|
|
Post by strindl on Apr 22, 2010 8:56:42 GMT -5
Because processors today are computers as much as an audio/video product, firmware updates will be a fact of life. How often does Windows update on your computer?
An ethernet connection sure does make things easier and more trouble free.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vespid on Apr 22, 2010 13:44:30 GMT -5
There was no before that. I owned their first DVD player, it was always upgradeable via USB stick, or with a disc in the player. The original OPPO was a 971H. I still own one. It's currently providing good service for my son. There was no provision to update through USB. The upgrade had to be done with an ISO image burned to a CD as I recall.  Oh my...could you imagine the waling and gnashing of teeth if you had to download an ISO and convert it before you could update the UMC-1? I do wish they would have figured out an economical way to integrate the loader program on/in the UMC processor so you could just flash it with a bin file loaded on usb stick. |
|
ratmice
Emo VIPs 
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Posts: 1,853
|
Post by ratmice on Apr 22, 2010 14:21:58 GMT -5
There was no before that. I owned their first DVD player, it was always upgradeable via USB stick, or with a disc in the player. The original OPPO was a 971H. I still own one. It's currently providing good service for my son. There was no provision to update through USB. The upgrade had to be done with an ISO image burned to a CD as I recall. Hmm...I'll have to go look at my 971 again, but you're probably right about the missing USB. I've had all the Oppo offerings, except the 983, so I was probably blurring them. |
|
ratmice
Emo VIPs
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Posts: 1,853
|
Post by ratmice on Apr 22, 2010 14:24:41 GMT -5
The original OPPO was a 971H. I still own one. It's currently providing good service for my son. There was no provision to update through USB. The upgrade had to be done with an ISO image burned to a CD as I recall. Oh my...could you imagine the waling and gnashing of teeth if you had to download an ISO and convert it before you could update the UMC-1? I do wish they would have figured out an economical way to integrate the loader program on/in the UMC processor so you could just flash it with a bin file loaded on usb stick. As opposed to what we have now? The burning an ISO would be a cakewalk. I dare you to find one post about problems with updating even the oldest of the Oppos, I don't remember reading about any difficulty. The instructions are easy. |
|
|
|
Post by sergeantynot on Apr 22, 2010 14:26:06 GMT -5
As one member already pointed out, adding ethernet for streaming/update features is cost prohibitive. I can only imagine the cost of reengineering the UMC platform, with the cost of adding update servers to Emo, would be astronomical to the point that the UMC would not be competitive. I would love to see this feature as home theater has matured into a DLNA enviroment. Anyone claiming they don't want ethernet access for DLNA/update purposes is delusional.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 16:43:08 GMT -5
Oh my...could you imagine the waling and gnashing of teeth if you had to download an ISO and convert it before you could update the UMC-1? I do wish they would have figured out an economical way to integrate the loader program on/in the UMC processor so you could just flash it with a bin file loaded on usb stick. As opposed to what we have now? The burning an ISO would be a cakewalk. I dare you to find one post about problems with updating even the oldest of the Oppos, I don't remember reading about any difficulty. The instructions are easy. I bet some day people will post things like, "I dare you to find me one post about a problem with an Emotiva product, ever." Or, "The transition from VHS to DVD was so much easier than this..." or, well, you get the point. It's rosy-colored glasses many in this community seem to have of the past. www.mp4nation.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=16623 |
|
ratmice
Emo VIPs
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Posts: 1,853
|
Post by ratmice on Apr 22, 2010 16:56:50 GMT -5
As opposed to what we have now? The burning an ISO would be a cakewalk. I dare you to find one post about problems with updating even the oldest of the Oppos, I don't remember reading about any difficulty. The instructions are easy. I bet some day people will post things like, "I dare you to find me one post about a problem with an Emotiva product, ever." Or, "The transition from VHS to DVD was so much easier than this..." or, well, you get the point. It's rosy-colored glasses many in this community seem to have of the past. www.mp4nation.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=16623Had to hunt for a bit for that one, didn't ya? Dude, it's an MP3 player only available (maybe?) in China, as far as I can tell. Not really the same as trying to get the ISO loaded, is it? The point is, burning an ISO and getting firmware loaded is not that hard. Unfortunately, I think getting people to forget the problems with Emos processors will be the problem, not the converse. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 17:06:53 GMT -5
