Netgear's Digital Entertainer HD ready for your home

This streaming media receiver was unveiled at CES earlier this year, but Netgear's officially made it available for your living room. To refresh your memory, the Digital Entertainer HD (EVA8000) basically promises to do everything to amuse you short of growing limbs and break dancing on your coffee table. It's got an HDMI port with resolutions up to 1080p, connects to 802.11 b / g WiFi networks, and controls PC-PVR recordings remotely (with a not-included TV tuner card). It streams nearly anything, including HD movies, BitTorrent downloads, internet radio, RSS feeds, music, videos, and Flickr photos, from nearly any device, like your networked PCs, flash drives, iPods, or digital cameras. Netgear's right on point with their projected first quarter release -- units went on sale today on select e-commerce sites at around $399 a pop. The Digital Entertainer HD will be available at e-commerce sites, retailers, and resellers worldwide sometime in Q2 2007.

Read - Digital Entertainer HD press release
Read - Netgear product page

[Kev50027 @ Mar 14th 2007 4:29PM]

Apple TV, you were never that great anyway. Hello Netgear!

[Kieran Coghlan @ Mar 14th 2007 4:50PM]

I don't even own a single Apple product. But hold your tongue a bit, dude. Nobody has used an AppleTV, and nobody has used the EVA8000, either. Personally, I'm excited about the "on paper" prospects of the EVA8000, but I'll wait for real-world reviews before jumping on board.

[Kieran Coghlan @ Mar 14th 2007 4:52PM]

I'm really interested how all these wifi hd streamers achieve their bandwidth. 802.11g BARELY has the bandwidth for 1080p, put a couple of walls in the way and I doubt it'll look that slick.

[zargon @ Mar 14th 2007 5:03PM]

The question for me is, can this replace my Roku Photobridge?

Everything looks good on paper, it would give me the added mpeg-4 support that the PB lacks. The deal breaker however lies in the ability to stream files. People are claiming that you don't need to use a server application for basic functionality, something I refuse to use. It is the cheap and lazy way out, the PB is a perfect example of how things should be. My other main concern is if it support NFS, since that is what I use for my NAS.

Only thing I know it won't have, is the openness that I got with my Roku, which opened the doors for all kinds of great third party applications that made the unit so much more useful.

Guess I should maybe take a peek at the manual and keep an eye out for reviews.

[Jesse @ Mar 14th 2007 7:44PM]

Here is a guy who has one and posts lots of responses to answers. http://forum1.netgear.com/showthread.php?t=3148

11g is definitely enough as long as your using some kind of MIMO n or g router. I have the MIMO pre-n d-link router and I can stream 1080p to my lappie in the living room np (h.264 and mkv).

This things does a hell of a lot more than sling your pc to your TV. It has setup for RDP. Nice interface and tons and tons of video support. I don't know why you would need sling at all with Orb I can stream where ever I need content even over LAN. The big downside to sling AND orb is the amount of proc it kills doing the convert on your system. The netgear does all the decoding at the box with hardware. I've used a hacked Xbox for a htpc and have been keen to get something that could do all the same stuff but have the power to do HD. I'm definitely going to get one of these things the minute they are in stock.

[Sy @ Mar 14th 2007 5:02PM]

Spec wise, Netgear entertainer has the advantage over Apple TV. However, I found it odd that Netgear does not include 801n compatibility. The Apple TV does have 801n compatibility but is only 720p.

[Marko @ Mar 15th 2007 4:29AM]

It should hamve SMB, hence all shared drives should be accessible. Should!

[Sy @ Mar 14th 2007 5:06PM]

Also the Entertainer should be better than AppleTV ...its $100 more. It says in the spec it can play MP4 files ...does that includes .mkv files?

