Is mgcamd protocol better than cccamd

[arturor]

Hello guys. As title says, is mgcamd better than cccam? Which are the pros and cons?

[bokkie]

Re: Is mgcamd protocol better than cccamd

Some say that mgcamd is faster zapping than cccam and has lower ecm.
I personally haven't tried it as my server doesn't allow it, but many people prefer it.
remember it is client only.

[herrr]

Re: Is mgcamd protocol better than cccamd

Some say that mgcamd is faster zapping than cccam and has lower ecm.
I personally haven't tried it as my server doesn't allow it, but many people prefer it.
remember it is client only.

I didn't try it by myself, but I read interesting things about emu with keys.
I think it maked it possible some EMU, like TNT, before new version of CCcam did.

[digicon]

Re: Is mgcamd protocol better than cccamd

Some say that mgcamd is faster zapping than cccam and has lower ecm.
I personally haven't tried it as my server doesn't allow it, but many people prefer it.
remember it is client only.

I am not sure what you exactly mean by that 'Client Only' as mgcamd can be used by either and can also handle Multiple servers through 1 line.

The main reason why its used is that it stores CW's in cache so if say a server has a blip you wont notice in as much in mgcamd through an 'N' line as much as what you would using a 'C' line in CCcam, thats the main reason most payservers use them

[microchick]

Re: Is mgcamd protocol better than cccamd

All depends on your receiver. If you have a linux receiver then c line or any line is better but for other cheapos they provide n line. Most of the servers would want to know what receiver do you use before you subscribe.

[marian321]

Re: Is mgcamd protocol better than cccamd

There's a little difference in the ecm-request and also a little difference in zapping speed. This depends on the server you are connected. If the server is too slow or overloaded, no cam can help.

[mahrkpat]

Re: Is mgcamd protocol better than cccamd

When we compare mgcamd and cccam, while MGCamd allows the user and the card added with no reboot/restart/interruption, with CCcam, after each adding, this could be either a user or a card, the system should be restarted, and this means the loss of 15 to 20 seconds, whenever the mentioned execution is repeated.

Some CCcam server owners themselves build or exchange with extra servers and give extra lines to prevent this loss of time, yet this is in my opinion, completely needless for a small procedure/operation. Besides, the card Exchange causes nothing but a heavy load and traffic upon cards resulting in frequent glitches/freezes by which the viewing plesure is significantly worsend.

Contrary to CCcam, MgCamd uses the cache buffer. It means that when a channel is opened, the MGCamd server saves the channel key and when another user or users open the same channel/channels, MGCamd receives and uses that key data from buffer. This makes the server much faster because of the fact that it does not have to check the card twice for the key data again, so it allows a faster channel zapping and a much better tv experience.

Mgcamd server does not stop without the human intrusion, meaning the interfearance of the server admin. Where as, the biggest problem of the CCCam server is the great likelyhood to stop randomly at any unpredictable time due to the massive amount of requests from the cards. Even commands scripted for the automatic reset in case the server stops, could not prevent the time loss described above.

A quote don't know if accurate or not.

[marian321]

Re: Is mgcamd protocol better than cccamd

Contrary to CCcam, MgCamd uses the cache buffer. It means that when a channel is opened, the MGCamd server saves the channel key and when another user or users open the same channel/channels, MGCamd receives and uses that key data from buffer. This makes the server much faster because of the fact that it does not have to check the card twice for the key data again, so it allows a faster channel zapping and a much better tv experience.

This is the big advantage e.g. for football matches which means that the server can answer faster on many ecm-requests of the same program (if they can reach the server at the same time).

[cisko]

Re: Is mgcamd protocol better than cccamd

This is a server side advantage, also Oscam has it. The bigger advantage is, in my personal opinion, the better support of n-line, and the ability to use one n-line for more than one caid (obviously either client and server must run Mgcamd or equivalent software with that function enabled).