into the provided slot, much like a credit card. The TIVO box reads the data from the card and provides all of the digital and HD channels you have subscribed to from that box. Why not Eye TV? The only thing that has stopped me from dumping my cable company's DVR box (which I pay $15 a month for) is the fact that Elgato and similar H.264 hardware encoders still make you jump through a lot of hoops to record and watch HD TV. This latest EyeTV HD product gets us a little closer, but the fact that you can't use HDMI kills the deal for me. I'm wondering if there are rights issues that stop Elgato from employing this method of cable reception. Any legal savvy Mac users out there?

dwboston4, on 16 June 2010 - 05:17 AM, said:

A few things:

1. Cable Card is, the name might suggest, cable only. Satellite providers like DirecTV and Dish aren't required to—and don't—support CC, and so that would leave millions of satellite customers behind.

2. An HDMI connection would probably require HDCP copy protection. Not sure how that would work with EyeTV software.

3. AFAIK, TiVo boxes encrypt recordings themselves even after a Cable Card or cable box decodes the signal to prevent piracy. You can extract from a TiVo to a computer, but I don't know if third-party software like EyeTV would be able to handle that in any way.

dwboston4, on 16 June 2010 - 05:17 AM, said:

As Jonathan pointed out, CableCard is for cable only; doesn't help satellite users. In addition, CableCard imposes onerous copy protection rules on the stuff you record. No exporting high definition versions of your recordings, for example.

Quote

HDMI's sole reason for existence is copy protection. Technically it would be very simple to make a device like the EyeTV HD with HDMI input, but legally/contractually it would be crippled because we would not be allowed to record anything via that connection.

Mike Evangelist
Elgato

Mike--to sat HDMI's "sole" reason for existence is for copy protection is vastly overstated. That may be El Gato's perspective as far as this product is concerned, but in the realm of consumer electronics products it has severall real consumer benefits. To name just a few: combined multichannel audio with video, better color performance, and simpler/more convenient cable management--all weaknesses of this product as a result of not including it. It makes sense what you guys have done with this product, but I wouldn't over play your hand.