Alastair Morrison was stumped; his Iomega NAS sent MP3 files to be played on a Sony Bravia TV, and they stuttered to a halt after a few seconds, yet both devices were DLNA-compliant. The Digital Living Network Alliance (DLNA) is an industry body concerned to develop standards to enable storage devices and playing devices to …
I guess they need something like the Bluetooth Unpluggedfest - bring together lots of engineers from all manufacturers to try all their devices with each other, and debug issues on the fly. Probably one of the reasons why bluetooth generally works pretty well (although there are exceptions).
Blue man with bluetooth...
Not just Iomega...
There's a long thread at http://www.readynas.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=24546 where at least Netgear and Buffalo devices are reported as not working with the KDL40W4500.
The most illuminating comment seems to be at the end where there's discussion as to the same NAS devices working with a PS3 and the comment Sony apparently makes as to this disparity...
I must say that this has put me off purchasing a Sony LCD - the 40W4500 was previously at the top of my list...
Yet more proof that the old adage holds true:
Never buy version 1 of anything.
X.400 once more.
X.400 failed because everyone implemented differing, incompatible subsets of the standard but they all passed the relevant subsets of the interoperability tests and that was enough to certify the product as compliant.
Kudos to the drive manuf for pulling out the stops in trying to diagnose the problem.
I am amazed that Sony did not even respond - they must realise that by ignoring the issue only fuels the tinfoil hat brigade.
Having said this, I suspect the TV will only talk to other Sony products or products that implement the specific subset of the standard that Sony have decided to implement. Once more the certification process will allow products that implement different incompatible subsets of the standard - allowing the big manufs to get away with being standards compliant and incompatible with cheaper products at the same time.
I am afraid this is how the standards process works.
The general rule seems to be don't buy Sony unless everything you own is Sony.
Not good enough
A bit obvious to say, but this is just not good enough.
If the DLNA organisation are running a compliance program and they are (via the manufacturers) sticking "DLNA compatible" stickers (or whatever it is they do) on stuff then THEY (the DLNA organisation) should take responsibility for this. It's mis-selling which is a basic breach of sales-of-goods rules in most of the world.
The industry does not get it
All we want/need is TCP/IP+SMB awareness.
All the necessary files for our digital entertainment nowadays get into our homes through the computer.
Being it Linux, Mac or Windows they all talk SMB, dammit even most if not all home NAS and multimedia boxes out there talk SMB.
And having a wonderfull free open sauce implementation of SMB called SAMBA, why the Fcuk do the likes of sony or iomegas of the world have to keep inventing new stupid standards every year to interoperate computer-related equipment.
Compliance testing is not interoperability testing
Any fule doth know that.
Especially any olde fule (like me) wot is olde enough to remember the early days of OSI networking (MAP, and TOP, and all that). Say mid 1980s, for the younger readers here.
You could happily connect two "certified conforming" app+network stacks together with a very reasonable probability that they wouldn't actually interoperate in any meaningful way.
Fortunately (?) this kind of problem applies to various kinds of mixed networks, not just OSI ones.
Those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it (or summat like that).
ah yes, standards
This is the problem with these silly open standards, it's the same with web standards. Things were much better when the dominant player on the market sets the standard and everyone else just tows the line. As soon as you have everyone trying to work to documentation you have a problem because badly drafted standards lead to a wealth of differing interpretations which result in little interoperability.
During the browser wars the losers were the ones that worked to the spec while the winners were the ones that made their stuff work with IE. In this case if one vendor set the standard and everyone else followed suit they would make sure that their kit was interoperable and there would be no finger pointing.
PS3 not talking to Lacie either
When my housemate had a PS3, it would only see some music and the images on my Lacie 1TB NAS. Almost none of the movie files would play. The same movies being served via a Windows box to the PS3 were fine. The Sony PS3 would also only see some of the content being served up by the various versions of iTunes on the network. I blame Sony - in fact, I blame Sony for most of the world's ills...
Pile of stinking dingo's kidneys
From bitter experience I would say that at best DNLA support is pants.
