[Rant] What problem is DLNA trying to solve? Why does it even exist?

[vandidant]

Why does DLNA exist? Does Sony expect users to run another guest OS on their hypervisor just to install and run one of their bloated junkware DLNA servers, then install a DLNA client on their HTPC instead of using Kodi? Oh, don't forget mobile devices, because of course I would rather consume media on my tiny tablet or cellphone instead of my HTPC. Obviously these devices all don't already work with SMB at all, so my only option is to add another layer of Sony DLNA bloat on top of both ends while locking myself in to their server, player, and protocol. The biggest surprise? These fools at Plex have the nerve to ask for money to use their junkware.

 

Someone please [try to] explain to me why DLNA exists, what problems it fixes that SMB has, and why I should use it over SMB.

[Mohenjo]

Thats a lot of smart words there that i dont understand, but i can maybe add to the conversation. every company wants to ride bandwagons to make some money.especially sony since its only division making it money is the ps4. 

[brandishwar]

From what I've seen, having used both over the years, DLNA brings two things to the party: auto-discovery (courtesy of the server broadcasting itself on the network) and on-the-fly transcoding, if you intend to play the same media on different devices that don't support the same media types. The former is important as your DLNA client being able to automatically discover the server tells you immediately if you have everything set up right, and you don't have to remember the hostname of the server since the client tells you what it found. The latter is good, again, if you're wanting to play the same media on multiple devices.

 

But the other beauty of DLNA is that it's an open standard. You're not looked into anyone's software and you should be able to use any DLNA-compatible media server to stream media to a PS4, just as I know you can do that to get media to a PS3.

[vandidant]

I see... thanks for the explanation. I can see why it exists, now I know I should never waste my time on it.

 

Mohenjo, from what I understand, Sony and Intel do not profit from DLNA.

[dzonidev]

1. SMB was made by Microsoft.
2. Most media devices usually only support only DLNA.

3. Once you setup the server you can connect to it with every DLNA capable device.

5. SMB and DLNA are two completely different things. SMB requires the client to have a straming capable player while DLNA transcodes files, is optimized for streaming and doesn't require a fully featured player on the device.

 

One of the *best* DLNA servers is Serviio that will pretty much work on every device. A lot of people have separate NAS boxes on which they setup a DLNA server. Those who don't, run 3rd party software like Serviio or manufacturer issued one.

[vandidant]

1. SMB was made by Microsoft.

2. Most media devices usually only support only DLNA.

3. Once you setup the server you can connect to it with every DLNA capable device.

5. SMB and DLNA are two completely different things. SMB requires the client to have a straming capable player while DLNA transcodes files, is optimized for streaming and doesn't require a fully featured player on the device.

 

One of the *best* DLNA servers is Serviio that will pretty much work on every device. A lot of people have separate NAS boxes on which they setup a DLNA server. Those who don't, run 3rd party software like Serviio or manufacturer issued one.

#2 is wrong, actually most devices support SMB. Do you realize how prevalent SMB is? Pretty much every PC running Windows or Linux (which includes Android). In comparison, DLNA is a drop in the ocean. What person with a proper computing infrastructure even has a purpose for DLNA to fill? It is not natively compatible with 99% of devices that actually matter. The fact is that DLNA has no place in normal homes, unless some fool insists on getting a "Smart TV" that is locked into DLNA and doesn't have the logic capacity to get a HTPC.

[dzonidev]

#2 is wrong, actually most devices support SMB. Do you realize how prevalent SMB is? Pretty much every PC running Windows or Linux (which includes Android). In comparison, DLNA is a drop in the ocean. What person with a proper computing infrastructure even has a purpose for DLNA to fill? It is not natively compatible with 99% of devices that actually matter. The fact is that DLNA has no place in normal homes, unless some fool insists on getting a "Smart TV" that is locked into DLNA and doesn't have the logic capacity to get a HTPC.

 

Alight let's see...

