I have the Hybrid as well, and agree.. the quality of the recording is just OK, nothing to write home about. I am using it on a Mac Mini and it does ok as long as I don’t put the settings to DVD quality record.

You might also look into the Slingbox. I have had great success with the my Macbook, looking at my home TV while sitting in a coffee shop using WiFi access. Much better picture quality and nothing sticking out of a USB port. To bad you can’t record the program onto your laptop…yet.

Regards

Scott

I encode the shows to Mpeg 1 and then mount my server drive, and copy them over. Then I can use my PS2 and Madcats media player to stream them from the server to the TV. Works great.

• Hardware vs. software encoding: This is the primary reason I choose the EyeTV 250; it encodes video in the hardware instead of software. That means low stress for the CPU. I use Activity monitor and find that EyeTV 250 only uses on average 6-7% CPU power on my 2GHz MacBook Core Duo (not Core 2) and with 2GB RAM. I am interested to see the numbers on EyeTV Hybrid.
• Portability: the hybrid is more portable, but I doubt its off-the-air picture quality is any good.
• Digital programming: This is where the hybrid wins, but it still need an antenna to produce decent pictures.

Besides watching TV, one can use the EyeTV to convert old analog sources such as VHS, analog camcorder tapes to DVD. However, the picture quality is not as good as the Canopus ADVC 110. See the comparison in my blog. To summarize my blog: the ADVC 110 produces better pictures when converting from analog sources to digital at the cost of time and user’s effort. The EyeTV 250 produces acceptable result with simpler process. However, the ADVC 110 does not allow the user to watch TV. Use the right tool for your job.