Is any of this true?

At another forum, someone is making some negative comments about using Serviio with WDTV Live. I don't agree. I always have excellent results with Serviio on both WDTV and my Samsung devices.

Here's the comment:
-------
"There is NO reason to use serviio with WD, you get worse results, worse video, less transport control. That is an objective fact.

And it isn't just me. on several threads you keep recommending serviio with WDTV and people with knowledge besides myself have pointed out there is NO reason, and you just get WORSE video than WD native.

Go to avsforums and say you are using serviio with WD -- the experts will say: WTF!?!

What is your reason for using servio on a WD, and thereby losing quality, features and transport control defteness, I am dying to hear it! The only people I know doing it are people who dont know how teh basics of to set up their network"
-------

Personally, I get equal results in both video quality and streaming performance. I've played 20Mbps 1080p videos using both Serviio and Network Shares over wireless-n with a WDTV LIve Streaming Media Player. No matter what method I use, playback is perfectly smooth and the picture looks identical to me.

I'm asking because this guy is beginning to attack several people and I'm really getting tired of his comments. Is there any chance that what he's saying is true (even though I truly don't notice any quality, speed or functionality loss)?

[Cerberus]

id love to know were the comment was as he clearly flaming us and giving out false information, serviio works perfectly with WD live and even allows the playing of files that can not be played via a network share. so yes what he is saying is completely untrue.

I am dying to hear it! The only people I know doing it are people who dont know how teh basics of to set up their network

i love that statement other than not bein very good english, i personally know exactly how to setup a network as its my job LOLOL

id love to know were the comment was as he clearly flaming us and giving out false information, serviio works perfectly with WD live and even allows the playing of files that can not be played via a network share. so yes what he is saying is completely untrue.

I am dying to hear it! The only people I know doing it are people who dont know how teh basics of to set up their network

i love that statement other than not bein very good english, i personally know exactly how to setup a network as its my job LOLOL

Here's a link to a page in the forum. You may have to register, I don't know.

http://nzbmatrix.com/forums.php?action=viewtopic&topicid=46105&page=3

For some reason these guys think WDTV has to do double work when you use Serviio. I didn't write Serviio, but it doesn't make sense. I'm thinking Serviio just sends binary data over a port, just like Windows does over a Network Share.

[Cerberus]

id love to know were the comment was as he clearly flaming us and giving out false information, serviio works perfectly with WD live and even allows the playing of files that can not be played via a network share. so yes what he is saying is completely untrue.

I am dying to hear it! The only people I know doing it are people who dont know how teh basics of to set up their network

i love that statement other than not bein very good english, i personally know exactly how to setup a network as its my job LOLOL

Here's a link to a page in the forum. You may have to register, I don't know.

http://nzbmatrix.com/forums.php?action=viewtopic&topicid=46105&page=3

For some reason these guys think WDTV has to do double work when you use Serviio. I didn't write Serviio, but it doesn't make sense. I'm thinking Serviio just sends binary data over a port, just like Windows does over a Network Share.

he clearly hasnt got a clue how DLNA or serviio work.

[will]

I think he is saying that because WDTV can stream from network shares on its own then there is no point using serviio. At a basic level that is correct, there may also be some badly constructed files that are incorrectly regognised and transcoded by serviio when they shouldn't, but I would imagine they would be rare. Anyway, there are lots of very useful features that make it worth while to use serviio over streaming from a network share.

1) Serviio can organise all you media and create a nice virtual folder structure
2) Serviio supports online sources with comunity written plugins for lots of sites
3) Any files that do not need to be transcoded won't be (unless they are very obscure), so not much diffrence to the player, but any files that does need to be transcoded will be, which means they can play
4) If you use serviio on other devices in your house, then the last played markers will be carried between devices, other views such as last added can be very useful I find

[zip]

Quality is the same as WDTV hardly transcodes anything. Not sure what he means by transpostation options, I'm guessing ffwd/rew and I cannot comment on that as I don't have the device and cannot confirm if it's supported via DLNA for the device.

[NX3]

hilarious trolling post on nzbmatrix. avsforums is a US based forum, while popular plenty of good forums and people out their recommending Serviio. I run Serviio with a WDTV amongst other device, all works great, no transcoding and a great compliment even with a full on media player plus adds online streams like iPlayer or 4oD to a media box.

I have two WDTV Live boxes, and run Serviio on an iMac. Have not had any problems with any of the 300+ movies that I have on it except for one mkv file that was created by merging two m4v files together. It will play on the WDTV live box if mounted directly, but I have another post regarding this issue.

Overall, no issues at all, have not seen any quality or performance issues. Sounds to me like this guy just likes to complain.....

[WildRushSykes]

God i love trolls