GEOSATpro HDVR3500 - New DVBS2 STB - Photos and Initial Testing
- Thread starter Titanium
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 1K
- Views 208K
- Status
I do not know if the readings for internet speed from the website that I found are accurate with this qt web browser and a linux system. I used the web browser on our HDVR3500 system and I went to www.bandwidthplace.com and performed an internet speed test. The site iuses a non-flash player test. On the HDVR3500 the results were 1.2 Mbps Download and 0.1 Mbps Upload. Those readings were taken connected to my network via ethernet. I ran the same test on my laptop using wifi and my readings were 13Mbps and 1.7Mbps. I then took the ethernet cable from the back of the HDVR3500 and plugged it into my computer where the test results were 25Mbps download and 1.9Mbps Upload. I am just wondering if the HDVR3500 is really connecting that slow or if the test site does not work accurately with the unit. Most of my SD channels that I watch even stop and search while watching them. I looked and Netflix recommends 3Mbps for SD, 5Mbps for HD and 25Mbps for UltraHD. Based off of Netflix recommendations and since my IPTV and XBMC spend a lot of time searching on even SD channels I tend to believe that the test results that I received were correct. I am now wondering if there might be something wrong with the network card in my unit. Would the network card possibly be limiting the speed that I am getting? I have done all that I know to do to get more speed. Any suggestions? Not trying to open a can of worms but could this in anyway be related to the cpu? If so I just want to know that I have done all that I can do short of opening up the HDVR3500 and modifying. That would be over my head.
If anyone has not yet used the internet browser but goes and toys with it, Good Luck! because it is difficult to figure out without any instructions but here is a" TIP"... after opening the browser push the red CC button one time to activate the pointer. Typing with the pointer is much easier than the arrow button moves.
Last edited:
FYI: Muzak is now called MOOD: http://us.moodmedia.com/ but their "What's Playing Now" lists still use the muzak urls (at least for now) http://muzakwpn.muzak.com/
Eugene,
Where is your link, or the HDVR3500 manufacturer's link, to build the Busybox binary from source?
Where is your link, or the HDVR3500 manufacturer's link, to build the Busybox binary from source?
I like to keep the channel list on all satellites for a full channel list. When I power off the box with the remote then power back on later the channel list is in per-satellite mode. Basically if Im watching ION West HD for instance and in all sats channel list mode, power off the box, power back on the channel list reverts to only the channels on the current sat. I have to arrow left or right until I get to All Sats. Maybe Im missing something or maybe I need to instead add all channel to a favorites group and use that instead? Thanks for any ideas.
The plan for this receiver did not include access to build. But nothing is off the table.
MES is mostly for ALI, it allows importing xml, but we have not communicated with MES developer on exporting to HDVR3500 yet.
After searching and trying several internet speed testing sites it is obvious that my initial 1.2 speed that I reported from the bandwidthplace website may not be accurate. I am NOT confident in the speed tests results that I am receiving through the HDVR3500 web browser from the different speed test websites. I have found scattered results from different websites browsing to them using the QT Web Browser on the HDVR3500 and have received mixed results. So, before I start a big stink and cause any negative ideas I need to say that I honestly do not know at what speed the internet is connecting to my unit. I do know that I am pumping in over 20Mbps and that I am experiencing frequent stops/buffering but that could be because of the stream being received. So I am reporting my results, trying to correct any negative press that I may be causing, and am zipping up my lips on the matter. Sorry about any confusion that I may have caused. Just striving for improvements!
Don't be so hard on yourself lol. The internet speed at your house doesn't mean the channels are providing a good signal. Also, we are dependent on public internet, literally. So are the others, like roku, apple tv and the rest.
GPL?
http://busybox.net/license.html
Quotes:
If you are distributing the BusyBox binary, you also have to distribute the complete, corresponding source code. If you modified the source, you have to distribute the modified source.
Can I include Busybox as part of the software on my device?
Yes. As long as you fully comply with the terms of the GPL Busybox license you can ship Busybox as part of the software on your device.
I want to use Busybox as part of the Linux-based firmware for a new device. Will it create any license issues in future?
If you use Busybox binary in your device's firmware, and if you (or the company you work for) is providing this device to others (selling, giving for free, etc), you have to provide users with means to build the same Busybox binary from source.
For example, you may do it by placing the following, or similar, text somewhere on the company's web site:
This device's firmware includes the following open-source components:
...
...
Busybox:
We are using patched version of Busybox 1.6.2. In order to rebuild it from source, download http://company.site.com/firmware/source/busybox-1.6.2.tar.gz, unpack it to an empty directory, download http://company.site.com/firmware/source/busybox-1.6.2.patch and http://company.site.com/firmware/source/.config to the same directory and apply the patch with this command:
patch -p1 <busybox-1.6.2.patch
Now you can build Busybox with these commands:
export ARCH=arm
make CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-uclibc-
After successful build, you will have Busybox binary in this directory.
