Receiving site Computers

Related question: We have had some small-box PC's that users have used for running the broadcast in other sites. What are you all doing for machines (other than borrowing someone's laptop in the Stake) to run the broadcast in other buildings? Thanks in advance!
- Mike (Syracuse Utah Bluff Stake)

Moderator note: This thread was split from the Receiving site Browsers thread since the topics are different. Please follow the Code of Conduct and "Do not start a new topic in an existing thread; instead start a new thread."

jdlessley wrote:Moderator note: This thread was split from the Receiving site Browsers thread since the topics are different. Please follow the Code of Conduct and "Do not start a new topic in an existing thread; instead start a new thread."

Thanks! First post.

mnorto3 wrote:What are you all doing for machines (other than borrowing someone's laptop in the Stake) to run the broadcast in other buildings?

We have used two options. Borrow member laptops. Use one of the clerk administrative computers.

lajackson wrote:

mnorto3 wrote:What are you all doing for machines (other than borrowing someone's laptop in the Stake) to run the broadcast in other buildings?

We have used two options. Borrow member laptops. Use one of the clerk administrative computers.

We have small thin-clients that were provided to us (from where: Unknown) that appear to be XP boxes and have been significantly restricted. From what I read, the new broadcast method requires Firefox-release 39 to function properly. I doubt these boxes have enough horses to support that broadcast, nor can I even have a way to install anything on them.

I agree that if we need them to perform the function, the church should purchase the equipment. Does anyone have a mini-pc or thin-client that they have used or that is recommended?

We just have to find members with laptops. Wish we had a dedicated device. Anxious to see how much power we really need with the new system. I talked to the help desk today and they said it's not as efficient of a codec as most commercial streams so requires a little more power. They did say that you don't need Firefox 39 anymore but rather anything above that is fine too. Hoping to test it tomorrow.

It states that a quad-core is required.

johnshaw wrote:It states that a quad-core is required.

That's what it said, but now it says only a dual-core is required (quad-core recommended), and others have said a dual-core worked fine for them (and the help desk said it should be fine at lower bandwidths).

So I tried the receive test tonight on my 2 year old dual-core i5 Win7 laptop. Initially I was a bit alarmed as the picture was horrible, but I noticed that the download bitrate was only 95 kbps. (Audio was fine though.) Eventually the download rate worked itself up to 836 and the picture was good. My CPU was between 15 and 20%, health stayed at 100.

Note that I was using Firefox 41.0.1.

After reading some of the delays that others had, I'm anxious to determine if I should just go back to the Meetinghouse Webcast for this one until the kinks are worked out. Right now, I still do not have a recommended solution from the church to replace the Meetinghouse Receivers. So far, I'm thinking of getting Windows think clients from newegg at about $180 a pop. Let me know if anyone knows anything else!

I would caution everyone to hold off till we see what the new streaming player is going to need/require

Should be an interesting techconference session

@rolandc: Can't wait any longer - I need it for next week!

johnshaw wrote:Should be an interesting techconference session

The sessions are now online:
https://tech.lds.org/wiki/LDSTech_Confe ... on_streams

*sigh* one of the things I hate about Brightcove is that there's no playback speed settings. I like to crank up lectures to 1.5x to 2.0x speed. Otherwise it gets boring. If I start to do other things, then I'm not paying attention.

If there's a hack to change the speed, I haven't found it in casual browsing.

I wish they put the videos up on YouTube so that each video could have its own page and be more shareable. There's a lot of good stuff in these presentations, but it's hard to use them effectively for teaching and training in their current format. YouTube is, in my opinion, the most streamlined and feature-rich option.