Dahua NVR advice

[allen bell]

I go back to Dahua units that had the ActiveX interface where you could operate the DVR from any Windows device. Over the years many of their 'improvements' may have been necessary but did not, in my opinion, make the system any easier to operate. By the time we got to SmartPSS I became convinced that the authors knew very little about DVRS and even less about Windows. It's hard to imagine so many bugs in one place but there they are. I got used to most of them, of course, but it's still a pain. I looked at other brands and have been assured that, for example HikiVision, is just as buggy just in different ways and that the solution involved a massive upgrade in price to genuine institutional/government-level products.

Then I discovered Blue Iris and I was incredibly impressed with all the work and all the options that went into it. I was in fact not able to get through the learning curve before the eval period expired so I can't say that I saw results that I wanted. If I had the ear of their developers I would suggest that they find someone outside of a programmer - maybe someone in marketing - to make a list of what the average non-technical customers need as defaults and set the software up that way. A way so that 98% of users would never have to even see 90% of the screens. But that's just me.

But anyway all that's just background to my basic questions:

Before I buy a Blue Iris license without even knowing if I can use it ... what about the Dahua NVR line? Does it use the same buggy software? Or does it have it's own buggy software? What's better? What's worse? Or should I just dive into Blue Iris?

your thoughts would be appreciated.

 

[wittaj]

They all have their quirks.

The basic operation of the Dahua NVR interface hasn't substantially changed. It has updated the look/feel but it is basically the same. Probably had more features than when you last used one, but it is basically the same.

 

[allen bell]

They all have their quirks.

The basic operation of the Dahua NVR interface hasn't substantially changed. It has updated the look/feel but it is basically the same. Probably had more features than when you last used one, but it is basically the same.

so you connect to the unit via SmartPSS ?

 

[tigerwillow1]

Then I discovered Blue Iris and I was incredibly impressed with all the work and all the options that went into it. I was in fact not able to get through the learning curve before the eval period expired so I can't say that I saw results that I wanted. If I had the ear of their developers I would suggest that they find someone outside of a programmer - maybe someone in marketing - to make a list of what the average non-technical customers need as defaults and set the software up that way. A way so that 98% of users would never have to even see 90% of the screens. But that's just me.

My NVR is 8 years old and may not reflect current products. I used the NVR and smartPss exclusively for the first 5 to 6 years, then eventually migrated to almost exclusive BI use, while also keeping the NVR going in parallel because it does a fa couple of things that BI doesn't.

NVR opinion:
Exceptionally reliable.
No comment on native (direct connect) interface because I never used it much.
Web/network interface not very well designed in terms of how I want to view cameras and events. It works but is difficult to use.

smartPSS opinion:
Buggy. Got better over the years but still buggy.
User interface much easier to use than the NVR web interface.
Why are smartPSS and the web user interface so different? Dumb corporate decision IMO. Without being told you might not suspect they're from the same company.

I got off to a very bad start with BI for three reasons:
1. User interface so different from smartPSS that unlearning how smartPSS operates was a huge obstacle.
2. BI setup and configuration is a huge confrontation factor. Your comments about typical "average" defaults is spot-on.
3. I started with CPAI installed. Big mistake as the setup was very unreliable, needing restart every couple of days.

An example of horrible BI setup is the need to allocate less space than available for video storage because BI sometimes runs over what you allocate. A pretty big rookie mistake (bug, IMO) in an otherwise very impressive package.

I blew past the eval period before getting BI set up as usable for me. I finally gave in and purchased it, and after another year of learning the complexities and getting it set up without any optional AI , my opinion is:
Exceptionally reliable (but does depend on which release you use and underlying windows setup).
Native user interface better design and easier to use than NVR web interface or smartPSS.
UI3 is what make BI shine for the user interface. Incredibly easier and faster to use than the other NVR or BI user interfaces.

There are 2 reasons I still keep the NVR going:
1. To be able to see the IVS trip lines and object tracking boxes. I sure wish BI could do these.
2. For ID capability at the margins the image quality is a bit sharper than with BI. This could be a BI or UI3 configuration error on my part.

I rarely need to go to the NVR+smartPSS, but when I do, these two added capabilities are valuable to me. If I had to answer which one of NVR or BI I'd give up first, my answer would be neither.