On another site Emby vs. Plex lively discussion.

[Deathsquirrel 741]

I would love to see a two-tiered product. The $120 version for those who don’t care about quality. A $500 version for those of us who do.

 

Maybe even create a Raspberry Pi hardware solution that could sell for $250 that takes full advantage of all capabilities.

 

Removing power-user features is just a bad idea. Let the user choose. Charge more to unlock higher end features. Stop leaving money on the table for a feature that existed.

 

I would absolutely hate to see this.  It isn't how Emby has historically done business.  It would offend the crap out of much of the user base.  Most importantly, we would never agree on what constitutes an advanced feature.  Nothing good comes of this suggestion, IMO.

 

If I were king of Emby I'd probably reduce what is given away in the free version, but I wouldn't split my userbase among basic and advanced paid users unless I switched to a purely subscription licensing model.  Even then I couldn't justify charging more for audio bitstreaming.

 

[sze 3]

Hi,

 

I also own both (Plex and Emby). The UI is quit different but both are not bad. There is always room for improvement. The reason why I switch from Plex to Emby are:

1. Separate section for audio books (which doesn't work good, but that is a different topic)

2. and that is the main reason, the plex server was always busy. there was a lot of background processes that reduce the performance. I opened 2 times a ticket but that never resolve the problem. With emby I don't have things like this. I have tasks that generates loads, but if they don't run, the machine have no load. So I can configure the task to run at a time I don't use that machine.

 

Overall Emby is not overloaded like Plex and do only thinks that I want the machine do it.

 

 

Here is a small picture from the load. This machine runs Emby, Roon and Logitech media Server on a openmediavault system. I really good combination from my point of view.

 

 

[thrillcat 12]

I would absolutely hate to see this. It isn't how Emby has historically done business. It would offend the crap out of much of the user base. Most importantly, we would never agree on what constitutes an advanced feature. Nothing good comes of this suggestion, IMO.

 

If I were king of Emby I'd probably reduce what is given away in the free version, but I wouldn't split my userbase among basic and advanced paid users unless I switched to a purely subscription licensing model. Even then I couldn't justify charging more for audio bitstreaming.

 

And yet right there, we can agree on at least one “advanced feature”. [emoji2371]

 

I’m very happy with Emby. I prefer AppleTV but I understand they’ve hobbled it for third party devs.

 

Emby on my Nvidia Shield in the theater is very good. It offers everything I need.

 

I’m going to keep PLEX running as my DVR until Emby is able to implement a few more features on that side of things. The AppleTV app is not great, but not terrible. I use it upstairs in the non-theater. The live TV guide is weak. But I dvr everything with PLEX, so no biggie.

 

I’d love to use the AppleTV as my only device in the theater, but the Emby app is lacking, for all the same reasons as every PLEX, infuse, et all apps are. And maybe a couple other items.

 

For the most part it’s just as good as the alternatives. But their support listens to users, hopefully ALL users, so I feel like there’s more of a chance that it could become the powerful app that every home theater enthusiast is dying to find. There isn’t yet one perfect app. Each seems to do 1 or 2 things that others don’t, but miss something else.

 

Like I said, I get it. There are inherent problems on the ATV platform. But when you’ve done the work to add a capability, don’t remove it because some people complain. Make it optional. A setting users can toggle based on what they want.

 

And seriously, give consideration to creating a higher level tool for power users. Build a powerhouse, and let features trickle down do the more universal version, for the people who like to see that light pop on so it sounds better.

 

Don’t sleep on the high end market. Fewer sales at a higher price is not a bad thing, because you don’t have to give up any sales of a lower-tiered product at a lower price point to do it.

 

Don’t ignore the users who want the highest quality even if a certain blinky doesn’t blink. There are those of us who don’t even keep those blinkys in the same room as our screen. We want a solid interface and as many high performance options and features as we can get.

