Serviio

I have read a article "Why do I hate DLNA protocol so much"
http://gxben.wordpress.com/2008/08/24/w ... l-so-much/

It states, that DLNA's major flaw is that it has serious restrictions. For example it does not allow AVI container.

I then realized that this design might have sense. Basically it moves compatibility pressure to the software side?

Maybe without the restrictions the hardware would be required to contain many crappy parts to support all kinds of containers, etc. There would be boxes for $500 that would play MPEG, and for $1000 that would play WMV10, and for $2000 that would play all formats. And there maybe would be no pressure on server developers. Media streaming would become exclusive? "Oh, he has HT that plays AVI and WMV10, he must be rich!"

With DLNA today, we can see the DLNA logo on any crappy hardware. They are simply compatible. And we are simply waiting for a server, that will do the damn transcoding
right?

Regards,
Turnig

This article is very old 2008/08/24....between there were new Samsung/Sony Tv ... and....Serviio !!

lol i seconnd what illico said but there is no waiting and DLNA DOES support AVI containers amoung many others, as for transcoding that what we have serviio for.

Only mpeg2 is required. You are right, the cost oh other codecs might be too much for some manufacturers. Avi is not in dlna spec, the fact its playable on many devices is up to them and is just upnp based.