Guys, not sure whether this is more "General" or "Apps and Themes" - it does concern the Media Hub app though.
Cutting it short, I am German, living in China, bought an international version Galaxy Tab in U.S. amazon.com, as with so many things, Media Hub is blocked for China, and I can't even register to it (it probably detects the China Mobile SIM card and says "no go").
does anybody have experience whether or not it could be circumvented, or "hacked"?
it's really stupid; i want to legally purchase movies/tv shows to play on the Tab. I can legally purchase via iTunes in China, but in order to play them on the Tab i would have to use a DRM removal software ... which makes it cumbersome and doesn't sound so legal, although they claim it is.
by blocking the service in China (same with amazonmp3, netflix, etc.) they are driving us into illegality --- only Apple seems to have figured it out.
Have you tried this one?
http://gumballtech.com/2010/09/17/how-to-sync-your-android-with-itunes/
raymentchen said:
Have you tried this one?
http://gumballtech.com/2010/09/17/how-to-sync-your-android-with-itunes/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hi, thanks a lot! i will give this a try. music with iTunes is no problem, the problem is that iTunes movies have DRM, which needs to be removed before they can be played on other devices, so i don't know whether the suggested apps in that website can do it or not.
i have however meanwhile figured out that DivX works well, at least now i can download some blockbusters from Warner Bros. or Film Fresh websites
thanks for your help!
uhg. the videoplayer in media hub doesnt support mhl. it seems intentional because it wont even mirror the phone screen, it actually shows it mirrored for a second and displays a mesage that it is not supported.
kinda makes media hub not worth having. why wouldnt samsung just put drm protection on a filetype that plays in the normal video player? this is lame. why would i rent a move to watch on my phone with no possibility of playback on a tv? they'd get many more rentals if it was more flexible this seems more like a way to show off than a practical aplication. i dont think it can stream over dlna either. it would be much more useful if i could use it on a hotel tv when i travel or my home tv with a dock.
come on samsung. we need an update! asap!
Yep, I tried it yesterday as well and it didnt work. Thats very dissapointing. Who wants to buy a movie in media hub but only be able to watch on their phone? If you buy the movie you should be able to watch it wherever you wish....
I really hope someone makes a hack for HDMI mirroring like the Droid x has...
I used with slingplayer. It worked ok, I think it doesn't have the horsepower to get it really smooth. But it was ok. Are the media player files drmed? I'll only use it to spend that $25 credit. I'll probably just copy and rip the movies I buy. Did anybody try other media players/movies?
nstong said:
I used with slingplayer. It worked ok, I think it doesn't have the horsepower to get it really smooth. But it was ok. Are the media player files drmed? I'll only use it to spend that $25 credit. I'll probably just copy and rip the movies I buy. Did anybody try other media players/movies?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ya know that's probably it. they are drm'd and in a proprietary format. they probably fear that if you had video capture on a computer you'd get around all that and dont want people ripping their movies.
the on board video player works amazing. dont use 3rd party apps, it supports mkv's and such. plus it putsout 1080p when used with mhl, the screen turns off and it switches to a highres mode and powers the mhl exclusively.
a better solution would have been watermarking the output. so that movies if ripped would have evidence of piracy in which case the user could be reported if they distribute it.
i wonder it that's what the update is about. maybe if we spoof the build.prop it wont force the update and then who knows? that might kill it altogether though and other version might only mirror, not use hi res. maybe there is a way to squash the update, an apk that can be frozen or something?
Samsung's response to me when I inquired
@CYNlKALOPTlMlST: @Samsungtweets @samsungmobileus Why can I not use media hub on my tv? #Infuse4G http://ow.ly/i/brzA
@SamsungMary:
@cynikaloptimist Due to licensing rights from the studios, Media Hub content unfortunately can be played only on Galaxy S devices. Sorry :-/
11:00 AM May 13th via CoTweet
http://twitter.com/SamsungMary/status/69054290928472064
Dani897 said:
ya know that's probably it. they are drm'd and in a proprietary format. they probably fear that if you had video capture on a computer you'd get around all that and dont want people ripping their movies.
the on board video player works amazing. dont use 3rd party apps, it supports mkv's and such. plus it putsout 1080p when used with mhl, the screen turns off and it switches to a highres mode and powers the mhl exclusively.
a better solution would have been watermarking the output. so that movies if ripped would have evidence of piracy in which case the user could be reported if they distribute it.
i wonder it that's what the update is about. maybe if we spoof the build.prop it wont force the update and then who knows? that might kill it altogether though and other version might only mirror, not use hi res. maybe there is a way to squash the update, an apk that can be frozen or something?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi.
