<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Vista Service Pack 2 Lacks Media Center TV Pack 2008 (Updated)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.christopherprice.net/vista-service-pack-2-lacks-media-center-tv-pack-2008-672.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.christopherprice.net/vista-service-pack-2-lacks-media-center-tv-pack-2008-672.html</link>
	<description>Wireless consumer advocate Christopher Price tackles the rest of tech.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 05:06:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Christopher Price</title>
		<link>http://www.christopherprice.net/vista-service-pack-2-lacks-media-center-tv-pack-2008-672.html/comment-page-1#comment-3805</link>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Price</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 14:51:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.christopherprice.net/?p=672#comment-3805</guid>
		<description>John, I think the virtual channel scenario is because TV Pack 2008 is supposed to be tuner agnostic. Meaning, QAM has to have a separate set of channels from ATSC, because there may be someone who wants to use both in their system. I agree, using * wasn&#039;t the best solution (many remote controls don&#039;t have * on it), the user should have been able to chose from a series of wildcards.

As to favorites... I agree, but TiVo doesn&#039;t have that done well either.

I&#039;ve read where Microsoft thought of Channel Logos. The basic problem came down to that the team was too busy to get permission (and a set of images) from each operator. Not a good excuse, since TiVo has already done all that in a single release...

Channel flipping is meant to replicate a traditional TV or DVR, which would only remember the last channel.

As to H.264... I&#039;ve already ranted on that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John, I think the virtual channel scenario is because TV Pack 2008 is supposed to be tuner agnostic. Meaning, QAM has to have a separate set of channels from ATSC, because there may be someone who wants to use both in their system. I agree, using * wasn&#8217;t the best solution (many remote controls don&#8217;t have * on it), the user should have been able to chose from a series of wildcards.</p>
<p>As to favorites&#8230; I agree, but TiVo doesn&#8217;t have that done well either.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve read where Microsoft thought of Channel Logos. The basic problem came down to that the team was too busy to get permission (and a set of images) from each operator. Not a good excuse, since TiVo has already done all that in a single release&#8230;</p>
<p>Channel flipping is meant to replicate a traditional TV or DVR, which would only remember the last channel.</p>
<p>As to H.264&#8230; I&#8217;ve already ranted on that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.christopherprice.net/vista-service-pack-2-lacks-media-center-tv-pack-2008-672.html/comment-page-1#comment-3802</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 17:01:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.christopherprice.net/?p=672#comment-3802</guid>
		<description>Why didn&#039;t Microsoft include features popular in other PVR software:

Virtual Channels -  I don&#039;t like to have to use the &#039;*&#039; button to tune my QAM channels. I&#039;d like to reassign it to its ATSC equivalent.

Favorite Lineups - Why can&#039;t we set one of these lineups as the default when we click on the guide button and when using the channel up/down button for channel tuning

Channel Logos - I don&#039;t expect Microsoft to provide them, but at least give us a directory where VMC will look for them so we can provide our own

Now, that it provides up to 12 sources for Ultimate and 6 for premium, why does the OK/Enter button only take you to the last channel on the same source. Last channel across all sources makes sense.

H.264/Direct TV support - I know they were working on this but it doesn&#039;t seem like we will see it until Windows 7.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why didn&#8217;t Microsoft include features popular in other PVR software:</p>
<p>Virtual Channels &#8211;  I don&#8217;t like to have to use the &#8216;*&#8217; button to tune my QAM channels. I&#8217;d like to reassign it to its ATSC equivalent.</p>
<p>Favorite Lineups &#8211; Why can&#8217;t we set one of these lineups as the default when we click on the guide button and when using the channel up/down button for channel tuning</p>
<p>Channel Logos &#8211; I don&#8217;t expect Microsoft to provide them, but at least give us a directory where VMC will look for them so we can provide our own</p>
<p>Now, that it provides up to 12 sources for Ultimate and 6 for premium, why does the OK/Enter button only take you to the last channel on the same source. Last channel across all sources makes sense.</p>
<p>H.264/Direct TV support &#8211; I know they were working on this but it doesn&#8217;t seem like we will see it until Windows 7.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christopher Price</title>
		<link>http://www.christopherprice.net/vista-service-pack-2-lacks-media-center-tv-pack-2008-672.html/comment-page-1#comment-3787</link>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Price</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.christopherprice.net/?p=672#comment-3787</guid>
		<description>Steve, the answer to that is simple: Compatibility, and not enough time to test the update for SP1 deployment.

It&#039;s the same argument that Microsoft uses to say why the Bluetooth and Storage Feature Packs are OEM-only. Those updates are getting rolled into SP2, why not TV Pack 2008?

OEMs can roll/slipstream these updates into their new installs, with much less testing required.

Now, I am giving Microsoft the benefit of the doubt with this argument, I suspect the reason that they really did it was to encourage the sale of new PCs with features like Blu-Ray burning, Bluetooth 2.1, and ClearQAM. By forcing people to wait until next year for the software that enables these (unless they buy a new PC), Microsoft in turn assures some of them will go out and buy a new PC... just for the drivers.

And, that helps Microsoft boost a rather bleak picture for Vista sales.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve, the answer to that is simple: Compatibility, and not enough time to test the update for SP1 deployment.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s the same argument that Microsoft uses to say why the Bluetooth and Storage Feature Packs are OEM-only. Those updates are getting rolled into SP2, why not TV Pack 2008?</p>
<p>OEMs can roll/slipstream these updates into their new installs, with much less testing required.</p>
<p>Now, I am giving Microsoft the benefit of the doubt with this argument, I suspect the reason that they really did it was to encourage the sale of new PCs with features like Blu-Ray burning, Bluetooth 2.1, and ClearQAM. By forcing people to wait until next year for the software that enables these (unless they buy a new PC), Microsoft in turn assures some of them will go out and buy a new PC&#8230; just for the drivers.</p>
<p>And, that helps Microsoft boost a rather bleak picture for Vista sales.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://www.christopherprice.net/vista-service-pack-2-lacks-media-center-tv-pack-2008-672.html/comment-page-1#comment-3782</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 12:22:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.christopherprice.net/?p=672#comment-3782</guid>
		<description>Why would they make it OEM only and then turn around 3 months later and put it in a service pack?  Seems kind of dumb to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why would they make it OEM only and then turn around 3 months later and put it in a service pack?  Seems kind of dumb to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
