Talk:Home theater PC

Storage

The problem of storage in an HTPC can be reduced by using a seperate home media server PC in another room (or the loft or cupboard under stairs) connected to the lounge / home theatre room via wireless LAN.

Apple TV?

Is an Apple TV really an HTPC? If it is then so is a all of those media center extenders, TiVos, ReplayTVs, and probably most cable boxes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.113.229.45 (talk) 15:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I had this question with regards to Front Row, as it has no recording capabilities. It seems that inclusion of such is contradictory to the article. BubbaStrangelove (talk) 07:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Copyright violation

I think that the top section of the page should be rewritten. 75.74.112.76 19:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't find an offer of license, or any substantial meta-information for that matter, on the wiki. Did the author of the text intend to publish it only under all-rights-reserved terms? --Damian Yerrick (☎) 21:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Either way, I've started a rewrite. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 21:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you have to lock the whole damn article for a top section rewrite? Some of us would like to read the article!

"Television connectivity" an absolute?

Why is this presented as an absolute? Any sort of monitor may be used with an HTPC, not just a television. A large CRT or LCD computer monitor, or more notably a projector, requires no "television connectivity".75.64.178.63 11:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

agreed, I use a 1920x1200 24 inch LCD monitor which is enough to show full HD and gives the fast response times for games etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.62.165 (talk) 15:02, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Then your monitor is as big as a TV (but is probably more expensive than a TV). This touches on a deeper question: what is a TV? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 00:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, a TV is any self contained specialized video screen which does nothing other than display input, with an interface designed around that purpose. In other words, a computer monitor is not a TV because it cannot do anything useful by itself. A TV is more than a screen because it lets you change channels/adjust volume, etc. A TV/VCR combo is exactly what it sounds like, but it is not solely a TV. In a more classic definition, a TV is anything that accepts analog input (AV, coaxial, RF, etc) and displays it. This line is blurred by digital broadcasts or HDMI inputs. I think there's a difference in the way TVs and monitors display pixels, but I don't know enough details. In my opinion, television connectivity is not required, only output of some sort. Prgrmr@wrk 19:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I think a TV should be considered a screen with a tv-tuner built in. You clearly do not need to have a tv-tuner in your screen to use a HTPC, rather the opposite since you'll probably be using a computer tv-tuner. 81.226.215.82 13:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

1. 1. I don't think anything is being presented as an absolute. The whole discussion about display for PVR versus Media Centre versus Media Server versus Set Top Box is irrelevant. All these devices AND the software controlling it all, are converging at the speed of light--well more like the speed of email or internet chat group contact. Eventually there will be one device that is PC, media center/server and it will be able to be remote controlled on screen (TV/PC),iPod, iPhone (other phones), PDA, etc etc. The reason there is so much confusion in this area is that the entire media module (hardware/software/management) is in a severe state of flux. Eventually boxes and management tools will emerge on all major platforms with plug n play ability to add memory/TV(satellite and terrestrial)/DVD burner/cameras(security/internet chat/telephony) as well as software plugins. Control can be passed from the remote in the lounge room to the phone for private email, chatting etc or multiple users can use it at the same time (still be a fight about the remote though). This is my first post so I hope I haven't been too verbose. If I have, then I apologize.Bmwjohnno (talk) 12:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Hardware?

I have a definition of a general hardware setup that embodies the definition of a HTPC. The essential elements are a wide screen television, surround sound, and a computer running any multimedia capable operating system. The television must, at a minimum, provide the typical functions expected by a consumer buying a wide screen TV at a big box retail outlet. There are numerous flavors of "surround sound" but again some minimum implementation beyond the stereo speakers integrated into the television is the expectation. Lastly, the computer should run a generic operating system like Windows, MacOS or Linux capable of playing multimedia based content.

A documented example of an HTPC implementation is the one I use in my home. The hardware pieces are readily available but integrating the components does require technical expertise.

Much of the definition of an HTPC is currently opinion because there are no industry standards. Nonetheless, I believe the previous definitions are generally accepted and should therefore be considered suitable Wikipedia content until such standards evolve.

--Jhmpub (talk) 17:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Console Emulation

Recently I mentioned in the article that HTPCs are also good for emulation. One of the edits was removed, and the other was qualified with "as long as they own a license". I understand the idea behind those changes, but just because it's copyright infringement (or a crime) to download roms doesn't mean an encyclopedia shouldn't mention it, or should say that it requires a license, when it isn't true. Emulation is often a major reason people want to build any sort of media PC, and not mentioning that in an encyclopedia seems like censorship to me. If possible, I'd like to hear if there's a policy that limits which articles can mention criminal or improper actions. I imagine that simply mentioning roms are usually not public domain should be enough to prevent accusations of inducement. Afterall, mentioning roms is hardly the same as providing them for download, or telling people how to get them. Prgrmr@wrk 13:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Why should wikipedia be on the corporate side of all of this? You do not need a license to be able play roms on a computer. It's as simple as it can get. This wikipedia article isn't about the law system in different countries, it's about the functionality of a HTPC. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's not possible. Saying that something is "good" or "bad" in an article only because it's illegal would be very POV. You could add that some companies dislike the spreading of rom files, but you can't say that you physically can't use roms on a computer just because it's illegal, since that obviously would be false. Ran4 13:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Of course emulation is not illegal. That's why I mentioned official emulators such as Midway Arcade Treasures. It's specific methods of copying programs to the PC, such as copying through the Internet, that violate copyright. But details about emulation are for the article console emulator, not here. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 15:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

