Re: store system w 4-8 cameras ?

["Roland Moore" <roland@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It is easy to see the PC in many DVR units. That said some DVR units are
more PC than others. One beef (of too many to mention) I have with
VideoInsight  is that they won't create a COTS spec for their grabber card
and create a Windows XP Embedded OS to go with it (they won't even suggest a
policy editor template for OS modification or even msconfig). The developers
of the product were honest enough to tell me that they lack the sales volume
to be able to even begin justify such a move. And a 100% fully automated
recovery CD? Not on your life. Auto throttle bandwith with QoS? That's
always coming in the next release.
Many people get confused about the term embedded OS and say one thing when
they actually mean another. Nearly all build it yourself units run on some
form of Windows OS. No matter what kind of Policy Editor you use it will
still be that version of Windows at the shell. Many DVR units use Windows XP
Embedded (more information here
http://msdn.microsoft.com/embedded/windowsxpembedded/default.aspx ) others
use an embedded OS. According to the Microsoft Embedded site Microsoft
Windows XP Embedded provides the ability to build a customized operating
system image which contains the components and technologies that are
appropriate for your specific device. One thing you should never do is apply
XP Pro patches to XP Embedded. If you can't tell one from the other the
splash screen after the POST shows XP Embedded and there is always the tiny
XP Embedded sticker (versus the much larger XP Pro sticker) on the case to
point out the difference. Some Integral Technologies units and Bosch DiBos
units use Windows XP Embedded, some units like Dedicated Micros use an
embedded OS (at least that is their description). Some units like Dallmeier
and March Networks use a Linux OS, although not the same distribution. Some
units like the Intellex use a highly modified Windows OS that is almost XP
Embedded (on version 4.x), but it is really just an odd duck. I'll say it
again, if you're a computer guy discovering CCTV then getting a grabber card
and building you're own unit seems cool. If you're a security guy, or more
specifically a systems integrator, you won't have time to build your own.
The puny margins in building your own DVR would never be worth it. If you
are thinking about supporting an up the Coax PTZ (Bosch PTZ units, Panasonic
PTZ units or Pelco PTZ units to name a few) with Bilinx (Bosch) or using
BiPhase (Bosch) to support a different protocol, no build it yourself unit
would ever be an option. And we haven't even mentioned access control
integration, POS integration or an Aegis interface (developed by KapLogic
Corporation). If you are using professional camera gear like Bosch Auto
Domes or AD Ultra  few cusomers are going to consider it a plus to cheap out
and have you drag in some weird ass home built PC no matter how you try to
promote it as a DVR. If you do a dozen or so simple mostly fixed camera DVR
deployments a year that never interface with anything else maybe you have
found your calling with build it yourself. When you walk into a major sports
arena or giant medical center and think about a DVR solution to deploy the
build it yourself option never crosses your mind, ever! Well, if you're
going to check yourself in at the Psych ward in medical center maybe. In my
opinion if you ever aspire to serve those sorts of large customers in the
future in that type of upper end market segment you should not afflict your
current customers with the crippled limitations of build it yourself, leave
that for the box sale guys or the lame IT guy with too much time and no
budget.

"Matt Ion" <soundy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9yaTg.70351$R63.30733@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> J. <jsloud2001 wrote:
>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 16:29:00 GMT, Matt Ion <soundy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>You have some sort of philosophical issues with PC-based DVRs?
>>
>>
>>
>> In a word, yes.  I deal with a lot of medium to larger size facilities
>> that almost
>> always have their DVR's connected to a network.  If you do not connect
>> to a network, then you lose a lot of the functionality of having a
>> digital solution.  When you use a Windows PC as a DVR, you bring along
>> all of the baggage associated with  Windows.  Each time a new exploit
>> is found, Windows must be updated to control it.  If you connect to a
>> network without keeping up to date on security patches and service
>> packs, the machine will become vunerable.  Add to this fact that a PC
>> based machine can and will be used by associates for other purposes
>> and reliability suffers even more.