[Donald Dorson @ Mar 14th 2007 5:24PM]

802.11g does not have the bandwidth for 1080p video unless that video is compressed to the point where the purpose is kind of defeated. It's sad that all the manufacturers long ago agreed to confuse the consumer as best they could by classifying the speed of networking gear in terms of Mbps (megabits per second) instead of MBps (megaBYTES per second). Then of course the numbers are also inflated- just to make things more fun. For example- I recently picked up one of those new Apple Airport Extreme routers that rock the draft N standard-- 110Mbps theoretical maximum thouroughput. What that actually means is that I can transfer about 10 megabytes per second when I set the thing up to only broadcast an N signal at 5ghz (instead of 2.4ghz). Pretty sweet, but if you do the math 110Mbps should equal 13.75 megabytes per second. Yeah, right. So I've done some tests on my 802.11g network as well. Do the math (54 divided by 8) there on that supposed 54Mbps standard and you'll see that 6.75 megabytes per second ought to be achievable. Never happened. For whatever reason I can get between 2 and 3 megabytes a second on that network. Two or three! There are some DVDs that have a 7 megabyte per second data rate! That's just 480p! Granted DVDs use the older, less efficient MPEG2 standard for compression- and the happy shiny H.264 codec can get you a very pretty picture at much lower data rates-- but seriously if you're going to have a crazy high rez image, what's the point if you compress out all the details.... All right so I just took a look at a 1080p movie trailer (The Astronaut Farmer) and it has a data rate of 1.22 megabytes per second- and it looks decent but there are a lot of compression artifacts in the darker areas. The very first shot of the trailer is a good example (look at the dark hill and the darker clouds in the sunset). So maybe one could get away with a G router for a 1080p picture, but I still contend you ought to have at least 5 megabytes a second, even with H.264, to even get close to doing 1080p justice. I guess I'm kind of a image quality snob.

[Eric Reid @ Mar 14th 2007 5:47PM]

Donald,

SD DVDs are around 7 megaBITS/second, not bytes. Most 1080i HDTV broadcasts from Comcast are around 18megabits/second, way below the theorhetical max of 54megabits/second of 802.11g. Most Blu Ray titles encoded at 1080p between 20 and 30megabit/second.

[zargon @ Mar 14th 2007 5:52PM]

Well, it is a good thing that it can also be wired into the network.

I have my Photobridge wired, wouldn't have it any other way. I would really only use wireless if I picked up a SoundBridge, which is audio only.

[Kev50027 @ Mar 14th 2007 6:59PM]

Not only are you wrong, but you can't compare theoretical maximums with actual speeds. Theoretical speeds are NEVER reached PERIOD.

One more thing: When you were "testing" the speed of your 802.11g network, you were actually using 802.11b. This is because if a g router finds any b hardware on the network, everything will run at b speeds rather than g.

[andy @ Mar 15th 2007 9:52AM]

@Donald Dorson


Wireless is slow and insecure. It's great for surfing the net in the hammock out back, but there's a reason I put cat 6 throughout my home and only buy stuff that includes a wired port.

[KC @ Mar 14th 2007 5:30PM]

Providers only use about 19.3Mbps per channel of HD. In theory, 56Mbps should be sufficient for one movie stream. Just for reference, the newer codecs compress videos at 24 Mbps for HD quality (from what I recall reading about AVCHD).

[Evan @ Mar 14th 2007 5:30PM]

It's not gonna replace my SqueezeBox any time soon.

[zargon @ Mar 14th 2007 5:49PM]

There is absolutely no comparison for this and a squeezbox, apples to oranges. The squeezbox is audio only, this device is your all in one media solution.

[Craig @ Mar 14th 2007 6:28PM]

The slingcatcher (http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/08/hands-on-with-the-slingcatcher/) will have similar functionality for about half the price.

[Kev50027 @ Mar 14th 2007 6:57PM]

No, the Sling Catcher (from what I know) requires a sling box, which will be pretty expensive with both of them, and also, the price has not yet been released for the sling catcher, the only thing we know is they are aiming for less than $200.

[MIkesOnline @ Mar 14th 2007 6:29PM]

I don't understand why people are saying that 802.11g does not have the bandwidth for 1080P. I have a Netgear wireless router that has no problem streaming 1080P to my xbox 360 using 802.11g.

Granted, it would be nice if it supported 802.11 n even if has to be 802.11 draft n until the spec is finalized, but 802.11 g works just fine for me. Plus, I have no problem streaming it through walls. So I have no doubt this can do the job.

