Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Priority on 5504

Last response: in Home Theatre Legacy
Share
March 30, 2005 9:36:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

How do you determine the priority on recordings if they happen at the same
time of different channels. How do you set which program will have top
priority if the times are the same?

More about : priority 5504

Anonymous
March 30, 2005 9:36:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:36:08 GMT, "Dave" <drcarson@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:

>How do you determine the priority on recordings if they happen at the same
>time of different channels. How do you set which program will have top
>priority if the times are the same?
>

Theme channels always have lower priority than manually-set ones. For
different theme channels, Replay has provided a feature (which I asked
for with the v2 software, and was ignored) to allow you to set
relative priorities, but left it hidden and didn't tell people. To
enable the feature, go to the "Clawfoot Portal" and enter "THEME
PRIORITY". This adds a new option of the screen when you set up a
theme channel. It's a number from 1 to 99. Note that the replaionship
between this number and priority is BACKWARD (that is, 1 gives the
highest priority not the lowest).

BTW, DVArchive shows different numbers, with a FORWARD relationship.

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The idea that there is an invisible being who
created and still runs this old universe is so
childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
still fall for that scam."
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 2:38:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Dave wrote:
> How do you determine the priority on recordings if they happen at the same
> time of different channels. How do you set which program will have top
> priority if the times are the same?
>
>

This is explained.... Somewhere

Program already recording takes precedence over... EVERYTHING

Manual takes precedence over Programmed

Scheduled by program (IE: Record Alias 9:02 to 10:02) takes precedence
over them (IE: any incidence of "Smallville"

If the shows are on the same priority level (IE Two theme shows or two
time specific show requests. (IE: Let's say you program West Wing on a
night Smallville is not on and Smallville on a night W.W. is not on, but
on nights they are both on (IE: Tonight) and of course they both run 9pm
to 10pm right along with Alias... Arent your glad you have an ATI
TV-wonder card just in case this happens :=) )

Well then the machine starts with "Chan zero" And counts up the channels
till it hits a request, The show on the lowest chan wins.

(Thus WW on chan 4, beats Smallville on 20) and

Does this help.. Or is it as clear as mud


Basically: The priority ranking is "The more manual input required, the
higher the rank) and if two shows of the same rank conflict the lower
channel wins

The exception is it won't change canoes mid-stream, that is if WW is
recording (Starts at 9pm) It won't get ALIAS sat 9:03 may ABC fry over
that scheduling fiasco.
Related resources
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 2:38:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

John in Detroit wrote:
> Dave wrote:
>
>> How do you determine the priority on recordings if they happen at the
>> same time of different channels. How do you set which program will
>> have top priority if the times are the same?
>>
>
> This is explained.... Somewhere
>
> Program already recording takes precedence over... EVERYTHING
>
> Manual takes precedence over Programmed
>
> Well then the machine starts with "Chan zero" And counts up the channels
> till it hits a request, The show on the lowest chan wins.
>
> (Thus WW on chan 4, beats Smallville on 20) and

Wrong.

A Replay channel has priority ahead of a theme channel. A Replay channel
will look 1 ime period ahead and 1 behind the scheduled time to see if a
show has moved.

If 2 Replay channels conflict, the channel last created has priority.

If 2 theme channels have equal priorities set (if theme priority is
used) or overlap without setting theme priority, the last created
channel as priority.
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 5:30:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Mark Lloyd <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> shaped the electrons to say:
>theme channel. It's a number from 1 to 99. Note that the replaionship
>between this number and priority is BACKWARD (that is, 1 gives the
>highest priority not the lowest).

I wouldn't call it backward - #1 is my highest priority, the top of my
list, the first thing I want recorded.

TiVo's Season Pass manager works the same way. It numbers up from #1
- #1 is the top priority. #2 is next, etc - up to who knows, people
have had over 100 Season Passes and Wishlists in the list.

I presume RTV doesn't let you use the same number for two programs?
If it does let you do it - how does it handle a conflict for two shows
of the same priority?