If make command fails with the message
arm-linux-uclibc-gcc: command not found
you need to install suitable cross-compiler for ARM processor first. ARM cross-compilers are widely available both from commercial vendors and from open-source projects.
Adjust the text to suit your actual situation.
You have to make the page easily accessible. In other words, users should not be forced to guess the URL. The most sensible choice is to put this text on the page where users normally download updated binary firmware images.
If you want to be extra nice, you may provide URLs to places where people may get ARM toolchains or read HOWTOs explaining how to build one. You may even provide the toolchain. But these "extra nice" things are not required by license. License also does not require you to provide any support for users which use firmware (or part of it) built from source.
What license does require, though, is that Busybox source which you provide actually can be built and that it will match Busybox binary which is found in your binary firmware. Match is meant as "functional match", not byte-by-byte match - binaries may slightly differ because of different compilers/linkers used, because of build timestamp and so on.
Just posting on the channel editor. Exported channel list. Loaded into the editor. Changed the name on a bunch of channels (just the service name). Reloaded it into the box and poof all channels gone. Rebooted the box and the old unedited channel list came back. So editing channels doesnt work. Really, changing anything results in corruption. Tried removing one satellite, reloading (and not changing anything else). Poof all satellite settings scramble. Editing any of the satellites in the satellite box using the remote results in those settings not getting saved and they return to the scrambled settings. Reloading a good backup from before editing anything brings the box back to normal. Thats good. But from my testing if you edit anything from your backup using the channel editor application and reload it into the box it results in corruption on the box as explained above. I have not found one thing the editor is able to edit without corrupting something on reload. Its only useful, at the moment, for viewing a backup. Thanks!
Time for a change of plans then, maybe?
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to be an a@@, I didn't ask for the source on a whim or to be troublesome. My receiver is working perfectly as a satellite receiver in the way I wanted it, except for the remote, which isn't software related and which can be remedied, but I've been very busy with other stuff and lazy on that.
There is however quite a few things I would like to make run better. There is also a lot of streamlining that could be done too. Not essential stuff, mainly just things I would like for my own personal preferences and to make the receiver run more efficiently. Things such as defaulting to blind scan FTA only and not default to scan all channels, remove oscam completely, better lib's in place of some of the existing ones, etc. Bluetooth for keyboard, game controllers, quite a few things.
I myself don't like waiting a long time for updates and fixes, or, even more annoying, wanting something changed but it'll never be changed because your personal preference for whatever it is to be changed is in the minority as to the general consensus as to whether it should be changed or not. The default to blind scan all channels is a perfect example of that, every single time, I forget to scroll down to scan FTA only and end up scanning all channels.
I myself have zero interest, motivation and time to dedicate in helping get the receiver working as a fully saleable product, my interest is only my own receiver. There are others on site here however, that are light years better at this than I am who may be willing to help in that aspect of developing the receiver and it probably would speed up the process of the receivers development if it was accessible for them to work on it, I would think.
All reasonable requests are appreciated. Let's see how it goes. So far receiver does a great job, we hope to continue making it better.Time for a change of plans then, maybe?
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to be an a@@, I didn't ask for the source on a whim or to be troublesome. My receiver is working perfectly as a satellite receiver in the way I wanted it, except for the remote, which isn't software related and which can be remedied, but I've been very busy with other stuff and lazy on that.
There is however quite a few things I would like to make run better. There is also a lot of streamlining that could be done too. Not essential stuff, mainly just things I would like for my own personal preferences and to make the receiver run more efficiently. Things such as defaulting to blind scan FTA only and not default to scan all channels, remove oscam completely, better lib's in place of some of the existing ones, etc. Bluetooth for keyboard, game controllers, quite a few things.
I myself don't like waiting a long time for updates and fixes, or, even more annoying, wanting something changed but it'll never be changed because your personal preference for whatever it is to be changed is in the minority as to the general consensus as to whether it should be changed or not. The default to blind scan all channels is a perfect example of that, every single time, I forget to scroll down to scan FTA only and end up scanning all channels.
I myself have zero interest, motivation and time to dedicate in helping get the receiver working as a fully saleable product, my interest is only my own receiver. There are others on site here however, that are light years better at this than I am who may be willing to help in that aspect of developing the receiver and it probably would speed up the process of the receivers development if it was accessible for them to work on it, I would think.
It wasn't a request and your vague response isn't an answer to my original question. As far as let's see how it goes, as I've said, I don't like waiting. Yes, my receiver does do a great job now and I can make it better. I want to make it better, which is why I asked in the first place, I'd appreciate a straight answer to my original question.
With access to the source code as required by GPL, there are people here who could help bring out the best in the 3500. I see it as a 'win-win' situation.
Which -a didn't return a path for either and which make or gcc also return nothing.
- Status
Similar threads