 

Become the server/client version of the Shield.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[vdatanet 1549]

I’d love to use the AppleTV as my only device in the theater, but the Emby app is lacking, for all the same reasons as every PLEX, infuse, et all apps are. And maybe a couple other items.

 

I like Emby's UI for Apple TV. It is consistent with the rest of Emby applications and it's getting more polished. The difference with Plex is the player. Plex using the native player uses HLS fMP4 streams, allowing HEVC direct stream and the MPV player is much more advanced. The differences in Live TV are also evident. In my opinion, if Emby for Apple TV had a better player, new unhappy Plex users would be attracted. It is simply an opinion, not a market study.

[BAlGaInTl 279]

@@thrillcat

 

This isn't meant to be adversarial, so please don't take it the wrong way...

 

You speak of home theater power users and those who will spend big $$ on getting the best of everything.  You've proposed a tiring of the application pricing for those users with more features.

 

In the mean time, for some reason, you are stuck on using ATV (a fine media device I'm sure) as your preferred streaming device... A device which is really not a high end, audiophile, home theater power user, device.  It's meant for basic streaming from the internet of content that Apple approves or creates.  

 

It is Apple that really has created this deficiency that you associate with Emby.  Have you reached out to Apple to ask why they produce a device that fails to support bit-streaming of formats that true power users want?  What about trying to convince them that they should build a media streaming device that would meet all the needs of the true home theater power user?

 

If for a moment, you could get their ear, the same answer would be given.  That's not what the market wants.  They have produced a device for the masses, not for the niche home theater power user market.

 

So how can we expect Emby to suddenly have more resources than a media bohemoth like Apple?

 

The Emby team is constantly working on a LOT of improvements to both the server and all the apps.  Those improvements have to be prioritized and balanced based on what the customers (masses) want, and what is technically feasible.

[vdatanet 1549]

@@thrillcat

 

It is Apple that really has created this deficiency that you associate with Emby.  Have you reached out to Apple to ask why they produce a device that fails to support bit-streaming of formats that true power users want?  What about trying to convince them that they should build a media streaming device that would meet all the needs of the true home theater power user?

 

It is true that Apple TV has many limitations as a local media player, it's very oriented to VOD content providers. But Emby doesn't do everything Apple TV could do. I recognize that it is very expensive to develop an alternative player like MPV, but Emby should support HLS H265 streams for the native player, that's a basic feature for a media server.

 

I am sorry to be boring with HLS H265 streams issue, but as Emby for the Apple TV beta tester, I am obliged to insist on all related topics. 

Edited January 23, 2020 by vdatanet

[Dibbes 431]

It is true that Apple TV has many limitations as a local media player, it's very oriented to VOD content providers. But Emby doesn't do everything Apple TV could do. I recognize that it is very expensive to develop an alternative player like MPV, but Emby should support HLS H265 streams for the native player, that's a basic feature for a media server.

 

I am sorry to be boring with HLS H265 streams issue, but as Emby for the Apple TV beta tester, I am obliged to insist on all related topics. 

 

Especially the H265 that you really feel very strongly about... ;-)

 

You're right though. Unfortunately Apple has a history of trying to lock users in the Apple universe, this ever since they started offering cloud services. They even tried (and failed) to corner the market for SIM cards a few years back. It's something I really have a very strong dislike for and the main reason I didn't renew iPads, iPhoneys and other Apple hardware. Emby was the last reason I still had an up to date Apple product, which was the Apple TV, now though, I have the feeling Apple is going to lock that thing down even more whenever the Apple VOD services grow... I don't think they will open up their products for as long as they can get away with this way of working. Though it was a nice thing that Apple had to present lower figures because of lacking iPhoney sales for 19Q4.

[thrillcat 12]

@@thrillcat

 

This isn't meant to be adversarial, so please don't take it the wrong way...

 

You speak of home theater power users and those who will spend big $$ on getting the best of everything. You've proposed a tiring of the application pricing for those users with more features.