-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762
--
<URL:mailto:megazoneatmegazone.org> Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me.
"A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 508-755-4098
<URL:http://www.megazone.org/&gt; <URL:http://www.eyrie-productions.com/&gt; Eris
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 1:59:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 01:30:27 +0000 (UTC), newsREMOVE@THISmegazone.org
(MegaZone) wrote:

>Mark Lloyd <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> shaped the electrons to say:
>>theme channel. It's a number from 1 to 99. Note that the replaionship
>>between this number and priority is BACKWARD (that is, 1 gives the
>>highest priority not the lowest).
>
>I wouldn't call it backward - #1 is my highest priority, the top of my
>list, the first thing I want recorded.
>

People can feel different ways about this. Note that on the Replay a
LOWER number gives a HIGHER priority. That sure sounds backward. Maybe
my thinking has something to do with my giving higher priority to
reality than to rules (and imitating others). I don't really know.

Also, did you see my comment about DVA? It reverses the arrangement.

>TiVo's Season Pass manager works the same way. It numbers up from #1
>- #1 is the top priority. #2 is next, etc -

I don't really want to say something bad about anybody, but this does
look a bit like the common myth of assuming the majority is right. I
hope it isn't.

> up to who knows, people
>have had over 100 Season Passes and Wishlists in the list.
>
>I presume RTV doesn't let you use the same number for two programs?

It does. Several of my theme channels have priority 15 (when the
desirability of the shows is about equal).

>If it does let you do it - how does it handle a conflict for two shows
>of the same priority?
>

I suppose it handles these conflicts the same way it would without
priorities enabled. I use the same priority when it doesn't really
matter which is recorded (just that SOMETHING is recorded).

>-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The idea that there is an invisible being who
created and still runs this old universe is so
childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
still fall for that scam."
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 7:30:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Actually I said that, just in different words

Priority
1: Manual Recording (If there is a session in progress you will have to
manually stop it)
2: Recording session in progress
3: Specific show (This is "Replay Channel") Where the setting is "Record
all Alias 9:03 to 10:04 pm on Wed on Chan 7" for example
4: Theme channels (Record any CSI any time, any where

And then if there is a conflict it's the lowest chan number

Example, if CSI shows up on 2 channels at once (Which it does here in
Detroit, 50 beats 62, or if two shows IE: West Wing and Smallville,
which are not always both on at the same time, but which sometimes are,
have both been set in show specific (Replay) Channels, then Chan 4 (WW)
beats Chan 20 (Smallville)

But the first pass, is the 1.2.3.4 thing above, if a theme chan
conflicts with a show specific replay channel then ... Show specfic wins

Tony D wrote:

> Wrong.
>
> A Replay channel has priority ahead of a theme channel. A Replay channel
> will look 1 ime period ahead and 1 behind the scheduled time to see if a
> show has moved.
>
> If 2 Replay channels conflict, the channel last created has priority.
>
> If 2 theme channels have equal priorities set (if theme priority is
> used) or overlap without setting theme priority, the last created
> channel as priority.
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 7:30:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:30:10 GMT, John in Detroit
<Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>Actually I said that, just in different words
>
>Priority
>1: Manual Recording (If there is a session in progress you will have to
>manually stop it)
>2: Recording session in progress
>3: Specific show (This is "Replay Channel") Where the setting is "Record
>all Alias 9:03 to 10:04 pm on Wed on Chan 7" for example
>4: Theme channels (Record any CSI any time, any where
>
>And then if there is a conflict it's the lowest chan number
>

I think that's true, but some people say it depends on the time the
Replay channel was set up (or something else useless, like
alphabetical order of search string).