 

SMB capable devices:

 

- My PC (Native)

- W8.1 Tablet (Native)

- Nexus 7 (Needs File Manager + VLC)

- My Laptop (Native)

 

DLNA capable devices:

 

- My PC (Native)

- Nexus 7 (Needs VLC)

- W8.1 Tablet (Native)

- My Laptop (Native)

- My Phone (WP8.1) (Native)

- My TV (not a smart TV) (Native)

- PS3 (Native)

- PS4 (Native)

- Xbox 360 (Native)

- Home Cinema (not smart) (Native)

- Projector (not smart) (Native)

 

At home I run 3 servers, DNS, File server + Media Server and a Web Server. Am I missing something?

Basically what you are saying is I should buy an HTPC because SMB is better? Why should I bother buying an HTPC? I don't know about where you live, but here around 10% of TV-s are not Smart TV's. Also tell me how do you join an Android or an SMB capable device to a workgroup?

 

I agree to around 10% of your post. I like SMB feels familiar and it's easy. But streaming is crap.

[vandidant]

Alight let's see...

 

SMB capable devices:

 

- My PC (Native)

- W8.1 Tablet (Native)

- Nexus 7 (Needs File Manager + VLC)

- My Laptop (Native)

 

DLNA capable devices:

 

- My PC (Native)

- Nexus 7 (Needs VLC)

- W8.1 Tablet (Native)

- My Laptop (Native)

- My Phone (WP8.1) (Native)

- My TV (not a smart TV) (Native)

- PS3 (Native)

- PS4 (Native)

- Xbox 360 (Native)

- Home Cinema (not smart) (Native)

- Projector (not smart) (Native)

 

At home I run 3 servers, DNS, File server + Media Server and a Web Server. Am I missing something?

Basically what you are saying is I should buy an HTPC because SMB is better? Why should I bother buying an HTPC? I don't know about where you live, but here around 10% of TV-s are not Smart TV's. Also tell me how do you join an Android or an SMB capable device to a workgroup?

 

I agree to around 10% of your post. I like SMB feels familiar and it's easy. But streaming is crap.

Haha no do not make mistakes like that buddy.

 

Basically, I'm not saying you should do anything because I don't care what you want to do or what you want to believe. The fact is that DLNA is a bundle of garbage that only serves to complicate things and compromise security. It asks for permissions to do anything it likes, and then acts as a proxy to let everyone else to abuse that permission. That's a massive leak, so what else about DLNA can anyone respect if the fundamentals are FUBAR? More importantly, where's the AD integration?

 

No one wants to mess with extra layer of useless trash that brings nothing to the table, there is no need and no space for DLNA to exist because we already have everything we want. No one cares about PS4 or Xbox. Displays and Projectors should have DVI, DP, and HDMI input, that is all. No one will pay for extra DLNA garbage.

 

Nothing about DLNA is native if it requires a DLNA server... thus the bare foundations of your arguments are severely flawed.

 

You may be incapable of using SMB to stream, that does not give you right to call it crap. It works perfectly fine for me using Kodi. If you failed highschool, it does not mean the school is crap, just means you're stupid.

[r3bify]

My media server hosts SMB shares and a DLNA server. 

 

The SMB shares are for moving content between devices, and streaming my music w/ foobar2000. Streaming video is all done with DLNA. It's a vastly superior protocol. 

 

I feel like you're just bitching because you want something to bitch about. DLNA client support is free, and DLNA servers are just as free. If you already have to have a machine set up with the content you're going to be streaming, what difference does it make to you? I have to set folders up as SMB shares to access the media in them, just as I have to install a DLNA server program to use that. 

 

SMB doesn't transcode data, which means that if the file type or codec isn't supported on my end devices, it won't work. DLNA transcodes the data, meaning I don't have to worry about that. 

 

Ever used plex? I can access my Plex server, and stream all of its media, anywhere in my house, and on the go. My house is divided in multiple subnets with multiple routers. All of our phones, tablets, laptops, desktops, gaming consoles... can all stream my media from plex, with as little as a web browser. It has a very useable interface and remembers my progress in videos, and keeps track of shows I'm watching on the go. SMB can't do that. And with SMB, I need to make sure everyone has some type of file browser to access the shares, which eliminates all the iOS devices (if only it was that easy to get rid of them..)

 

To paraphrase your own words, if you don't understand the reason to use dlna over smb, it doesn't mean that dlna is crap, just means you're stupid.

[vandidant]

My media server hosts SMB shares and a DLNA server. 