Someone did this already? There is for some reason the possiblity to stream music vis desktop explorer - right mouse click to (play to) "non" ms certified dlna devices. But this is not working for downloaded xbox music pass wma files because the dlna device could not understand this.
So i thought of burning a cd and than recopy it to my device. This is "allowed" by law and than i would be able to stream it to my hifi.
Thanks for any hints.
Not sure where you got the idea that burning to a CD and then re-ripping is "allowed by law". Under strict reading of the DMCA, that's actually illegal, as it would circumvernt a DRM restriction. Of course, the DMCA is a **** law which conflicts with a number of other laws and is constantly being discussed (especially around what constitutes "fair use" exceptions to copyright limitations).
My downloaded-but-not-purchased music (from Zune Pass, but it's the same as Xbox Music) says it has "sync rights but no burn rights" which means the software will refuse to remove the DRM for burning to a CD. You could burn the DRMed file itself if you wanted to, but that wouldn't help anything.
If you buy the music from the Xbox Music store, then the DRM will be removed or at the very least all restrictions on it lifted.
GoodDayToDie said:
Not sure where you got the idea that burning to a CD and then re-ripping is "allowed by law". Under strict reading of the DMCA, that's actually illegal, as it would circumvernt a DRM restriction. Of course, the DMCA is a **** law which conflicts with a number of other laws and is constantly being discussed (especially around what constitutes "fair use" exceptions to copyright limitations).
My downloaded-but-not-purchased music (from Zune Pass, but it's the same as Xbox Music) says it has "sync rights but no burn rights" which means the software will refuse to remove the DRM for burning to a CD. You could burn the DRMed file itself if you wanted to, but that wouldn't help anything.
If you buy the music from the Xbox Music store, then the DRM will be removed or at the very least all restrictions on it lifted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this.
music that is acquired via the music pass is not yours and is simply rented on a monthly basis. there are ways around this, but it is in no way legal.
if you purchase music from xbox music, then it is provided in a DRM free mp3 format that can be burned to a disc or copied wherever you want it.
so no deal transferring my files to my car, my sports audio usb stick and my living room hifi equipment.
quite a high price for a music abo only for my pc ...
you could always get a zune, or other windows device
@oOp: No morese than if you bought a subscription to Spotify or something, no.
However, you can use a Windows laptop/tablet (including the Surface), or a Windows Phone, or one of the Zunes (even the pre-HD models), to play the music in your car. You'd need an Aux In port (most but not all cars have these) and a "ripping cable" (double-ended headphone cable, basically, typically only a few dollars even at rip-off prices). If your car supports Bluetooth audio (not the same as BT headset, which is more common) and you have a Windows phone/tablet/laptop with BT, you can play the music through that as well. Alternatively, I suppose you could get a car FM transmitter... As for your living room equipment, that's what DLNA is for. Get a DLNA receiver (they aren't rare, if nothing else an Xbox 360 works as one) and connect it to your amp (I'm assuming you've got at least one available input connection).
GoodDayToDie said:
... Get a DLNA receiver (they aren't rare, if nothing else an Xbox 360 works as one) and connect it to your amp (I'm assuming you've got at least one available input connection).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i got one but xbox music pass drm protected files cannot be played all other files i can.
Ah sad, sorry about that then. Mine offers to stream to my Xbox, which is the only DLNA receiver I have, but of course the Xbox 360 already has the ability to decode Zune Pass DRM.
There was a time when apps like Plex, Kodi, etc. were very attractive to provide a great multimedia experience at home. People would download movies, TV series/ shows, etc. using Torrents, manually edit the tags, and save them to their NAS boxes.
A media server would then present all the info in a very attractive manner that would be pleasing to the eye. They would even download missing information or correct incorrect tags. The one problem with this was when these servers would go beserk when updating content.
At one point, I realised these servers are of little to no use to me. If I need to watch something, I'll browse to the file (I would keep my files well organized) and simply play it. So I stopped using them.
Things are changing now.