>Example, if CSI shows up on 2 channels at once (Which it does here in
>Detroit, 50 beats 62, or if two shows IE: West Wing and Smallville,
>which are not always both on at the same time, but which sometimes are,
>have both been set in show specific (Replay) Channels, then Chan 4 (WW)
>beats Chan 20 (Smallville)
>
>But the first pass, is the 1.2.3.4 thing above, if a theme chan
>conflicts with a show specific replay channel then ... Show specfic wins
>
>Tony D wrote:
>
>> Wrong.
>>
>> A Replay channel has priority ahead of a theme channel. A Replay channel
>> will look 1 ime period ahead and 1 behind the scheduled time to see if a
>> show has moved.
>>
>> If 2 Replay channels conflict, the channel last created has priority.
>>
>> If 2 theme channels have equal priorities set (if theme priority is
>> used) or overlap without setting theme priority, the last created
>> channel as priority.

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The idea that there is an invisible being who
created and still runs this old universe is so
childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
still fall for that scam."
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 10:42:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

> Priority
> 1: Manual Recording (If there is a session in progress you will have to
> manually stop it)
> 2: Recording session in progress
> 3: Specific show (This is "Replay Channel") Where the setting is "Record
> all Alias 9:03 to 10:04 pm on Wed on Chan 7" for example
> 4: Theme channels (Record any CSI any time, any where
>
> And then if there is a conflict it's the lowest chan number
>
> Example, if CSI shows up on 2 channels at once (Which it does here in
> Detroit, 50 beats 62, or if two shows IE: West Wing and Smallville,
> which are not always both on at the same time, but which sometimes are,
> have both been set in show specific (Replay) Channels, then Chan 4 (WW)
> beats Chan 20 (Smallville)

No.
If a show shows up on two REPLAY channels the LAST CHANNEL CREATED will
take priority.

On a theme channel if 2 shows are on different channels at the same
time, it will record the lower channel but this is not a conflict. There
is only 1 channel.

A manual channel is a Replay channel and has no special priority beyond
that. A manual channel usually winds up recording because when you set
it up and there is a conflict, it tells you of the conflict and you
choose what will record. If you add a REPLAY channel later which
conflicts with a manual channel, again you get the warning and have to
choose. If a conflict DEVELOPS because a show moves etc., the last
created channel will record. 99% of the time, this is the "manual channel".
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 4:54:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Mark Lloyd <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> shaped the electrons to say:
>People can feel different ways about this. Note that on the Replay a
>LOWER number gives a HIGHER priority. That sure sounds backward. Maybe

It makes perfect sense to me.

My 'number one priority' is the most important thing. Priorities are
normally numbered with #1 the most important, #2 next, etc - in every
system I can remember seeing throughout my life. That is reality, and
convention.

When someone tells you something is their number one priority, that
means it isn't very important then, right? It is a low number. No,
you know that's not how it is used - a number one priority means the
first thing, the most important.

It sounds like you're thinking of them as *weights* - a higher
weighting would come first. But it sounds like the intent was a
priority listing and not a weighting. They're opposite systems to do
similar things.

See also the 'nice' command on UNIX - the lower the number the higher
the priority the process is.

>Also, did you see my comment about DVA? It reverses the arrangement.

So DVA presents it as a weighting and not a priority.

>>TiVo's Season Pass manager works the same way. It numbers up from #1
>>- #1 is the top priority. #2 is next, etc -
>I don't really want to say something bad about anybody, but this does
>look a bit like the common myth of assuming the majority is right. I
>hope it isn't.

It is certainly the least confusing. The priority manager is
presented as a list, and you can move shows up/down the list. You
don't have to set numbers on things. The show at the top of the list
(#1) has the higher priority, etc. It is intutive, and elegant. To
change priorities you just change the position of a show on the list.
Select the show, then up/down arrow. Easy.

>It does. Several of my theme channels have priority 15 (when the
>desirability of the shows is about equal).

As a developer this sounds like inviting unexpected behavior. I think
TiVo's system is more foolproof - since it is a list you can't put two
shows at the same priority, so there is *always* a clear priority
order. It isn't possible to create a conflict this way.

