Technological discussion on PS3 security and crack.*
- Thread starter senas8
- Start date
I guess I wasn't clear. I meant to stream anime from the web like from https://www.animeftw.tv/ and other sites.
It plays full screen with XBMC for the PC with a customized UI different than going to the site with your web browser. I imagine a similar interface being created for Netflix, Hulu, ESPN, etc that would make it more user friendly related to a console's control.
In addition, the XBMC interface for music is also a lot more user friendly than what is available on the PS3 (my PS3 for some strange reason does not want to stream my MP3s on my PC even though I have no problems streaming music from my X360 and laptop).
You should be able to do that with PS3 Media Server. The "problem" is you need a separate PC/Mac. And FF/RW is slow.
Yeah XMB's music player UI is a somewhat clumsy. But if homebrw apps are not here yet, then PS Media Server is not a bad solution. At least for our case here, it just works.
Yeah, I'm hoping to eliminate the middle man (PC/Mac) from the process. Also XBMC lets you jump pretty much anywhere in a movie (minus buffering).
Doesn't the PS Media Server utilize the host PC to transcode vids not supported by the PS3? I'd rather have native support built in. Regardless, it's a pipe dream until someone ports or creates something similar from the ground up for the PS3.
I am not updating to the latest official firmware...just in case. I'd rather buy a new PS3 for the newer games and keep my backward compatible ready to be my be-all, play-all PS3.
Yes, it uses a PC/Mac to transcode files not recognized by the PS3. The author did a good job configuring the decoders. So far, all the 4-5 video formats my friends threw at their PS3 Media Server worked without a hitch. They are average computer users, I was impressed the software made it seem easy.
If you want to play locally, I think there is a mode for the Media Server to cache the files persistently. You should be able to copy them to the PS3 via DLNA.
Yeah, the homebrew folks may take a long~ time to do anything substantial.
I thought about this for a while about a year ago. Now I just think it's a bad idea. Better just to get any ION based mini computer (like the Asus EEE eb1501) and run XBMC on it. Perfectly quiet, less power consumption, elegant and sleek, remote control that works and it does 1080p/60Hz without a hickup.
The PS3slim is just too noisy, big and clumsy. The only area where it excells IMO is perhaps the music player. All that processing power is wasted on XBMC.
BatTB25 said:
It is strange isn't it. It's going to be interesting how things will progress from here. I certainly expect Sony to start banning users off PSN with unauthorised content. That should pretty much keep the masses off using CFW if the system gets exposed as easy and quickly again.
Lucid_Dreamer
Veteran
Sony's started banning Jailbreak users for life.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/289419/news/sony-starts-banning-ps3-jailbreak-users/
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/289419/news/sony-starts-banning-ps3-jailbreak-users/
Why would this happen now since it didn't happen when otherOS was available?
NathansFortune
Regular
Console bans.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
OtherOS didn't give unfettered access to the GPU and was limited in other ways. HD video playback through XBMC can usually take advantage of hardware accelerated video decode and playback even through the relatively simplistic shader architecture on RSX.
Regards,
SB
Silent_Buddha
Legend
That may be true. But if we're talking about a Linux "port" of XBMC rather than the XBMC guys coding a specific version of XBMC for the PS3 then access to the GPU is most likely required.
As well without access to the GPU will they even be able to get enough video acceleration from RSX to support 720p/1080p uncompressed video playback?
Windows without access to video acceleration through video card drivers isn't able to accelerate the windows desktop (forget about full motion video) at even 320x240. 640x480 standard resolution for XP with unaccelerated video is painfully slow until video acceleration was enabled through the drivers available with a card.
Vista/W7 changed that being able to render through basic DX8/9 functionality that exists in all cards which allows them to accerlate the desktop even if video card drivers aren't provided.
Without access to RSX. I'd be surprised if even a 320x240 resolution full motion video would play smoothly through OtherOS.
Regards,
SB
As well without access to the GPU will they even be able to get enough video acceleration from RSX to support 720p/1080p uncompressed video playback?
Windows without access to video acceleration through video card drivers isn't able to accelerate the windows desktop (forget about full motion video) at even 320x240. 640x480 standard resolution for XP with unaccelerated video is painfully slow until video acceleration was enabled through the drivers available with a card.
Vista/W7 changed that being able to render through basic DX8/9 functionality that exists in all cards which allows them to accerlate the desktop even if video card drivers aren't provided.
Without access to RSX. I'd be surprised if even a 320x240 resolution full motion video would play smoothly through OtherOS.
Regards,
SB
Windows don't run on Cell. The SPUs alone can decode 1080p videos. It can decode 2 parallel streams of 1080p Blu-ray spec'ed H.264 videos.
XBMC needs RSX because of the the fancy UI. They will need the underlying decoders to run on the SPUs. RSX should be better for rendering to the screen.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
I'm not talking about uncompressing video. I'm talking about uncompressed video playback.
Without access to a GPU you cannot access ANY video acceleration which would be absolutely essential for playing back any full motion uncompressed video at any resolution.
The SPUs don't change that.
Regards,
SB
Are you sure ps3 even has video acceleration on gpu? AFAIK. all codecs run on cell(spu's). All indications on ps3 native side are that cell is used to do dvd and blu-ray decoding, upscaling, processing and so on. It wouldn't be surprising if nvidia was told to take any video acceleration out to make the RSX chip cheaper.
I don't follow.
CPU has pretty decent write bandwidth to vram and they already had vram access under linux.
Why do you think one would need anything more than 2d hardware scaling from RSX (which not only matters for some resolutions but also is not necessary if you have spu sw scaling)?
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Codecs are there only to decode/uncompress video that has been compressed by those codecs. As well as enable more advanced video processing. But can't do much by itself without access to the video display unit.
Perhaps Sony included 2D video acceleration in their OtherOS driver for RSX but I find that doubtful considering complaints about how slow RSX video feed is without access to the GPU.
Much like Windows Linux needs access to the GPU in order to accelerate even 2D video. Try playing back full motion uncompressed video on Windows XP with the standard video driver (or just turn off GPU acceleration in display properties) which has access to only the most basic video card features. It doesn't matter how powerful your CPU is or what video codecs you have installed, it just isn't going to happen.
A cursory search on Linux reveals roughly the same requirement. At least some level of hardware access to the video card in order to playback video of any kind no matter how powerful your CPU.
Regards,
SB
Similar threads
- Locked