I've struggled to get Windows Media Player to consistently talk to my PS3, and likewise with Google's media server. Timeouts, missing media, a whole host of problems.
The only product that's actually worked for me is 'PS3 Media Server' which despite it's name, isn't just for the PS3, and it's a one man and his dog outfit that seems to actually know how to write software.
For you penguins
Check out mediatomb and ushare as alternatives to twonky that seem to work just fine.
I've had both running on my NSLU2 and supplying music and video to PS3 (and with ushare, the xbox 360) just fine.
Sony and DLNA
Not suprised another Sony device is having DLNA issues. The PS3 is a pretty poor DLNA device. Recent firmwares have really broken the buffering on slower networks.
Xbox is slightly better, but won't support streaming MPEG2 from a NAS, without transcoding.
DLNA really need to sort out compatability between DLNA devices, codecs supported, network streaming tolerances and DLNA servers otherwise it will die and be replaced by proprietary formats.
SMB? Pull the other one it's got a vulnerability on it.
Seriously though, SMB is proprietary and MS will not provide documentation. Sure things like SAMBA will work with it (up to a point) but there is no guarantee they will work with future versions because MS could change the protocol. The industry is quite right to avoid using a proprietory technology for which they would need to pay license fees.
I'm sure MS would love to have the oportunity to insist on a Windows client license for every home media device. I am equally sure that buyers would object to paying the license fee.
Interconnectivity standards must by definition be open and vendor agnostic. Their management must also be completely independent of any single vendor.
Speaking of which it appears that there's one manufacturer here who are playing fast and loose with DNLA compliance in order to try to up their market share. And I would expect no less of them, lovely people that they are with history of caring and sharing. Ahem.
Mediatomb et al
I always have problems with mediatomb and mp3s. Try fuppes. I prefer it. Tversity used to be okey on windoze but every ps3 update seemed to break it.
I 2nd the need for a SMB protocol built into the PS3. The old hacked XBOXs used to do this, and they would unRAR files on the fly.
I guess installing Linux + SAMBA on the PS3 is a simple solution to all my woes. (but i cannot be arsed)
IOMEGA not certified
First off I am a BIG DLNA supporter. The certification process is not perfect but they are continually making improvements; not all certified products can be tested against all other certified products. The use of DLNA certified products is not a guarantee that they will interoperate but that there is a much stronger likely hood that they will versus using any two other products that have not passed certification; just as this case proves. The Iomega is not certified and the DLNA does not allow products to use the term compliant or compatible just for such reasons. Oh and by the way UPnP is part of the DLNA product requirements, not a different one.
ummm the store I was in earler today looking at the W4500 had a buffaloe router, NAS and ethernet adaptor all plugged into a W4500 and it all streamed fine. they had the Sony NAS drive too also worked fine. so not just needing Sony stuff
Could it be that someone's just not set it up right? or putting file that the TV can't understand?
Just a thought but hey dam me for not hating a company just cos they've made a few mistakes (but a few more positives)
Guffaw guffaw, said the AppleTV owner. Not perfect, but quite resilient.
PS3 DLNA OK
My ps3 has been working with DLNA through tversity on my pc for ages and ive never had a problem. In fact its been so good at transcoding on the fly ive stoped using discs altogether. Now everyone i know how has a ps3 has tversity installed on there pc and it works seemlessly. whether its transcoding strange codecs on the fly or streaming rss feeds direct from the web or just playin mp3's or jpegs. I have tried tversity with the xbox and it worked, but the gui on the xbox is just so unfriendly i gave it back. Well done sony and well done TVersity.
- Batten down the hatches, Ubuntu 14.04 LTS due in TWO DAYS
- FOUR DAYS: That's how long it took to crack Galaxy S5 fingerscanner
- Did a date calculation bug just cost hard-up Co-op Bank £110m?
- Feast your PUNY eyes on highest resolution phone display EVER
- Wall St's DROOLING as Twitter GULPS DOWN analytics firm Gnip