 

The SMB shares are for moving content between devices, and streaming my music w/ foobar2000. Streaming video is all done with DLNA. It's a vastly superior protocol. 

 

I feel like you're just bitching because you want something to bitch about. DLNA client support is free, and DLNA servers are just as free. If you already have to have a machine set up with the content you're going to be streaming, what difference does it make to you? I have to set folders up as SMB shares to access the media in them, just as I have to install a DLNA server program to use that. 

 

SMB doesn't transcode data, which means that if the file type or codec isn't supported on my end devices, it won't work. DLNA transcodes the data, meaning I don't have to worry about that. 

 

Ever used plex? I can access my Plex server, and stream all of its media, anywhere in my house, and on the go. My house is divided in multiple subnets with multiple routers. All of our phones, tablets, laptops, desktops, gaming consoles... can all stream my media from plex, with as little as a web browser. It has a very useable interface and remembers my progress in videos, and keeps track of shows I'm watching on the go. SMB can't do that. And with SMB, I need to make sure everyone has some type of file browser to access the shares, which eliminates all the iOS devices (if only it was that easy to get rid of them..)

 

To paraphrase your own words, if you don't understand the reason to use dlna over smb, it doesn't mean that dlna is crap, just means you're stupid.

oooooh multiple subnets and routers wow so impressive, did you graduate top of your class with over 300 confirmed kills? If you had any hint of intellectual life in the sack of meat currently occupying your location, you'd consolidate it to one router/UTM and deploy dedicated AP's, this is a home network after all isn't it? You made no mention of VPN's, that speaks to me that you depend on DLNA because you'd be too ignorant to figure out a more efficient method to stream outside your home otherwise.

 

It makes the difference of another guest VM to use DLNA. At least 1GB, and I only have 48GB in my hypervisor, so that's not insignificant. Since you're so smart, you should know why it's necessary.

 

No one who matters [to me] uses iOS or Xbox or PS4. What kind of archaic devices do you barbarians use that don't support modern codecs? All the displays for my devices are at least 1080p, and they're all on 802.11ac or gigabit Ethernet so resolution nor bandwidth are issues. Some devices don't support iso mounting or BD rips, so remux.

 

In case you were too thick to understand this, I will spell it out for you: I already know all of these features of DLNA, and you are merely regurgitating reasons that I find inadequate for the existence of DLNA.

[Darren]

Why you so mad, oh angsty one? If you don't like it, don't use it. It seems like you're just out to argue when no one else cares.

[brandishwar]

Another guest VM to use DLNA? According to what? With every DLNA server and player I've set up, I've never had to use virtualization to get anything working, whether the server is running on Windows or Linux. What software were you trying to use and in what kind of setup?

[dzonidev]

Haha no do not make mistakes like that buddy.

 

Basically, I'm not saying you should do anything because I don't care what you want to do or what you want to believe. The fact is that DLNA is a bundle of garbage that only serves to complicate things and compromise security. It asks for permissions to do anything it likes, and then acts as a proxy to let everyone else to abuse that permission. That's a massive leak, so what else about DLNA can anyone respect if the fundamentals are FUBAR? More importantly, where's the AD integration?

 

From what I see these are all claims, you based off your own subjective opinion. And once again you missed the point and blew up into nonsense. Which leads me to think you have no idea what you're even talking about.

 

No one wants to mess with extra layer of useless trash that brings nothing to the table, there is no need and no space for DLNA to exist because we already have everything we want. No one cares about PS4 or Xbox. Displays and Projectors should have DVI, DP, and HDMI input, that is all. No one will pay for extra DLNA garbage.

Read that paragraph a couple of times.

 

Nothing about DLNA is native if it requires a DLNA server... thus the bare foundations of your arguments are severely flawed.

Let me ask you once again, how do you access an SMB share on Android or Linux? Also you skipped my question, how do you join your phone to a Work Group or a Home Group?

 

You may be incapable of using SMB to stream, that does not give you right to call it crap. It works perfectly fine for me using Kodi. If you failed highschool, it does not mean the school is crap, just means you're stupid.

With this here you just contradicted everything you previously claimed...

Let me repeat my self once again, SMB is a great protocol for files but streaming sucks and DLNA is a great protocol for streaming and that's about it.