 

In the mean time, for some reason, you are stuck on using ATV (a fine media device I'm sure) as your preferred streaming device... A device which is really not a high end, audiophile, home theater power user, device. It's meant for basic streaming from the internet of content that Apple approves or creates.

 

It is Apple that really has created this deficiency that you associate with Emby. Have you reached out to Apple to ask why they produce a device that fails to support bit-streaming of formats that true power users want? What about trying to convince them that they should build a media streaming device that would meet all the needs of the true home theater power user?

 

If for a moment, you could get their ear, the same answer would be given. That's not what the market wants. They have produced a device for the masses, not for the niche home theater power user market.

 

So how can we expect Emby to suddenly have more resources than a media bohemoth like Apple?

 

The Emby team is constantly working on a LOT of improvements to both the server and all the apps. Those improvements have to be prioritized and balanced based on what the customers (masses) want, and what is technically feasible.

Except for the fact that I specifically said I’m using Emby on a Shield in my theater for performance reasons, you aren’t wrong.

 

I prefer the AppleTV overall experience. It’s a really slick device. It incorporates well into my Apple ecosystem here, and does a fantastic job for Netflix, Amazon Prime, and of course iTunes.

 

I prefer the AppleTV remote, and especially the fact that my Harmony Elite works seamlessly with it, whereas I had to perform a Hotfix on the Shield last fall to fix an audio issue, which broke the link with my Harmony and will not re-pair. Nvidia’s solution is to buy a new Shield. Not ideal.

 

I acknowledged that they’ve hobbled AppleTV for most third party devs, and that at the moment the Shield is the most capable theater device, which is why I use it there. However Emby has not fully implemented what is capable on the AppleTV, and other features that they tried out were later removed because there are more people who’d rather have inferior audio to make all their flashy lights flashy. This one thing is why I got wrapped up in this stupid conversation in the first place. Why remove a higher quality feature for no other reason than user misperception? Don’t remove it. Add a toggle in the settings. Give the user choices. Don’t throw out your hard work because most users are more concerned with flashy lights than audio quality.

 

And yes, I frequently reach out to Apple to suggest they allow more flexibility in third party apps, such as Emby. And to say it’s only there to allow access to content Apple creates is just laughable. Tell that to basically every streaming service provider from ABC to Amazon to Disney to Netflix to Sling and beyond.

 

Upstairs, where I just have the 65” QLED, I use an AppleTV. It’s just a better solution in that situation. Unfortunately that is where most of my live TV viewing occurs, and the Emby AppleTV app, while fine for accessing my library, is lacking for LiveTV use.

 

So aside from the fact that you honed in on one aspect of my posts and seemingly ignored everything else I said, sure. Spot on.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spaceboy 2493]

Is there any way we can have a sensible discussion about this without the pathetic fanboy isms? Iphoney? Grow up

[BAlGaInTl 279]

And to say it’s only there to allow access to content Apple creates is just laughable. Tell that to basically every streaming service provider from ABC to Amazon to Disney to Netflix to Sling and beyond.

 

I think you misinterpreted my statement.  

 

 

 

It's meant for basic streaming from the internet of content that Apple approves or creates.

 

So to clarify what I meant in that statement:

 

- It's designed for "internet" playback, not for the playback of local/personal media.  Precisely the types of services that you mentioned.

- Apple approves all of the apps and streaming services that can be on its devices.  I'm quite sure that they must be able to provide streams compatible with the device, and most likely pay Apple handsomely, especially if they also use Apple's subscriptions within an app. There's nothing wrong with that business model, so I'm not knocking that.

- Apple creates its own media and services that it would very much like to promote over other services. 

 

 

So there were really three parts to that statement.  I wasn't trying to imply that Apple only allowed (or wanted to) access to Apple created content.