-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762
--
<URL:mailto:megazoneatmegazone.org> Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me.
"A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 508-755-4098
<URL:http://www.megazone.org/&gt; <URL:http://www.eyrie-productions.com/&gt; Eris
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 6:18:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Some folks say the sun rises in the west too (I gather you don't believe
them) I got my info direct from Replay, I don't recall if it was an
"Online" or printed manual though, but it's in the FAQs for the device

Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:30:10 GMT, John in Detroit
> <Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Actually I said that, just in different words
>>
>>Priority
>>1: Manual Recording (If there is a session in progress you will have to
>>manually stop it)
>>2: Recording session in progress
>>3: Specific show (This is "Replay Channel") Where the setting is "Record
>>all Alias 9:03 to 10:04 pm on Wed on Chan 7" for example
>>4: Theme channels (Record any CSI any time, any where
>>
>>And then if there is a conflict it's the lowest chan number
>>
>
>
> I think that's true, but some people say it depends on the time the
> Replay channel was set up (or something else useless, like
> alphabetical order of search string).
>

--
John F Davis, in Delightful Detroit. WA8YXM(at)arrl(dot)net
"Nothing adds excitement like something that is none of your business"
Diabetic? http://community.compuserve.com/diabetes
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 1:02:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 02:18:28 GMT, John in Detroit
<Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>Some folks say the sun rises in the west too (I gather you don't believe
>them)

Maybe for a little while before finding out what's really happening.
Of course, I have no memory of not knowing.

Remember, ALL knowledge is tentative. There is NO "privileged
knowledge" (exempt from the possibility of being wrong).

> I got my info direct from Replay, I don't recall if it was an
>"Online" or printed manual though, but it's in the FAQs for the device
>

I would already know this, except I use theme priorities where it's
important, rather than relying on these things.

>Mark Lloyd wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:30:10 GMT, John in Detroit
>> <Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Actually I said that, just in different words
>>>
>>>Priority
>>>1: Manual Recording (If there is a session in progress you will have to
>>>manually stop it)
>>>2: Recording session in progress
>>>3: Specific show (This is "Replay Channel") Where the setting is "Record
>>>all Alias 9:03 to 10:04 pm on Wed on Chan 7" for example
>>>4: Theme channels (Record any CSI any time, any where
>>>
>>>And then if there is a conflict it's the lowest chan number
>>>
>>
>>
>> I think that's true, but some people say it depends on the time the
>> Replay channel was set up (or something else useless, like
>> alphabetical order of search string).
>>

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The idea that there is an invisible being who
created and still runs this old universe is so
childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
still fall for that scam."
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 1:16:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 00:54:00 +0000 (UTC), newsREMOVE@THISmegazone.org
(MegaZone) wrote:

>Mark Lloyd <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> shaped the electrons to say:
>>People can feel different ways about this. Note that on the Replay a
>>LOWER number gives a HIGHER priority. That sure sounds backward. Maybe
>
>It makes perfect sense to me.
>
>My 'number one priority' is the most important thing. Priorities are
>normally numbered with #1 the most important, #2 next, etc - in every
>system I can remember seeing throughout my life. That is reality, and
>convention.
>

Realize that "convention" is really useless as a way of making
decisions. It has nothing to do with the desirability of any method,
just that others are using it. Note that they're probably making thier
decisions the same way (using an excuse to get out of thinking).

>When someone tells you something is their number one priority,
> that means it isn't very important then, right?

Again, no valid reason, just mindless imitation. Forget about the
others. What system makes more sense to YOU?

> It is a low number. No,
>you know that's not how it is used - a number one priority means the
>first thing, the most important.
>
>It sounds like you're thinking of them as *weights* - a higher
>weighting would come first. But it sounds like the intent was a
>priority listing and not a weighting. They're opposite systems to do
>similar things.
>

Notice that I'm not saying that any one system is any better than the
other, just that that "others do it" reasoning is inappropriate.