1. Internet data is becoming increasingly cheap and available 24x7.
2. Music and video streaming services are rising and are available at very reasonable prices. More importantly, they offer plenty of additional benefits:
They make content available legally.
The content is available in very good quality.
New content is available shortly after they are released. No need to wait for weeks or months.
Their database is far more accurate with information about each media.
Users don't have to worry about losing their files (because of a hardware failure, system getting infected/ hacked, etc.) or upgrading their hardware.
Going forward, I think local media servers like Plex, Kodi, etc. would disappear due to no consumer interest, and people would use NAS primarily to store their own content (such as camera roll) due to privacy concerns.
Even NAS boxes would become a thing of the past as a simple computer with a large storage attached to it would be far more convenient to operate as the software that runs on NAS boxes are often closed/ locked and not very versatile as a normal computer.
How long before these products become a thing of the past?
The only way home servers will die out is if streaming services have access to every piece of music or film ever made. Example: my personal music collection contains quite a bit of content not available on any streaming service. To play these files remotely I need a server.
Strephon Alkhalikoi said:
The only way home servers will die out is if streaming services have access to every piece of music or film ever made. Example: my personal music collection contains quite a bit of content not available on any streaming service. To play these files remotely I need a server.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very niche case. How much storage does such content (those that are not available) take in your case? Do you really need a NAS or a media server just for that?
Plex is bigger than it ever was before.
The issue with streaming services is that they've followed the same route as cable did back in the day.
People got tired of ads on free TV. Cable companies came along and said "Pay us a subscription, and watch what you want without ads!"
Then people got tired of ads on cable. The cable companies said "You can buy access to premium channels for ad-free content."
Then people got tired of ads on premium channels. Streaming services said "Pay us a subscription and watch whatever you want as much as you want ad free!"
Then people got tired of ads on streaming services. The streaming services said "Pay us extra for premium access and ad-free content."
And so it goes. There comes a point when streaming just isn't worth it anymore. I have a 4TB Plex server at home with around 2,000 movies and several dozen shows, soon to be upgraded to to 8 or 12TB. Never mind how I acquired all that media, point is I don't have to deal with subscription services being turned into cash cows by greedy marketers.
V0latyle said:
Plex is bigger than it ever was before.
The issue with streaming services is that they've followed the same route as cable did back in the day.
People got tired of ads on free TV. Cable companies came along and said "Pay us a subscription, and watch what you want without ads!"
Then people got tired of ads on cable. The cable companies said "You can buy access to premium channels for ad-free content."
Then people got tired of ads on premium channels. Streaming services said "Pay us a subscription and watch whatever you want as much as you want ad free!"
Then people got tired of ads on streaming services. The streaming services said "Pay us extra for premium access and ad-free content."
And so it goes. There comes a point when streaming just isn't worth it anymore. I have a 4TB Plex server at home with around 2,000 movies and several dozen shows, soon to be upgraded to to 8 or 12TB. Never mind how I acquired all that media, point is I don't have to deal with subscription services being turned into cash cows by greedy marketers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How often do you watch something again? I would say less than 1% of what you have saved in your own hardware would be content that would be watched a second time.
When we complain about subscriptions, we completely forget how much we pay for the hardware that we invest in (because this is something we do once in a few years or so) to locally save files, and also money spent in running and protecting them. If you do the math, you would often see that there is no real savings by having content locally, and more so if you take into account the effort required for upkeep of data.
Companies offering subscription services have to make money, so as long as their services are reasonably priced, they are the future as we save a lot of time and headache in not having to acquire and maintain content.
TheMystic said:
How often do you watch something again? I would say less than 1% of what you have saved in your own hardware would be content that would be watched a second time.
When we complain about subscriptions, we completely forget how much we pay for the hardware that we invest in (because this is something we do once in a few years or so) to locally save files, and also money spent in running and protecting them. If you do the math, you would often see that there is no real savings by having content locally, and more so if you take into account the effort required for upkeep of data.
Companies offering subscription services have to make money, so as long as their services are reasonably priced, they are the future as we save a lot of time and headache in not having to acquire and maintain content.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They already figured that cost when they initially priced their services. It was more than enough to cover their hardware back end. They didn't need advertiser revenue, nor did they need to charge people more for ads; they're only doing it to maximize their profits.