[Dibbes 431]

Is there any way we can have a sensible discussion about this without the pathetic fanboy isms? Iphoney? Grow up

 

Sure, we can have a sensible discussion, though that is going to be difficult if you start throwing words around like "pathetic". and no, I'm not a fanboy of anything.

 

I'm just seriously unhappy and disillusioned with Apple making people spend top money and then limiting them to try to make them spend even more money. Apple TV could (and should be) be a great device and it is if you only use Apple and spend your coin with Apple... as soon as you try to step outside of the Apple environment, you find you're being caged. Not even mentioning the blocking of trying to repair any the devices you paid for and then, what's worse, there are people not affiliated to Apple in any way, defending these practices... Cracking the screen of your iPhoney (oops, I'm such a pathetic child!) after 1 year and a month, a device you paid more than a 1000 Euro for, and you either pay lots of money to get it fixed. So yes, I'm seriously unhappy with Apple... 

[Spaceboy 2493]

Sure, we can have a sensible discussion, though that is going to be difficult if you start throwing words around like "pathetic". and no, I'm not a fanboy of anything.

 

I'm just seriously unhappy and disillusioned with Apple making people spend top money and then limiting them to try to make them spend even more money. Apple TV could (and should be) be a great device and it is if you only use Apple and spend your coin with Apple... as soon as you try to step outside of the Apple environment, you find you're being caged. Not even mentioning the blocking of trying to repair any the devices you paid for and then, what's worse, there are people not affiliated to Apple in any way, defending these practices... Cracking the screen of your iPhoney (oops, I'm such a pathetic child!) after 1 year and a month, a device you paid more than a 1000 Euro for, and you either pay lots of money to get it fixed. So yes, I'm seriously unhappy with Apple...

blah blah fanboy blah

 

Grow up

[Dibbes 431]

blah blah fanboy blah

 

Grow up

 

 

[Spaceboy 2493]

most sensible thing you’ve contributed to this thread so far

[Dibbes 431]

most sensible thing you’ve contributed to this thread so far

 

and it still topped yours... wow, I'm so impressed 

[Spaceboy 2493]

and it still topped yours... wow, I'm so impressed

funny that, there’s zero likes on your fanboy posts

[Dibbes 431]

funny that, there’s zero likes on your fanboy posts

 

Mate, this isn't going anywhere... have a good one and enjoy yourself 

[Spaceboy 2493]

Mate, this isn't going anywhere... have a good one and enjoy yourself

the whole thread thanks you

 

[emoji120] as you like your emojis so much

[thrillcat 12]

after 1 year and a month, a device you paid more than a 1000 Euro for, and you either pay lots of money to get it fixed...

I can’t believe Land Rover won’t replace the cracked windshield on my 2012 Range Rover with 140,000 miles for free. What a terrible way of doing business.

 

You damage your stuff, you pay to fix it. That’s how commerce works.

 

If you can’t afford to fix it, don’t break it, or buy something else.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TeamB 2352]

this forum needs a dislike button

[Dibbes 431]

I can’t believe Land Rover won’t replace the cracked windshield on my 2012 Range Rover with 140,000 miles for free. What a terrible way of doing business.

 

You damage your stuff, you pay to fix it. That’s how commerce works.

 

If you can’t afford to fix it, don’t break it, or buy something else.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I agree! and that is not at all what I'm suggesting. I break it and I don't want to throw it out, I pay to repair it or for parts if I can do it myself. With my Landrover I can go to Car-Glass (a European wide chain, not sure if you have it in the USA) and get the windshield fixed or replaced. Also Landrover is not forcing me to buy the car battery from them if I need a new one and get it replaced by them even if I have the tools and know-how to replace the battery myself. Imagine BMW would now force you to fuel up with a nozzle that you can only buy from BMW at 3 times the price a standard nozzle would go for. If you'd use another nozzle, even if the car is only a day old, you'd lose warranty directly. You´d still be happy with your BMW?