>See also the 'nice' command on UNIX - the lower the number the higher
>the priority the process is.
>
>>Also, did you see my comment about DVA? It reverses the arrangement.
>
>So DVA presents it as a weighting and not a priority.
>

There's a problem here. By using 2 different words, you're making it
sound like 2 different things. If's obviously the SAME thing, just
presented differently.

Consider the (non-)differences between "Bathroom Tissue", "Toilet
Paper", and "A**wipers".

>>>TiVo's Season Pass manager works the same way. It numbers up from #1
>>>- #1 is the top priority. #2 is next, etc -
>>I don't really want to say something bad about anybody, but this does
>>look a bit like the common myth of assuming the majority is right. I
>>hope it isn't.
>
>It is certainly the least confusing. The priority manager is
>presented as a list, and you can move shows up/down the list. You
>don't have to set numbers on things.

That does sound like a good idea.

> The show at the top of the list
>(#1) has the higher priority, etc.

Notice that you're putting numbers back in, after stating the
advantage of not using them.

> It is intutive, and elegant. To
>change priorities you just change the position of a show on the list.
>Select the show, then up/down arrow. Easy.
>

OK.

>>It does. Several of my theme channels have priority 15 (when the
>>desirability of the shows is about equal).
>
>As a developer this sounds like inviting unexpected behavior. I think
>TiVo's system is more foolproof - since it is a list you can't put two
>shows at the same priority, so there is *always* a clear priority
>order. It isn't possible to create a conflict this way.
>

However, I do find it useful, When I just want one of the shows
recorder but don't really care which. It's easy to use different
priorities when you do care (although, I still admit that the TiVo
system has some advantages here).

>-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The idea that there is an invisible being who
created and still runs this old universe is so
childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
still fall for that scam."
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 1:17:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

To be honest I don't worry too much about priorities....

I have 2 Replays, I set the show to record on one or the other to avoid
conflicts, I check DVA's "Upcoming shows" regulary and when there is an
unresolved conflict... Then I fire up the ATI TV-Wonder card and grab it
that way, burn it to DVD and it's one of the shows I watch when the
computer is too busy and I'm not at home. So the problem, becomes a
solution.

Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 02:18:28 GMT, John in Detroit
> <Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Some folks say the sun rises in the west too (I gather you don't believe
>>them)
>
>
> Maybe for a little while before finding out what's really happening.
> Of course, I have no memory of not knowing.
>
> Remember, ALL knowledge is tentative. There is NO "privileged
> knowledge" (exempt from the possibility of being wrong).
>
>
>> I got my info direct from Replay, I don't recall if it was an
>>"Online" or printed manual though, but it's in the FAQs for the device
>>
>
>
> I would already know this, except I use theme priorities where it's
> important, rather than relying on these things.
>
>
>>Mark Lloyd wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:30:10 GMT, John in Detroit
>>><Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Actually I said that, just in different words
>>>>
>>>>Priority
>>>>1: Manual Recording (If there is a session in progress you will have to
>>>>manually stop it)
>>>>2: Recording session in progress
>>>>3: Specific show (This is "Replay Channel") Where the setting is "Record
>>>>all Alias 9:03 to 10:04 pm on Wed on Chan 7" for example
>>>>4: Theme channels (Record any CSI any time, any where
>>>>
>>>>And then if there is a conflict it's the lowest chan number
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I think that's true, but some people say it depends on the time the
>>>Replay channel was set up (or something else useless, like
>>>alphabetical order of search string).
>>>
>
>

--
John F Davis, in Delightful Detroit. WA8YXM(at)arrl(dot)net
"Nothing adds excitement like something that is none of your business"
Diabetic? http://community.compuserve.com/diabetes
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 1:34:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Mark Lloyd <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> shaped the electrons to say:
>Realize that "convention" is really useless as a way of making
>decisions. It has nothing to do with the desirability of any method,
>just that others are using it. Note that they're probably making thier
>decisions the same way (using an excuse to get out of thinking).

