Again, it shouldn't matter if the URL changes. Data flows into the box regardless of where it comes from. Once in the box the data can simply be moved to a local drive and saved....hence recorded video.
developers said it does matter
Again, it shouldn't matter if the URL changes. Data flows into the box regardless of where it comes from. Once in the box the data can simply be moved to a local drive and saved....hence recorded video.
if you press record and it's recording from url 123 and switches to url 124 how would it know?
because record has url in itThe same way the TV app knows when a stream comes back after 15-20s of buffering. We don't have to do anything for the stream to resume, if figures it out by itself, so why can't the PVR do the same?
because record has url in it
url changes it goes to blank cause it recording from a dead feed
I'm not sure why this isn't understood
You can only do so much with these little boxes and to much of one thing may mess up another.If the developer says it can't be done without a steady Url then it can't be done.You may see things change as time goes on and hardware and software gets better.They need to keep things economical for the user.The same way the TV app knows when a stream comes back after 15-20s of buffering. We don't have to do anything for the stream to resume, if figures it out by itself, so why can't the PVR do the same?
Your missing our point.The developer says it can't be done and then it can't be done.They are not new at what they do and they have provided a good box for the end user.I'm sure they will put out newer boxes and continue to support this box.I think you're missing my point, if the code is already in place in the TV app itself for it to detect when there is a new url for a stream (while you are watching live) I don't understand why that same code can't be shared with the PVR code.
I will email and correspond with buzz directly. I'm not going to waste my time arguing here, since no one here is the developer. That is unless someone here is going to present themselves as an official developer or as authorized to speak on their behalf. No one here has made that claim. I started this thread to find it a development was still in progress, not to argue about how features should or should not work.
I will email and correspond with buzz directly. I'm not going to waste my time arguing here, since no one here is the developer. That is unless someone here is going to present themselves as an official developer or as authorized to speak on their behalf. No one here has made that claim. I started this thread to find it a development was still in progress, not to argue about how features should or should not work.
Record based on channel wrapper rather than actual stream url...current method passes stream url to record routines rather than channel ids with associated stream url.
if that were true then why am I using 297?Sadly, I am starting to think that development on this device has been abandoned. No updates since February and they are no longer responding to emails.
You probably will find out when it's ready to be released to the public.Clearly you know something that we don't, since they have gone silent on email and the updates page still shows 247 from February as the latest. So, can you provide more information as to this 297 update please?
You probably will find out when it's ready to be released to the public.
![]() |
I still cant say enough about this box.
|
![]() |
box still rocks
|
Limited time offer