I just wish somebody would make a device that would stream audio and video from home theater components like the new tv from Samsung coming out this fall http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-12760_7-9673322-5.html

[Craig @ Mar 14th 2007 7:07PM]

At risk of carrying this thread even more OT: I hope you're wrong about the slingcatcher requiring a slingbox, but I'm holding out hope because PCMag says: "Sling Media's new SlingCatcher will do the reverse: It will take video content from a PC or notebook, or from a Slingbox, and display it on a television screen." (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2080386,00.asp)
Plus, the slingcatcher has a built in HDD!

[Ean @ Mar 14th 2007 7:01PM]

Pair this up with a set of HDX101 from the same manufacturer and it should work pretty well. I'm curious how they are going to implement the desktop control support with only the Remote control though... Seems Clumsy.

[User-Seventy @ Mar 14th 2007 7:10PM]

Man, the tech specs for video formats is useless.
What kind of XViD support does this have? Does it support b-frames? GMC? Qpel?
Does Mpeg-4 mean Mpeg-4 Part 10 (i.e. H.264)?

[Donald Dorson @ Mar 14th 2007 7:44PM]

KC, interesting info about the AVCHD and average bitrates, good to know. Eric, thanks for the correction concerning DVD bitrates- that does in fact make more sense. Kev50027, I am absolutely positive I wasn't testing my network at B speeds as I have purposely disabled the B functionality of my wireless router since everything in my home is G happy. Two to three megs a second is pretty typical for G networks anyhow I think. So anyways, in light of all this education I've just received I guess the compression of HD consumer material (Blue-Ray, HD DVD, downloaded stuff) is fairly well in line with the compression ratios of content that has preceeded it, specifically DVDs. I still want higher bitrates though. G'yar.

[Kev50027 @ Mar 15th 2007 1:16AM]

Hmm, okay. It really depends more on what you're using to measure the speed though. Using a windows file transfer for example wouldn't be a good example of how fast a connection is, because there is significant overhead.

[Jake @ Mar 14th 2007 7:51PM]

I looked at the spec sheet for this... anyone know if it upconverts? I might be interested in streaming The Office from my PC.

[RK @ Mar 14th 2007 7:53PM]

Anyone know if the D-Link that was shown at CES has 1080i support?

http://www.dlink.com/products/?sec=1&pid=547

It's real similar to netgear's product but supports 11n. If it's got 1080p then I might wait. Supposed to ship early Q2.

[omf @ Mar 14th 2007 8:04PM]

Anyone know what "select e-commerce sites" one can buy this from today?

[Alan Erickson @ Mar 14th 2007 8:25PM]

It would be nice to see a review on this thing.

[Jeff @ Mar 14th 2007 11:52PM]

You guys who are streaming 1080p over 802.11g are doing so at very low bit rates. There's nothing magical about that. A 1080p video file at 5mbps is going to stream exactly the same as a 720p file at 5mbps; neither the router nor the media streamer should know the difference or care.

The problem is when you start talking full-res high quality 1080p movies on Blu-Ray or HD-DVD discs, then you're up around the 30-40mbps range. Standard 802.11g doesn't even come close to being able to reliably stream that. Even 1080i HDTV files (which is what a lot of people would use something like this to stream) top out at 19mbps - more than 802.11g can practically handle. Remember, we're not talking theoretical maximums here, we're talking real-world performance. It's a rare g adapter indeed that will consistently hit 19mbps, much less sustain that rate for an hour or two without fail *and* leave overhead for network hiccups or anyone else who wants to use the network for web browsing or whatever.

The average *maximum* throughput for 802.11g adapters is around 20-25mbps. You can look that up. That's under ideal conditions in bursts, not sustained over the length of a video file, and not in the situations that most people's networks exist in (ie. most people do not keep their wireless adapters a foot away from their router out in the woods away from all other interference).

You're gonna need 802.11n to do "real" 1080i and 1080p, and by that I mean the content industry standards (which are the highest quality after all). Or you can just use ethernet.

[Nihir @ Mar 15th 2007 7:28PM]

No H.264/x.264 support = Useless

Buffalo's HD Linktheater has been around for years providing the same thing. Not to mention the recent use of the Xbox 360 to stream directly from your PC.

Hopefully, someone releases a networked HD media streaming device that can handle all the formats necessary.

[Dez @ Mar 16th 2007 3:43AM]

Looks nice, but if it is anything like my Netgear wireless router, it will keep letting me down and losing connection all of the time, even after the firmware updates!!