I watch plenty of things more than once, and I'm going to continue to expand my NAS because to me that's money better spent than paying for a subscription service. Plus, I get to curate what content is on my own media server; this is especially important to me as a soon to be father, because I don't want my daughter watching the garbage that most streaming services consider "child friendly".
V0latyle said:
They already figured that cost when they initially priced their services. It was more than enough to cover their hardware back end. They didn't need advertiser revenue, nor did they need to charge people more for ads; they're only doing it to maximize their profits.
I watch plenty of things more than once, and I'm going to continue to expand my NAS because to me that's money better spent than paying for a subscription service.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see far far less movies these days compared to a few years earlier. Never been into watching TV shows either. So we see things from different perspectives.
V0latyle said:
Plus, I get to curate what content is on my own media server; this is especially important to me as a soon to be father, because I don't want my daughter watching the garbage that most streaming services consider "child friendly".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Congratulations!
This is the new challenge of this generation. There is indeed a lot of garbage that we need to shield children from. A very big challenge indeed.
TheMystic said:
Congratulations!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks
TheMystic said:
This is the new challenge of this generation. There is indeed a lot of garbage that we need to shield children from. A very big challenge indeed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely. Most of the stuff touted as "child friendly" by the mainstream providers isn't even stuff I would watch. Can't really get into the details because our site host is paranoid about controversial topics but I think you get the point.
Maybe it's time to go old school and see if I can find Veggie Tales on DVD...
V0latyle said:
Absolutely. Most of the stuff touted as "child friendly" by the mainstream providers isn't even stuff I would watch. Can't really get into the details because our site host is paranoid about controversial topics but I think you get the point.
Maybe it's time to go old school and see if I can find Veggie Tales on DVD...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The ease of smartphone availability and access to content online is indeed something to worry about. Children become smarter than parents much before they realise. The most effective way to keep them away from it would be to keep them busy the whole day with some activity under someone's watchful eyes. This is something the previous generation did not have to deal with.
TheMystic said:
The ease of smartphone availability and access to content online is indeed something to worry about. Children become smarter than parents much before they realise. The most effective way to keep them away from it would be to keep them busy the whole day with some activity under someone's watchful eyes. This is something the previous generation did not have to deal with.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I grew up playing in the dirt, she can too!
V0latyle said:
Well, I grew up playing in the dirt, she can too!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Easier said than done. I wish you best of luck!
TheMystic said:
Their database is far more accurate with information about each media.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your probably right about this for movies and music.
Where you're dead wrong is library book borrowing with OverDrive/Libby.
There's no way to even get the year of publication.
"The Great Gatsby"? 2003. Hmm, probably the year the ebook came out.
Renate said:
Your probably right about this for movies and music.
Where you're dead wrong is library book borrowing with OverDrive/Libby.
There's no way to even get the year of publication.
"The Great Gatsby"? 2003. Hmm, probably the year the ebook came out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do people use media servers for books too?
TheMystic said:
Do people use media servers for books too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mmm, kind of.
I keep all my books organized on my desktop and sync them to all my Androids and ereaders.
But I was more speaking of the willingness to codify metadata.
Even gutenberg.org can't tell me the year that "The Great Gatsby" was written.
Spotify will tell me that "The Lord is Listenin' to Ya, Hallelujah" was released in 1982.
But it won't tell you that Michael Mantler played trumpet on it.
Renate said:
Mmm, kind of.
I keep all my books organized on my desktop and sync them to all my Androids and ereaders.
But I was more speaking of the willingness to codify metadata.
Even gutenberg.org can't tell me the year that "The Great Gatsby" was written.
Spotify will tell me that "The Lord is Listenin' to Ya, Hallelujah" was released in 1982.
But it won't tell you that Michael Mantler played trumpet on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's probably because there is usually just one information that people look for in a book: the author.
But for a music or a movie, there is a whole lot of additional information that people are interested in: the actors, director, producer, music, lyricist, ratings, performance at box office, budget, etc.
There is a lot of work required to put all information together for each movie and music. A streaming service takes care of that, and you don't need terrabytes of storage to worry about in case of books.
As with some information missing, may be it isn't something the majority users would look forward to.
The point of OP is this:
People are not saving nearly as much as they think they do by maintaining their own servers in place of an online streaming service. Maintaining own server means substantial investment in hardware every few years, costs of running it, keeping it safe, keeping one or more backups, etc. Plus the time required in managing it.