Are you a solipsist? Convention is a part of life, it dictates
language and the meaning of words. If I call what everyone else calls
an 'apple' an 'orange' I'm breaking convention. There is nothing
inate about the object that makes its name 'apple' (obviously it isn't
called that in every language) - it is just convention in the English
speaking world that that is the proper name for tat fruit.

Convention is *vitally* important to developers, especially UI
developers. You want the UI to do what the majority of people expect
- ie, you want to follow convention.

>Again, no valid reason, just mindless imitation. Forget about the
>others. What system makes more sense to YOU?

Lover numbers come first makes more sense to me if you're talking a
priority list. Something having a 'higher priority' means it is
higher on a list, a lower number on a numbered list. Logical.

Higher numbers come first makes more sense to me if you're talking a
weighting system. Giving something more weight means favoring that
item, also logical.

>Notice that I'm not saying that any one system is any better than the
>other, just that that "others do it" reasoning is inappropriate.

I'm not either. I'm saying that it seems the coders at RTV intended
it to be a priority numbering scheme, but you're thinking of it as a
weighting scheme. In that case the numbers would look complete
backwards.

>>So DVA presents it as a weighting and not a priority.
>There's a problem here. By using 2 different words, you're making it
>sound like 2 different things. If's obviously the SAME thing, just
>presented differently.

No, it is obviously NOT the same thing - they are two *different
methods* to accomplish the same end goal. I can drive to Florida or I
can fly to Florida - they're not the same mode of transportation, but
they'll both accomplish the goal of getting me there. Lumping them
together and saying driving and flying are the same thing because
they're both 'travel' would be obscuring things.

Priorities and weightings are both methods to resolve conflicts or to
order tasks. So, yes, they accomplish the same end goals - but
they're two ways to go about doing so and they have distinct
differences.

>Consider the (non-)differences between "Bathroom Tissue", "Toilet
>Paper", and "A**wipers".

This metaphor doesn't align with the issue. Bathroom Tissue and
Toilet Paper are the same thing - two names for one object. You could
say that priorities and an order list are two names for the same
thing, but weighting isn't the same.

Priorities and Weighting are like Toiler Paper and Baby Wipes - they
can both clean your ass, but they aren't the same thing.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=priority
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=weighting

>>It is certainly the least confusing. The priority manager is
>>presented as a list, and you can move shows up/down the list. You
>>don't have to set numbers on things.
>
>That does sound like a good idea.
>
>> The show at the top of the list
>>(#1) has the higher priority, etc.
>
>Notice that you're putting numbers back in, after stating the
>advantage of not using them.

I'm not putting them back in - they're on the screen. Here's one
screenshot:
http://www.lasplash.com/artman/uploads/seasonpassmgr_fu...

From this page:
http://www.lasplash.com/TechTalk/To_TiVo_or_not_to_TiVo...

(Found it with Google...)

-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762
--
<URL:mailto:megazoneatmegazone.org> Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me.
"A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 508-755-4098
<URL:http://www.megazone.org/&gt; <URL:http://www.eyrie-productions.com/&gt; Eris
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 3:21:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 21:17:20 GMT, John in Detroit
<Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>To be honest I don't worry too much about priorities....
>
>I have 2 Replays, I set the show to record on one or the other to avoid
>conflicts, I check DVA's "Upcoming shows" regulary

I check that every day, and it has helped a lot.