>
> Umm, that's not a failing of PC-based DVRs... that's a failing of
> WINDOWS-based DVRs on an unsecured or improperly secured network.  Or more
> specifically, a failing of an IT department.  If a "medium to larger size"
> company doesn't have a firewall between their network and the internet,
> and the proper security in place. ALL their computers are volnerable, not
> just their DVR.  If they DO have a firewall, the systems are pretty much
> invulnerable to direct outside access... and as long as all the other
> systems are kept up-to-date with security measures (patches etc.) and
> aren't infected, there's no real way for the DVR to be affected unless
> someone's surfing the web on it... in which case you have other issues.
>
>> There are two types of PC based machines.  Factory built DVR's that
>> come as a unit complete with a warranty vs. a user built off the shelf
>> PC with a capture card and user installed software.  I have no problem
>> with the former.  We've used DVR's and NVR's from AD, Bosch, Pelco,
>> Verint, etc that are PC based and relatively free of issues, although
>> embedded recorders such as GE/ Kalatel units do seem to be more
>> reliable.  My problem is with user built DVR's where some guy takes an
>> off-the-shelf Dell and puts a capture card and some software on it and
>> calls it a DVR.  Windows, although improved in recent years, is still
>> not the most stable platform for running critical applications.
>
> Out of all the Vigil and VideoInsight DVRs I've installed and/or serviced,
> I've only seen TWO actually fail because of Windows issues, and both,
> though designed and built ONLY as DVRs, were used by their owners or
> employees onsite for surfing the web (one guy even installed a couple
> games, since the DVR machine was more powerful than his office PC). Again,
> that's not a failing of PC-based designs, that's a failing of STUPID
> PEOPLE.  And as we know, hydrogen and stupidity are the two most common
> elements in the universe.
>
> I've had ONE PC-based DVR fail because the CPU fan died and the whole
> thing overheated... any others that have died have been because of failing
> hard drives, which can happen to embedded machines just as well as PCs.
>
> Oh, and one where the video card died because the new owners on the site
> decided to test the backup generator by just throwing the switch on the
> main building power, and generated a nice power spike.  They killed the
> system drive in the replacement machine by doing the same thing again two
> months later, despite LOUD warnings (unheeded) to put the thing on a UPS.
> But again, that's just human stupidity; I've seen just as many standalone
> DVRs, as well as MUXs, VCRs and cameras, killed by power spikes.
>
> PC-based DVRs are no more or less INHERENTLY reliable than any other type
> of video-recording system... they may be easier for (l)users to fuck up,
> but that's a side-effect of ease-of-use.
>
>> A small list of problems I've seen with PC based units never
>> encountered with embedded DVRs:
>>
>> Version conflicts
>
> With what?  I've seen the Vigil client complain if it's connecting to a
> different revision of server, but it still works.
>
>> Security patches
>> Network worms
>
> Shouldn't be necessary on a properly secured network.  Vigil machines
> still run on Win2K; my VI machines run on a pretty bare-bones XP with all
> unnecessary services disabled.  And not so much an issue with
> non-Windows-based (Linux, BSD, and others) DVRs.
>
>> Guards using box to surf the internet (viruses, spyware, malware, etc)
>
> There's no accounting for the human factor.  How about this one:
> late-night employee decided to review footage for the hot blonde who was
> just at the counter, the forgets to restart recording, because the cheap
> standalone unit is a simplex design.
>
>> Windows update incompatibility
>
> So don't use automatic updates.  Not necessary on a properly secured
> network. And again, not an issue on non-Windows-based DVRs.
>
>> Blue screen of death
>
> Never had one of those on a DVR.
>
>> Power interupt/ shutdown issues
>
> That can affect ANY recording device, PC, standalone, or VCR.
>
> In fact, PCs are able to BETTER handle those instances if they're on a UPS
> with the proper support installed, because a UPS can trigger a clean
> shutdown of the PC if the battery runs low after power has been off a
> while.
>
>> Software conflicts caused by other programs running on PC
>
> There shouldn't be any other programs running... again, a human failing,
> not a design issue, and not really a problem anyway with non-Windows
> machines.  Even with, it's not that difficult to lock down the machine to
> prevent installation and use of other software.  Capture's machines run
> their own shell over the Windows desktop and lock out most key
> combinations, such as ctrl-esc, strl-alt-del, etc.  With
> password-protected shutdown, it's virtually impossible for an unauthorized
> user to access the desktop or run any other software.
>