HolidayBuyer's Guide

Samsung forum

General discussion

C7500 BR player - plays videos from usb but not over network

by davedave123 / April 2, 2011 5:29 AM PDT

Hi all,

Recently purchased the Samsung C7500 Blu-Ray player, and so far it's worked flawlessly, except for the fact that when I attempt to play avi videos from a NAS drive, I receive an error claiming the format is not supported - yet playing the same files from a USB drive works perfectly.

I can play my MP3s and my avi files from a connected usb device with no problem.

I can play the same MP3s from my DLNA certified NAS server, but I cannot play the same avi files. They are listed in the videos section and the device has generated a thumbnail for them, yet they just won't play.

The thing I find odd is that the videos play from a USB drive, yet when accessed from a network location, I receive an error message claiming the file format is not supported, even though this logically can't be the case.

Does anyone have any ideas as to how I can play the videos on my NAS server without having to copy them all to a USB drive first?

Note: I am using the latest firmware and have enable automatic updating.

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: C7500 BR player - plays videos from usb but not over network
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: C7500 BR player - plays videos from usb but not over network
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Well discussed.
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / April 2, 2011 6:39 AM PDT

You are not alone noticing that USB and network decoding don't match up. Almost all of this has to do with DLNA.

Not to repeat all that's been written the bottom line is you're right. And no, so far no sign of this being updated.
Bob

Collapse -
At least I'm not the only one!
by davedave123 / April 2, 2011 11:53 PM PDT
In reply to: Well discussed.

Thanks for the reply Bob.

Having looked into DLNA a bit more, it would seem that certified players are only required to support certain formats, but can optionally support more.

For a quick overview, see here: http://www.dlna.org/industry/why_dlna/key_components/media_format/

So it would seem to me from my experiments that the player has been designed to support a very limited number of formats from a DLNA device, even though it is perfectly capable of decoding these files from USB. What's more ridiculous is that it even generates the correct thumbnails, so at some stage it is successfully decoding at least part of the file before refusing to play it because it "doesn't support the file format". I am being lied to by a machine.

I can understand why it doesn't have a web browser, but these videos are stored on my local network, are accessible by my player and stored in a format it is capable of playing. The xbox 360 and PS3 are perfectly capable of playing these videos from a device on my LAN, even if it isn't DLNA certified.

I find this situation frustrating because I could have bought a player for literally half the cost, without DLNA or wifi that would allow me to play videos from USB. Heck for

Collapse -
"optionally support more."
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / April 3, 2011 1:57 AM PDT

There are some thousand or more posts about this topic. I had hoped to save you from losing time on this. You've discovered that such is optional and I wish the best of luck getting Samsung to add more.

As to the web browser, that's fairly easy to understand if you consider this is not a full sized PC behind the screen. Some folk wonder why and the more seasoned person understands there is no big CPU behind the screen. How would you feel when the browser doesn't support PLUG-INS and work exactly like IE (which one?), FireFox, Opera or other? If you want the full PC WEB experience I think you know what to do next.

Then there's the matter of costs. If you price out that GoogleTV box you see how much this browser will cost you in the set. To get the prices they have now, they have to implement what they can in the space that fits. Again, there will be some that think it is just a matter of software. They dismiss that software costs money and there will be money to put more CPU, memory into the set.
Bob

Collapse -
Lets hope Samsung make something good, great.
by davedave123 / April 3, 2011 4:33 AM PDT

Thanks for the info, I spent hours trying to find anything useful about this problem on the net and your answers have by far been the most helpful. Like I said I can appreciate why there is no web browser, I was not expecting there to be one, although I doubt it's anything to do with the CPU as it takes more resources to decode a blu ray movie than to render a web page. And I agree the plugin support would likely be poor.

I'll see what Samsung have to say about the discrepancy between network vs USB playback and in the meantime give serious thought to the HTPC alternative.

For the sake of everyone experiencing this, I hope samsung step.

Thanks again for your responses Happy

Collapse -
correction...
by davedave123 / April 3, 2011 4:35 AM PDT

**I hope Samsung step up.

Collapse -
Odd you wrote that.
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / April 3, 2011 4:49 AM PDT

One of my current gigs is with video encoding for surveillance. This has lead me to look at said BluRay decoding chips and more. Here's the point. The BluRay decoding is not done in your classic CPU but a dedicated chip.

The reason is all about the costs. A generic purpose CPU would cost more.
Bob

Collapse -
I stand corrected...
by davedave123 / April 3, 2011 6:25 AM PDT
In reply to: Odd you wrote that.

Guess I learnt something today!

My experience is with mobile (and PC) hardware so I see the same components recycled everywhere with functionality driven by the firmware. Forgive my ignorance Happy

Collapse -
I hope
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / April 3, 2011 6:30 AM PDT
In reply to: I stand corrected...

I hope I didn't upset you and if we rewind to the top I hope to have saved you from long calls to Samsung to ask about this issue. (the one about USB and DLNA.)

I appreciate you researched DLNA and how other than a few encodings, everything else is optional.

-> Even when such is working folk are still writing about fast forward, rewind problems which is amazingly absent from the DLNA spec I read last year.
Bob

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE 2017

Cameras that make great holiday gifts

Let them start the new year with a step up in photo and video quality from a phone.