And most importantly - if it wasn't for the underground emulation movement - there would BE NO REVIVAL of these old titles, and NO LEGITIMATE emulation of older titles - like the old titles you can pick up on Wii. Discounting the entire emulation field because *SOME* people might be using it illegitimately, is narrow minded. And here's some shameless opinion for you: I do not believe Wikipedia should be a place where narrow-mindedness is fostered, or welcomed. My opinion on that is so shameless, that I think EVERYONE should have the same opinion as I do. --Kyanwan (talk) 03:24, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Merged in Media PC

I have merged in the content from Media PC as was discussed on Talk:Media_PC#Merge_proposal. It still needs some cleanup though - esp the external links section. Also just spotted media center and media server which also seem similar. johnSLADE (talk) 18:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Advantage/disadvantage

this section is a giant pile of opinion and original research without citation. If none are provided within the week I'll axe the entire thing.--Crossmr (talk) 00:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it will be possible to find citations for information like that. At best, we could find a review or tutorial on building an HTPC, and we could then cite somebody else's opinion. If there is anything in that section that anybody actually thinks is wrong, it can be removed, but otherwise it probably falls under the "too basic to require everything is cited" category (EG: "Cars are more comfortable in snowstorms than bikes"). It could probably use some trimming though, if I get time, I'll clean it up a little. Prgrmr@wrk (talk) 15:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

You're using uncited opinion to build a case favoured by one or more editors. Its the very definition of original research and has no place on the encyclopedia. If any opinion can't be sourced, it doesn't belong here. There have been a lot of articles written about home theatres and the various components. As long as the review/etc comes from a reliable source it can be used to source this as being an advantage/disadvantage. Otherwise its got serious neutral point of view issues created by original research.--Crossmr (talk) 03:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Windows Media Center on Windows 7.png

The image File:Windows Media Center on Windows 7.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Apple advertisement

Why is there a giant apple advertisement in the middle of this article? Why is there not a PC Windows PC Unix advantage/disadvantage section also? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.192.24.30 (talk) 05:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I never looked closely at that section, but would agree that it does not belong. It's simply a series of categories that say "Apple does this, too!" The topic on Apple HTPCs may be useful for a sentence here or there, but not a large section on which specific Macs have upgradable video cards, etc. Rurik (talk) 14:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

MAC OS X ISN'T A PC OS!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.194.242.158 (talk) 16:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Um, yes it is Personal computer Nil Einne (talk) 06:52, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree with you, Nil. The article should eventually compare the available platforms designed for operation as a home theater PC: Lenovo compatible PCs with Windows Media Center Edition/Home Premium, Lenovo compatible PCs with some media-oriented Linux distro such as Mythbuntu, and Macintosh computers with Mac OS X. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 21:26, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Merge with Media center

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merge into Home theater PC.
I'm pretty sure this was undone at some point, but just closing off discussion since its stale. -- DarkCrow^Caw 16:13, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

---

  Y Merger complete. I oppose. Home theater PC could rather be a subset of Media center, but not opposite.--Kozuch (talk) 08:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I picked the merge direction based on which article appeared more substantial, however it could go either way really. Socrates2008 (Talk) 08:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I oppose as well... You can have a media center Pc that is not an HTPC so it shouldn't even be discussed --64.111.50.222 (talk) 04:03, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Agreed a HTPC is a media cener PC, but has a specific function. Also to consider is PVR (personal video recorder) or DVR (digital video recorder) these are part of a media center PC. A HTPC can also act as a media server, or a media server as a HTPC. A HTPC can also be a upnp media streming device. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Htpchelp (talk • contribs) 14:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, just to confirm - is everyone opposing a merging in either direction? Socrates2008 (Talk) 04:24, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I believe we are all opposing the merge in both directions. My reason is that Media Center is too close to a brand name used in HTPC's. --76.77.73.178 (talk) 22:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Adam

I oppose as well. A "media center" does not have to be a "HTPC", thus the articles can not be megred. 83.227.151.27 (talk) 20:10, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

It's less developed and repeats a lot of content that's here already. A merger and redirect would help reduce some of the confusion in this space.Mattnad (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

merge complete.Mattnad (talk) 13:37, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