>and when there is an
>unresolved conflict... Then I fire up the ATI TV-Wonder card and grab it
>that way, burn it to DVD and it's one of the shows I watch when the
>computer is too busy and I'm not at home. So the problem, becomes a
>solution.
>
>Mark Lloyd wrote:
>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 02:18:28 GMT, John in Detroit
>> <Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Some folks say the sun rises in the west too (I gather you don't believe
>>>them)
>>
>>
>> Maybe for a little while before finding out what's really happening.
>> Of course, I have no memory of not knowing.
>>
>> Remember, ALL knowledge is tentative. There is NO "privileged
>> knowledge" (exempt from the possibility of being wrong).
>>
>>
>>> I got my info direct from Replay, I don't recall if it was an
>>>"Online" or printed manual though, but it's in the FAQs for the device
>>>
>>
>>
>> I would already know this, except I use theme priorities where it's
>> important, rather than relying on these things.
>>
>>
>>>Mark Lloyd wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:30:10 GMT, John in Detroit
>>>><Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Actually I said that, just in different words
>>>>>
>>>>>Priority
>>>>>1: Manual Recording (If there is a session in progress you will have to
>>>>>manually stop it)
>>>>>2: Recording session in progress
>>>>>3: Specific show (This is "Replay Channel") Where the setting is "Record
>>>>>all Alias 9:03 to 10:04 pm on Wed on Chan 7" for example
>>>>>4: Theme channels (Record any CSI any time, any where
>>>>>
>>>>>And then if there is a conflict it's the lowest chan number
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I think that's true, but some people say it depends on the time the
>>>>Replay channel was set up (or something else useless, like
>>>>alphabetical order of search string).
>>>>
>>
>>

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The idea that there is an invisible being who
created and still runs this old universe is so
childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
still fall for that scam."
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 3:21:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 21:34:44 +0000 (UTC), newsREMOVE@THISmegazone.org
(MegaZone) wrote:

>Mark Lloyd <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> shaped the electrons to say:
>>Realize that "convention" is really useless as a way of making
>>decisions. It has nothing to do with the desirability of any method,
>>just that others are using it. Note that they're probably making thier
>>decisions the same way (using an excuse to get out of thinking).
>
>Are you a solipsist?

The position of solipsism is impossible to defend (although I'm not
getting into a discussion about that here). I just don't listen to
b*llsh*t and treat it as if it represents something in the real world.

> Convention is a part of life, it dictates
>language and the meaning of words.

It doesn't take much thought to see the problem there. You're dealing
with "circular" reasoning, which is invalid in the same way you can't
get to the moon by bending over any pulling up on your shoes. Here:

1. People's behavior depends on convention.
2. Convention depends on people's behavior (which depends on
convention).
3. People's behavior depends on convention (which depends on people's
behavior, which depends on convention)
and so on, without end.

Notice that the real world isn't involved in that anywhere.

> If I call what everyone else calls
>an 'apple' an 'orange' I'm breaking convention. There is nothing
>inate about the object that makes its name 'apple' (obviously it isn't
>called that in every language) - it is just convention in the English
>speaking world that that is the proper name for tat fruit.
>

Note that a convertion to call something an "orange" in no way
indicates that "orange" is the best word for it. Anyway, communication
tools (which depend on common knowledge, more than anything else) are
quite different for other things. Still, there ARE changes to language
(see below about changes). One is "hiccup", which used to be spelled
in a non-intuitive way (looked like it had "cough" in it).

>Convention is *vitally* important to developers, especially UI
>developers. You want the UI to do what the majority of people expect
>- ie, you want to follow convention.
>

But, in NO CASE, is a suitable excuse to get out of thinking.
Conventions are frequently changed, this can happen because a few
people aren't slaves, and can recognize a better way.

What I was doing (when discussing priorities) was original thought,
something even more vital than convention.

>>Again, no valid reason, just mindless imitation. Forget about the
>>others. What system makes more sense to YOU?
>
>Lover numbers come first makes more sense to me if you're talking a
>priority list.

Notice that I never argued about THAT. I just stated that people are
different.

> Something having a 'higher priority' means it is
>higher on a list, a lower number on a numbered list. Logical.
>

Which is still not OBVIOUS to eveyone. I think of the numbers first
(rather than the physical position in certain lists).

BTW, that's not usually "number" (an idea), but "numeral" (a written
representation). I learned that in about 4th grade. I suppose you did
too.

>Higher numbers come first makes more sense to me if you're talking a
>weighting system.

>Giving something more weight means favoring that
>item, also logical.
>

And it would also be logical, that if you assigned numbers to weights,
to use a higher number for something with a higher weight.

