Phil Sumner Posted October 20, 2007 Posted October 20, 2007 What is the difference between standalone DVR and PC based DVR?Unpack both and you might find the same parts inside. Professional PC based DVR will contain selected components prepared for 24/7/365 recording. Eh? This quote is at best inaccurate. DMs kit is nothing like a PC. It doesn't use any PC components that you can buy other than a hard drive and standard connectors (USB/ethernet etc). The hardware is custom developed by AD Group and/or Chipwrights (DM and Chipwrights come under the AD umbrella), the software is developed in-house and has never been anywhere near a linux/unix/Windows OS. I know this is not true for some other DVRs, but this quote shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how/why a standalone DVR is different from a PC-based one. -- psumner@dmicros.com Manufacturer
camcrazy Posted October 20, 2007 Posted October 20, 2007 Eh? This quote is at best inaccurate. DMs kit is nothing like a PC. It doesn't use any PC components that you can buy other than a hard drive and standard connectors (USB/ethernet etc). The hardware is custom developed by AD Group and/or Chipwrights (DM and Chipwrights come under the AD umbrella), the software is developed in-house and has never been anywhere near a linux/unix/Windows OS.I know this is not true for some other DVRs, but this quote shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how/why a standalone DVR is different from a PC-based one. I hear where you are coming from but are you telling us that this means that the DM should be seen as a Stand Alone DVR first? I suppose it all depends on the defination of Stand Alone. I've worked with several of the biggest installers and a lot of the DM machines that they installed ended up on a network of some sort (mostly LAN). Does this mean you regard the machine as a Stand Alone DVR that is networked in such a situation? I know that DM has a reputation to keep up as they set certain industrie standards that some manufacturers still follow. I just think that nowadays the End Users shy away from front panel operated machines and that mouse control combined with a GUI has a preference, even over a key-pad solution. During my 17 years in the industry I've done a lot of End User Demo's. Especially the last couple of years these DEMO's have become more important with the introduction of the DVR in many shapes and sizes. The easier the operation the easier the sale I suppose.
barooga Posted October 20, 2007 Posted October 20, 2007 I hear where you are coming from but are you telling us that this means that the DM should be seen as a Stand Alone DVR first? I suppose it all depends on the defination of Stand Alone. I've worked with several of the biggest installers and a lot of the DM machines that they installed ended up on a network of some sort (mostly LAN). Does this mean you regard the machine as a Stand Alone DVR that is networked in such a situation? What does it matter?? I think what Phil is saying is that the DM units are not based on a PC framework. It is a DVR, not a PC hybrid. I know that DM has a reputation to keep up as they set certain industrie standards that some manufacturers still follow. I just think that nowadays the End Users shy away from front panel operated machines and that mouse control combined with a GUI has a preference, even over a key-pad solution. Nothing stopping you from using them that way, your only referring to the graphical front end. During my 17 years in the industry I've done a lot of End User Demo's. Especially the last couple of years these DEMO's have become more important with the introduction of the DVR in many shapes and sizes. The easier the operation the easier the sale I suppose. Err, not strictly true. Easy to use but poor performance does not equal long term sales growth. Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional
Guest Dave the alarm man Posted October 21, 2007 Posted October 21, 2007 I just think that nowadays the End Users shy away from front panel operated machines and that mouse control combined with a GUI has a preference, even over a key-pad solution. pc based machines are normally of the cheap cube type with el cheap video cards made by kids in the far east, front end software for eastern euroland..... rather than tarted up a desktop I'd look to use something built on a server with embedded OS, however changes are the IT boffin from the pub would know better & do it cheaper.......
camcrazy Posted October 21, 2007 Posted October 21, 2007 What does it matter??I think what Phil is saying is that the DM units are not based on a PC framework. It is a DVR, not a PC hybrid. Nothing stopping you from using them that way, your only referring to the graphical front end. Err, not strictly true. Easy to use but poor performance does not equal long term sales growth. What does it matter? I thought we had a great thing going on about Stand Alone or not Stand Alone and what this means. The graphical front end is what the End User uses on a daily basis. A DVR that does what is says on the box, i.e. records at 400FPS in D1 with small file sizes and with flexible storage options matters as that is what more and more End Users want. It's down to the manufacturer to select the right HDD's and other components to make the thing last. To me Stand Alone simply means installed on site, cameras connected and no LAN or WAN usage, whatever the type of DVR. "Horses for courses" I suppose.
camcrazy Posted October 21, 2007 Posted October 21, 2007 pc based machines are normally of the cheap cube type with el cheap video cards made by kids in the far east, front end software for eastern euroland..... rather than tarted up a desktop I'd look to use something built on a server with embedded OS, however changes are the IT boffin from the pub would know better & do it cheaper....... Your absolutely right Alarm man. These one day success stories never last. Anything CUBE styled should be taken of the market although the RUBIC one is making a comeback, again.
arfur mo Posted October 21, 2007 Posted October 21, 2007 When you make love, and use protection, do you use a condom, or do you use a rubber tube with the end tied in a knot and coated in oil? The latter is adapted and could be a reasonable alternative to the condom. But would you trust it? might turn it inside out and give that a go personally i think pc based system work ok for upto 8 camera's, if used for more then consideration are more likely down to decent server designed hard drives, and good reliable throughput of the mother board, placed over wizzy graphics cards designed for high end gamers. for pc based you need to devide into windows and linux o/s' as well. linux offer excellent stability and far harder to hack with little cost of the operating system, windows based you have the cost of the operating system and the natorious bugs, i like geovisions offerings which i find are very good and reliable, as long as the pc you place it into is well designed and built i've used lots of LJD's excellent Leviathans and tbh take a lot of beating until you need to use the returns proceedure - the whole lot has to go bacj to if it go's wrong and seen a few of their other kits which all seem to work ok SysetemQ' Smart DVR as a specific unit has also been very good and easy to use and good value imo if not having the features found in the windows based systems. regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!!
barooga Posted October 21, 2007 Posted October 21, 2007 To me Stand Alone simply means installed on site, cameras connected and no LAN or WAN usage, whatever the type of DVR. Hence the confusion. That is a view that may have been valid many moons ago, but no longer valid. Whilst there are reputable Units out there based on a 'pc skeleton' (for want of a better phrase) and have a deserved reputation for quality, i think the general perception of PC based systems is the one described by Dave earlier. That is, a Windows machine made to try and do a cctv job. How images are networked/aquired/transferred and viewed generally applies equally to both forms. Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional
camcrazy Posted October 21, 2007 Posted October 21, 2007 Hence the confusion.That is a view that may have been valid many moons ago, but no longer valid. Whilst there are reputable Units out there based on a 'pc skeleton' (for want of a better phrase) and have a deserved reputation for quality, i think the general perception of PC based systems is the one described by Dave earlier. That is, a Windows machine made to try and do a cctv job. How images are networked/aquired/transferred and viewed generally applies equally to both forms. I think your point of view, as that of Dave's is very clear. You still wonder how PC based machines like the Intellex managed to do so well for so many years although most manufacturers opted for the embedded route. Even LJD type distributors seem to get their share of the business. A serious PC-Based DVR is born as a DVR and not as a PC, I think we can agree on that as well. There are to many examples of so called manufacturers banging Capture Boards in to PC's running a family package on a celeron processor with insufficient RAM to do anything substantial. There is no point looking for any support as there normally is none. Are the DM machines still using the Maxtor drives or did they change to a different make?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.