Sign in
897 Members online 255K Discussions 42.3K Solutions
@Joe_Ambeault wrote:
@chewypgh wrote:Can you tell us what features are planned for IMG 2.0?
Well I have my own ideas... but we are thinking about doing a "call for requirements" from our forum members to help us write the description of what IMG 2.0 should be... maybe like a 60 day period to load up idea exchange...
One of my top candidates is one from the exchange that suggests you can pick what channel numbers you want for each network... ESPN could be whatever channel number you want it to be... as well as all the other channels.
But most importantly IMG 2.0 will be the start of our 3rd generation (IMG 1.9 finishes gen 3)... so it will be a radical upgrade... making 1.9 seems like a small release.
Cool Joe. I remember we talked about that one. I know it may be best to keep the numbers the same, but allow what order you want them to be placed. Like a sortable favorites where you can put the channels in the order you want. I like the idea of a 2.0 ideas board. But 9 should be 9 and 190 should be 190 IMO. Oh what a mess it could be. What was that channel?
Cool Joe. I remember we talked about that one. I know it may be best to keep the numbers the same, but allow what order you want them to be placed. Like a sortable favorites where you can put the channels in the order you want. I like the idea of a 2.0 ideas board. But 9 should be 9 and 190 should be 190 IMO. Oh what a mess it could be. What was that channel?
Well I also have some ideas around really changing the definition of "channel"... does it really have to be just constrained to only a live TV stream? I think any content could be assigned a "channel".
Well I guess my IP cam would never go on the system. I value my privacy and don't think it should be on a server outside of my property. Unless I was paying extra for that service. I was thinking more of a simple feature where you could record X frames per second and have it in your house. SD as many are, would not take up much room. Now with TB drives, much space to be had in the future. We shall see what pans out. I guess you would need to pay for that development and make some money off of it. Verizon is a business. Regardless pictures of inside my house or bedroom will not make it onto someone elses servers.
My Network Servers ok.
Thanks for the status update!
@prisaz wrote:
Well I guess my IP cam would never go on the system. I value my privacy and don't think it should be on a server outside of my property. Unless I was paying extra for that service. I was thinking more of a simple feature where you could record X frames per second and have it in your house. SD as many are, would not take up much room. Now with TB drives, much space to be had in the future. We shall see what pans out. I guess you would need to pay for that development and make some money off of it. Verizon is a business. Regardless pictures of inside my house or bedroom will not make it onto someone elses servers.
My Network Servers ok.
Thanks for the status update!
I will pass along to the home controls product team... can't say I disagree with your position.
@Joe_Ambeault wrote:
@prisaz wrote:Well I guess my IP cam would never go on the system. I value my privacy and don't think it should be on a server outside of my property. Unless I was paying extra for that service. I was thinking more of a simple feature where you could record X frames per second and have it in your house. SD as many are, would not take up much room. Now with TB drives, much space to be had in the future. We shall see what pans out. I guess you would need to pay for that development and make some money off of it. Verizon is a business. Regardless pictures of inside my house or bedroom will not make it onto someone elses servers.
My Network Servers ok.
Thanks for the status update!
I will pass along to the home controls product team... can't say I disagree with your position.
Is the home automation feature planned for general release later this year?