Notice that that's the same thing I was doing with priorities (which,
at least in this case, represent the same thing like the numerals "4"
"004.000" and "2+2" all represent the same number.

>>Notice that I'm not saying that any one system is any better than the
>>other, just that that "others do it" reasoning is inappropriate.
>
>I'm not either.

And what I'm saying about "weights" and "priorities" being the same
thing, isn't disagreeing with you either.

> I'm saying that it seems the coders at RTV intended
>it to be a priority numbering scheme, but you're thinking of it as a
>weighting scheme.

And I thought that didn't make sense, because they're referring to the
same thing.

> In that case the numbers would look complete
>backwards.
>
>>>So DVA presents it as a weighting and not a priority.
>>There's a problem here. By using 2 different words, you're making it
>>sound like 2 different things. If's obviously the SAME thing, just
>>presented differently.
>
>No, it is obviously NOT the same thing - they are two *different
>methods* to accomplish the same end goal.

They are not "two *different methods* to accomplish the same end
goal.", they are two different methods to EXPLAIN it (if even that).

I wouldn't know the actual algorythm Replay uses to determine what to
record, but it could look something like this:

show_to_record=0 ;record nothing
for show= 1 to number_channels
if channel.number > show_to_record then show_to_record=channel.number
next show

In case, you can understand those things. "number" here could be
called either "weight" or "priority", with no significant effect on
the algorithm.

> I can drive to Florida or I
>can fly to Florida - they're not the same mode of transportation, but
>they'll both accomplish the goal of getting me there. Lumping them
>together and saying driving and flying are the same thing because
>they're both 'travel' would be obscuring things.
>

Notice it depends on what word you're using. Of course, "flying" and
"driving" are different things. The phrase "going to florida" would
describe either.

>Priorities and weightings are both methods to resolve conflicts or to
>order tasks.

Is it possible for you to describe both methods and still produce two
fundamentally different explanations?

> So, yes, they accomplish the same end goals - but
>they're two ways to go about doing so and they have distinct
>differences.
>

Notice you haven't said anything about the differences themselves (now
that reminds me of some other BS).

>>Consider the (non-)differences between "Bathroom Tissue", "Toilet
>>Paper", and "A**wipers".
>
>This metaphor doesn't align with the issue. Bathroom Tissue and
>Toilet Paper are the same thing - two names for one object.

I gave 2 names. You don't have to repeat the 3rd one, but it does
exist.

> You could
>say that priorities and an order list are two names for the same
>thing, but weighting isn't the same.
>

I'd like to know how they're different.

>Priorities and Weighting are like Toiler Paper and Baby Wipes - they
>can both clean your ass, but they aren't the same thing.
>

But are very similar in the ways that count.

>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=priority
>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=weighting
>

It was highly unlikely that dictionary definitions would help here,
but I read them anyway, and they didn't. What I needed was
confirmation that these are 2 DIFFERENT procedures. If you actually
KNOW they are different, you have that information.

>>>It is certainly the least confusing. The priority manager is
>>>presented as a list, and you can move shows up/down the list. You
>>>don't have to set numbers on things.
>>
>>That does sound like a good idea.
>>
>>> The show at the top of the list
>>>(#1) has the higher priority, etc.
>>
>>Notice that you're putting numbers back in, after stating the
>>advantage of not using them.
>
>I'm not putting them back in - they're on the screen. Here's one
>screenshot:
>http://www.lasplash.com/artman/uploads/seasonpassmgr_fu...
>

Sorry for that mistake (currently ignoring the distinction between
numbers and numerals, I don't always say but it helps to know what
you're thinking about anyway). I see I misunderstood your description.

>From this page:
>http://www.lasplash.com/TechTalk/To_TiVo_or_not_to_TiVo...
>
>(Found it with Google...)
>
>-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The idea that there is an invisible being who
created and still runs this old universe is so
childish, so obviously contrived, that it is hard to
believe anyone with even a modicum of education can
still fall for that scam."
!