I bet some day people will post things like, "I dare you to find me one post about a problem with an Emotiva product, ever." Or, "The transition from VHS to DVD was so much easier than this..." or, well, you get the point. It's rosy-colored glasses many in this community seem to have of the past. www.mp4nation.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=16623Had to hunt for a bit for that one, didn't ya? Dude, it's an MP3 player only available (maybe?) in China, as far as I can tell. Not really the same as trying to get the ISO loaded, is it? The point is, burning an ISO and getting firmware loaded is not that hard. Unfortunately, I think getting people to forget the problems with Emos processors will be the problem, not the converse. Actually, no, I didn't even read that far. I put "problem flashing my oppo" in google and it was the first result. I guess I'm just over it when it comes to the whole firmware update thing. There are better and worse processes. We will all use the same process again as we have. Those are both facts. Will we have to use it on future processors? Who knows. But I think at this point the horse is dead, beaten, resurrected, shot, undead, risen again and has moved the stone from the tomb. |
|
|
|
Post by htlover on Apr 22, 2010 17:20:29 GMT -5
Unfortunately, I think getting people to forget the problems with Emos processors will be the problem, not the converse. I agree with you completely. I think, more resources should be committed to solving these issues, as the longer it takes to get these corrected the longer the bad taste in the mouth lingers. |
|
ratmice
Emo VIPs
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Posts: 1,853
|
Post by ratmice on Apr 22, 2010 17:40:54 GMT -5
I guess I'm just over it when it comes to the whole firmware update thing. There are better and worse processes. We will all use the same process again as we have. Those are both facts. Will we have to use it on future processors? Who knows. But I think at this point the horse is dead, beaten, resurrected, shot, undead, risen again and has moved the stone from the tomb. OK, whaddaya want to talk about instead? When the new FW will be released?  As a last point, maybe the topic wouldn't have cropped up so much if the process, and possibility of corrupt uploading, wasn't trotted out as a likely reason for the UMC-1s problems. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 17:47:40 GMT -5
I guess I'm just over it when it comes to the whole firmware update thing. There are better and worse processes. We will all use the same process again as we have. Those are both facts. Will we have to use it on future processors? Who knows. But I think at this point the horse is dead, beaten, resurrected, shot, undead, risen again and has moved the stone from the tomb. OK, whaddaya want to talk about instead? When the new FW will be released? As a last point, maybe the topic wouldn't have cropped up so much if the process, and possibility of corrupt uploading, wasn't trotted out as a likely reason for the UMC-1s problems. True. It appears Emotiva thought the code was super solid, then people had immediate problems, so "obviously" the code install wasn't happening properly. It seems pretty clear that the code install is an inconsistent procedure (but one we're stuck with) and the firmware itself was, well, not super solid. We could always discuss the weather. It's rainy in Philadelphia. It would also be fun to talk about other upcoming Emotiva products, but the folks there are a bit too busy to chat with us all right now. Oh, the double-edged sword that problems present. |
|
|
|
Post by fistofsouth on Apr 22, 2010 18:07:52 GMT -5
As one member already pointed out, adding ethernet for streaming/update features is cost prohibitive. I can only imagine the cost of reengineering the UMC platform, with the cost of adding update servers to Emo, would be astronomical to the point that the UMC would not be competitive. I would love to see this feature as home theater has matured into a DLNA enviroment. Anyone claiming they don't want ethernet access for DLNA/update purposes is delusional. Astronomical? As I pointed out NIC cards are cheap particularly when purchased in bulk and grabbing a few old servers to provide updates isn't going to run that high. Granted Network capability would have needed to have been there from the get-go in order to keep costs down, but as someone that works with Networks from end to end (shh I'm at work right now) adding Wi-Fi or Ethernet capability is neither complex nor expensive. Perhaps $10 per unit, but let us say it would cost $35 even that would have cost Emo less money than the UMC-1s that get returned for updates. Since Emo pays freight both ways for firmware updates, if they charge what they pay