Edited January 24, 2020 by Dibbes

[thrillcat 12]

I agree! and that is not at all what I'm suggesting. I break it and I don't want to throw it out, I pay to repair it or for parts if I can do it myself. With my Landrover I can go to Car-Glass (a European wide chain, not sure if you have it in the USA) and get the windshield fixed or replaced. Also Landrover is not forcing me to buy the car battery from them if I need a new one and get it replaced by them even if I have the tools and know-how to replace the battery myself. Imagine BMW would now force you to fuel up with a nozzle that you can only buy from BMW at 3 times the price a standard nozzle would go for. If you'd use another nozzle, even if the car is only a day old, you'd lose warranty directly. You´d still be happy with your BMW?

I’d love it if BMW charged me the cost of a new nozzle, gave me an entirely new BMW and then took my “broken” BMW and sent it back to the factory, fixed it, and sold it to someone else at a discount, which is what Apple does when you have them replace a screen. Or you could take it to a BMW mechanic and they’ll fix it cheaper.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited January 24, 2020 by thrillcat

[jachin99 82]

On the topic of "high end", i think jriver is comparable to something like kaleidescope minus the movie store and costs about sixty bucks. It also runs as either a client, a server, or both at the same time. They were even open to partnering with related companies a while back and the P word came up. It seems like there is something to be gained from emby users seeking a high quality video player and there might be something to be gained by jriver users in terms of a simplified server setup. Something like emby for jriver might make some users happy. A third party would probably have to write it so I wouldn't hold my breath but is an idea.

[thrillcat 12]

On the topic of "high end", i think jriver is comparable to something like kaleidescope minus the movie store and costs about sixty bucks. It also runs as either a client, a server, or both at the same time. They were even open to partnering with related companies a while back and the P word came up. It seems like there is something to be gained from emby users seeking a high quality video player and there might be something to be gained by jriver users in terms of a simplified server setup. Something like emby for jriver might make some users happy. A third party would probably have to write it so I wouldn't hold my breath but is an idea.

J River is what initially made me consider ripping my collection. A couple friends use it in their 6-figure theaters, however I’ve never been in their rooms and had it work smoothly, without rebooting, or they are waiting for an update to add a feature, or something isn’t working right, or we just accidentally watched the first 15 minutes in HD instead of UHD, or whatever. Seems to be less than perfect, but I agree there could be a lot to gain by integrating the two.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mark Norville 0]

Why not start my first post with opening my mouth, I am a star at that.

 

I came into home cinema software with mediaportal, I then found Kodi or XBMC as it was back then, I then found Plex and in 2020 I finally find Emby.

 

Mediaportal was difficult to set up, I was having to have my directories based on the IMDB number for that movie. I gave up on it when I found Kodi

 

Kodi, a breeze to set up, however always changing direction although with the latest releases they are aiming at more uniform functionality. However, that seems a bit late in the day, people start skins and end up abandoning the project, for some one else to pick up. The software seems to have slowed of late. It is a pain and a hassle to set up on Android and then link media, which is why I found Plex.

 

Plex dull as dishwater, bland graphics which change between different systems. I had Plex running on a shield, then an xbox one, the shield was far superior in looks. However, Android to PC server is a doddle to set up and works a lot better than Kodi, which is why I ditched it on Android systems.

 

Emby my first couple of days, of looking at it. The theatre could be a kodi killer for me, a lot better looking than Plex and if it has google assistant support, then a major game changer for me. 

 

I will keep using Kodi, Plex and Emby for now. Plex allows me to check for duplicate movies, which I can get my media library back on track, I do not think that Emby does that. 

 

However, the major downside to Plex and Emby is the price, at near enough £100 a lot of money to spend, especially when Kodi is free. I will wait for a sale to happen, to see if I have some spare money to buy a lifetime subscription.

 

I do not think that Plex has enough features to warrant buying lifetime, but Emby so far has ticked the majority of my boxes.

 

I still need to do a lot more research on Emby first though.

 

Regards

 

Mark