WTF! Did you not see that most people are against a such merge, did you not read Talk:Home theater PC#Media center merge on this very discussion page? The fact remains that a "Media center" does not have to be a "HTPC", the term media center refers either to a dedicated computer appliance with media center functions OR media center software that runs on a PC to create a HTPC. For example most people would call Networked Media Tank's Popcorn Hour function a "media center" function, and the Apple TV and number of other similar boxes that no one would ever think to call a "HTPC" because they can not be used a personal computer as well, and the same could be said for the media center function on some video game console like the PlayStation 3, it has some media center functions (so that could be linked to the media center article to explain what a media center is) but it is not a HTPC. So again, I strongly oppose this merge, a media center can be a purpose-built device like Networked Media Tank (and even something like TiVo could be said that have media center functionality), or it could be created by individuals by adding media center software to a PC or some other computer creating a Home Theater PC, but it can also be or a video game console such as the [[PlayStation 3] with its network services can also act as a basic media center device by default. My point is that "media Center" is a function, not specific type of custom hardware like a HTPC. Do not try to megre "media center label" to only make it synonymous with a HTPC and nothing else, causing more confusion so that people will not understand the difference. Gamester17 (talk) 09:41, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Dude, ease up and think about this. Although the Home Theater PC was the original application, it has evolved into dedicated devices that have both form and function. You are looking at HTPC too narrowly. And if you had reviewed the former Media Center stub, it also described computers and software - not "function" as you have suggested in your comments. Moreover, All of the devices you've referred to are based on computing technologies and have varying degrees of capability. Even the AppleTV has been modified to run OS X. These are all derivative of the HTPC concept and history. Given the diversity of devices and software, I also developed this template to help sort out the taxonomy. There's room for improvement, but your comments above convince me I did the right thing.

There are many definitions of "Media Center." It was originally referred to Windows PCs with a software and hardware bundle for media management. It is sometimes used to describe generic software as one editor recently suggested with this edit. And now you are suggesting it's neither software or hardware but a melange that becomes a "function". This article can be expanded to include your concepts and details around Media Center (whatever that is). Just make sure it's cited.

I will add that the older discussion above was based on a different article and I waited 4 months after posting the merge notice to do it. Nobody commented before, and only you have now with your particular ideas. So instead of having a little fork article on "Media Center", how about you build this one out.Mattnad (talk) 14:12, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

The fact still remains that "HTPC" is specific PC hardware, and "Media center" are not bound to any specific hardware, thus it would be more logical if "HTPC" was a subsection of "Media center" then the reverse (like it is today). So while I can agree that "HTPC" can be a sub-category under a "Media center" article, I do not agree that there should not be "Media center" article. Gamester17 (talk) 15:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

HTPCs vs. appliances

Has any reliable source compared sales or market penetration figures for home theater PCs vs. appliances such as the Roku DVP or the seventh-generation game consoles? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 17:44, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Not to my knowledge. This article is in need of expansion since HTPC will become an historic item that laid the foundation for consumer electronic companies to incorporate many of the features into their equipment. So for instance, network connected TVs like LG will allow people to access content locally or via the web. My belief is that "appliances", as you put it, will eclipse soon (if not already) dedicated HTPCs. Here are some projections from Strategy Analytics 2010 report: By 2014, there will be 82M Set top boxes (like Roku, AppleTV and Tivo boxes), 89M net connected blu-ray players, 89M ip enabled game consoles, and 107M IP enabled TVs.Mattnad (talk) 18:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

In that case, the article might need a comparison between appliances and HTPCs emphasizing that HTPCs are more likely to be able to play works that have not been certified by the appliance maker without any legally or practically questionable jailbreak. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 14:26, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

That's a reasonable build - there's ample reliable sources that comment on limitations of devices like the AppleTV in that regard.Mattnad (talk) 19:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Home Theater/Office PC Combination Page

Hi,

I'm working on a project to create an entertainment center through my office PC, and I'm detailing the steps here: http://julieshad.com/home_theater_pc/.

It is a blog, but it's dedicated to this subject matter which seems to be allowed per the wiki guidelines. May I add it to the external links portion of the page? I've learned a lot through doing this, and I'd like others to know how my setup is working, good or bad.

Thanks for your time, nsk3179 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nsk3179 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Looks like a great project, but wikipedia is probably not the right place for that. See WP:ELNO #11 which says we should avoid "Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority." There's a pretty tight lid on external links and this page is one that attracts a lot of interest like yours. But I like what you're doing on the blog. Nice work.Mattnad (talk) 22:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Mac mini.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Mac mini.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Home theater PC. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.businessweek.com/1996/13/b3468128.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://msmvps.com/blogs/chrisl/archive/2007/02/06/549593.aspx
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/science_tech/tvs-get-smart-with-internet-access-in-2011
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.valleynewslive.com/Global/story.asp?S=13551980&clienttype=printable
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713200733/http://www.leichtmanresearch.com/press/051711release.html to http://leichtmanresearch.com/press/051711release.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:03, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Home theater PC. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100215194819/http://static.telematicsfreedom.org/flossmediacenter/EN_FLOSS_Media_Center_Comparison.pdf to http://static.telematicsfreedom.org/flossmediacenter/EN_FLOSS_Media_Center_Comparison.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:28, 6 November 2017 (UTC)