for shipping it would cost them $40 to perform one firmware update for one client just in shipping costs. I could get you a NIC card and a beat-up old FTP server for less than $100, just using my own resources and I'm a regular Joe Blow without the benefit of economies of scale that Emotiva and their partners have. Then start adding in the costs of personnel that Emo is carrying to resolve this issue; programmers, customer service reps, shipping and receiving, honestly I believe the entire Emo family is probably drawn in by all of this. Next add in the cost of holding up assembly in China to update firmware. Then add up the loss in revenue to Emo while all of us wait for our number to come up while the firmware is updated. Then there is the incalculable loss in good will that this is costing Emotiva. Basic emergency/disaster/crisis/incident management indicates that $1 in prevention (the network interface) will eliminate $4 in damage control costs. I think Big Dan, Lonnie and the entire Emo Family have been doing a good job at damage control and even with a network connection there would still be some of that. I'm not trying to be argumentative or difficult, but I think in hindsight it would have been better and much cheaper for Emotiva and their customers if a Network connection had been included on the UMC-1 from the outset. Again this is all hindsight, I'm rooting for Emotiva and YMMV. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 18:17:26 GMT -5
fistofsouth, I appreciate the low cost of network hardware, 10/100 transceiver/phy combos can be had for cents (but not sense!). The cost of implementing it is not the hardware itself, it's the associated hardware and software. The UMC-1 is not designed to accept a network-based implementation. It would require more than just a NIC to offer updates, it would also require the implementation of some sort of centralized system control mechanism (which does not presently exist in the platform design). For that matter, were such a mechanism implemented, we actually wouldn't have as many issues with the current method. It still comes back to cost, and the cost would be much, much higher than you might expect.
|
|
|
|
Post by fistofsouth on Apr 22, 2010 18:33:31 GMT -5
fistofsouth, I appreciate the low cost of network hardware, 10/100 transceiver/phy combos can be had for cents (but not sense!). The cost of implementing it is not the hardware itself, it's the associated hardware and software. The UMC-1 is not designed to accept a network-based implementation. It would require more than just a NIC to offer updates, it would also require the implementation of some sort of centralized system control mechanism (which does not presently exist in the platform design). For that matter, were such a mechanism implemented, we actually wouldn't have as many issues with the current method. It still comes back to cost, and the cost would be much, much higher than you might expect. I know there are additional complexities involved that is why I specified that it must have been included from the get-go to keep costs down. This is all a what-if scenario at this point, but we are not discussing something that would have run into the hundreds per unit we are talking about a few bucks, perhaps double digits per unit, but probably still less than the current update process has cost Emo. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 18:38:30 GMT -5
fistofsouth, I appreciate the low cost of network hardware, 10/100 transceiver/phy combos can be had for cents (but not sense!). The cost of implementing it is not the hardware itself, it's the associated hardware and software. The UMC-1 is not designed to accept a network-based implementation. It would require more than just a NIC to offer updates, it would also require the implementation of some sort of centralized system control mechanism (which does not presently exist in the platform design). For that matter, were such a mechanism implemented, we actually wouldn't have as many issues with the current method. It still comes back to cost, and the cost would be much, much higher than you might expect. I know there are additional complexities involved that is why I specified that it must have been included from the get-go to keep costs down. This is all a what-if scenario at this point, but we are not discussing something that would have run into the hundreds per unit we are talking about a few bucks, perhaps double digits per unit, but probably still less than the current update process has cost Emo. Actually, the cost is in the range of $200+ per unit. |
|
|
|
Post by fistofsouth on Apr 22, 2010 19:00:40 GMT -5
Actually, the cost is in the range of $200+ per unit. Where may I ask do those numbers come from? |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 19:15:36 GMT -5