All these add up to an amount that can well be more than what we pay monthly/ annually to a streaming service whose economies of scale allow them to price it reasonably.
I thought of buying an old Pixel (5 or before) to avoid upgrading my Google One subscription. But when I did some math, I found out that there isn't much savings in it, if at all. The annual subscription that I pay today and what I'll be paying in future (including upgrades) isn't all that expensive than buying a 3 year old device today which can be expected to last for the next 7 or 8 years only. I have done the analysis here.
This is a very similar calculation. The only consideration for people going forward will be to use these for privacy reasons, such as saving their camera roll, screenshots, etc.
TheMystic said:
Very niche case. How much storage does such content (those that are not available) take in your case? Do you really need a NAS or a media server just for that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not a niche case at all, and quite a bit more common than you think. As for my music, 95% of it is in FLAC, which requires more space than a MP3. But I also have two binders full of DVDs - I never had a blu ray player - that I haven't yet digitized. Who knows how much space that would take?
I recently (within the last month) just got a Synonlogy NAS ds420+ got 2x 16tb drives and 2x 4tb drives. I just installed plex and got the lifetime pass. I have all my old movies on it. I love being able to start watching something in my TV in the living room, then moving to my kitchen, (Both are Sony A90k 48" Oled's). Even can continue watching something on my Amazon Echo show 15 in the bedroom! The big thing for me was being able to start watching on one device, then picking up where I left off on another device. Previously I had a USB drive plugged into the back of the TV, but that was a pain.
Plus I have content on it I actually like. I have amazon prime and netflix, but barely watch anything on them. I am also that person who likes to watch stuff again every once in a while.
Plus I setup my NAS to file sync my pictures and documents between my desktop PC and laptop. I am even thinking of upgrading them from 11 home to 11 pro. From there I can set the NAS up as a domain controller, DNS server, DHCP server etc. Have a full blown network in the house. I am toying with the idea of doing it natively with the available applications on the NAS, or by running a windows server 2022 VM and doing it that way.
Simple NAS boxes are just external drives with a network connection.
When you focus on specific NAS boxes with a management plane, virtualization, and other features like web server, database etc. then you have to ask yourself why you just use this thing to throw your music and movies on that.
You can use such "NAS boxes" for hosting container virtualization to run apps, host own web services, calendar, private phone books, wifi controllers, pi-hole, and much more.
Sure, you can use it just to store files, and yes, those files might also be stored in a public cloud or streamed from a hosting service. But with a synology, qnap etc. there are a lot more ways possible.
-> You all use your smartphone to... Make phone calls but that's not the only feature it can provide, right?
strongst said:
Simple NAS boxes are just external drives with a network connection.
When you focus on specific NAS boxes with a management plane, virtualization, and other features like web server, database etc. then you have to ask yourself why you just use this thing to throw your music and movies on that.
You can use such "NAS boxes" for hosting container virtualization to run apps, host own web services, calendar, private phone books, wifi controllers, pi-hole, and much more.
Sure, you can use it just to store files, and yes, those files might also be stored in a public cloud or streamed from a hosting service. But with a synology, qnap etc. there are a lot more ways possible.
-> You all use your smartphone to... Make phone calls but that's not the only feature it can provide, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could not agree more. I was at first looking at a full blown server, running windows server 2022, but they are vastly expensive. I can do the same with my NAS as I could with a full blown server.
'Cinema Halls' are losing their attraction and will probably disappear in the next decade. The rise of OTT platforms that make content available on fingertips, at the user's convenience, and most households having a good home entertainment system, make these the future.
Although I watch some comedy shows more than once (I don't think there is any other genre that people would watch more than once, with rare exceptions), I found that the amount of storage I have was simply wasted by files that I'm unlikely to watch again. And to preserve these, I was spending on electricity (since NAS runs 24x7) and investing in hardware every few years to keep them backed up and safe. The effort and the money was totally not worth it. Countdown has begun for domestic media servers.
Stephen said:
I was at first looking at a full blown server, running windows server 2022, but they are vastly expensive. I can do the same with my NAS as I could with a full blown server.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't get the kind of control over NAS software that you do with any Desktop OS like Windows, macOS, Linux, etc. And you don't need a Windows Server for running a media server. A simple PC running on Windows 7 too will do a better job than a NAS system. The only advantage a NAS box offers is its compact size.