Tvheadend

I agree with this, I just don't like "additional cost". We need some succinct way of describing the fact its the inverse of what people expect.

De-priotise? still not good

Adam

I asked SWMBO for a view from a non-technical perspective, and simply had "why don't you add a note that says '0=highest priority, 10000=lowest?'".

If we want to keep it as a checkbox with a simple description, then I suppose you're into "cost" instead of "priority", since that's effectively what you're doing ("Increase adapter cost by..."). Dredging other euphemisms, all I can think of otherwise is something around "adapter queue position" or "serving position" - kind of take-a-ticket style.

I believe this has been fixed?

Sam Stenvall wrote:

I believe this has been fixed?

Agree. Current model is apparently:

Streaming Priority

The tuner priority value for streamed channels through HTTP or HTSP (higher value = higher priority to use this tuner). If not set (zero), the standard priority value is used.