Actually, the cost is in the range of $200+ per unit. Where may I ask do those numbers come from? I'm so glad you asked. ;D The same place anyone's numbers come from. You look at what would have to be done, and make something up. Of course, I'm basing it off of the fact that the UMC-1 is already underpriced. If you added the cost of developing an entirely new platform, it goes way up. When I say entirely new, I mean that even if Emotiva had decided to do this from day one, they would have had to have put in everything there is now, plus additional components and additional development. If all of that had to be amortized over such a low-margin product in its first iteration, I cannot possibly see how it wouldn't be at LEAST $200 per unit. The way the UMC-1 is designed today, there isn't anything in it that would "come out" if we "put in" the networking, so you have UMC-1 + networking + functionality to enable the networking. That "enabling functionality" is what I call an entirely new platform. There is no existing platform, hence the issues with the updating that we have now; it has to be externally controlled. Adding the network update capability is building an entire control platfrom into the unit, from scratch. That isn't $50/unit. |
|
|
|
Post by fistofsouth on Apr 22, 2010 19:30:31 GMT -5
Where may I ask do those numbers come from? I'm so glad you asked. ;D The same place anyone's numbers come from. You look at what would have to be done, and make something up. Of course, I'm basing it off of the fact that the UMC-1 is already underpriced. If you added the cost of developing an entirely new platform, it goes way up. When I say entirely new, I mean that even if Emotiva had decided to do this from day one, they would have had to have put in everything there is now, plus additional components and additional development. If all of that had to be amortized over such a low-margin product in its first iteration, I cannot possibly see how it wouldn't be at LEAST $200 per unit. The way the UMC-1 is designed today, there isn't anything in it that would "come out" if we "put in" the networking, so you have UMC-1 + networking + functionality to enable the networking. That "enabling functionality" is what I call an entirely new platform. There is no existing platform, hence the issues with the updating that we have now; it has to be externally controlled. Adding the network update capability is building an entire control platfrom into the unit, from scratch. That isn't $50/unit. It is probably less than $50 per unit. The XMC-1 is $300 more and in addition to Network compatibility (including MUCH more than just FW updates, which is all I indicated) you can add the following over the UMC-1 THX Ultra II Certification Balanced (XLR) outputs x 7 Balanced (XLR) inputs x 2 Headphone Output Phone Input 3 more HDMI inputs So you would have us believe that all of those features, including the high-grade analog pass through via XLRs and all the additional hardware that involves costs Emo only $100, but just the Network Update Option would cost $200? Allllllllllrighty then. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 20:59:46 GMT -5
I'm so glad you asked. ;D The same place anyone's numbers come from. You look at what would have to be done, and make something up. Of course, I'm basing it off of the fact that the UMC-1 is already underpriced. If you added the cost of developing an entirely new platform, it goes way up. When I say entirely new, I mean that even if Emotiva had decided to do this from day one, they would have had to have put in everything there is now, plus additional components and additional development. If all of that had to be amortized over such a low-margin product in its first iteration, I cannot possibly see how it wouldn't be at LEAST $200 per unit. The way the UMC-1 is designed today, there isn't anything in it that would "come out" if we "put in" the networking, so you have UMC-1 + networking + functionality to enable the networking. That "enabling functionality" is what I call an entirely new platform. There is no existing platform, hence the issues with the updating that we have now; it has to be externally controlled. Adding the network update capability is building an entire control platfrom into the unit, from scratch. That isn't $50/unit. It is probably less than $50 per unit. The XMC-1 is $300 more and in addition to Network compatibility (including MUCH more than just FW updates, which is all I indicated) you can add the following over the UMC-1 THX Ultra II Certification Balanced (XLR) outputs x 7 Balanced (XLR) inputs x 2 Headphone Output Phone Input 3 more HDMI inputs So you would have us believe that all of those features, including the high-grade analog pass through via XLRs and all the additional hardware that involves costs Emo only $100, but just the Network Update Option would cost $200? Allllllllllrighty then. How's about this, if the XMC-1 is released with regular pricing (not early adopter) at $999, I'll buy you one. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 21:01:19 GMT -5
I was just being safe with that. I have 0% confidence even preorders will get it for $999. I fully expect the XMC-1 to come in at a very bare minimum of $1299.
|
|
