PDA

View Full Version : A user's perspective



Bart Maguire
2005-01-05, 13:28
Yes, thanks for the suggestions that I make the playlists in Winamp (or
iTunes, or whatever) and open them in Slimserver. This will work, of
course, and may be the way forward, but it would be better it I could do
it within Slimserver. If the web interface was keyboard-shortcut
enabled, if moving tracks around the playlist didn't involve moving
them one place at a time and waiting for a refresh(!) I would be
happier. If the software was properly integrated into the shell so that I
could use the native file search and management facilities and then
send tracks to the playlist, that would be best.

John L Fjellstad
2005-01-05, 13:48
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 08:28:34PM -0000, Bart Maguire wrote:

> happier. If the software was properly integrated into the shell so that I
> could use the native file search and management facilities and then
> send tracks to the playlist, that would be best.

Which shell, though? Would you be happy if they integrated it with the
KDE shell on Linux?

--
John L. Fjellstad
web: http://www.fjellstad.org/ Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

Mike Kozlowski
2005-01-05, 19:23
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Bart Maguire wrote:

> Yes, thanks for the suggestions that I make the playlists in Winamp (or
> iTunes, or whatever) and open them in Slimserver. This will work, of
> course, and may be the way forward, but it would be better it I could do
> it within Slimserver. If the web interface was keyboard-shortcut
> enabled, if moving tracks around the playlist didn't involve moving
> them one place at a time and waiting for a refresh(!) I would be
> happier. If the software was properly integrated into the shell so that I
> could use the native file search and management facilities and then
> send tracks to the playlist, that would be best.

Welcome to the world of Web interfaces. They have disadvantages, yes, but
they also have advantages -- I haven't seen a desktop app yet with the
same ease of navigation of SlimServer, or the same combination of
simplicity and attractiveness.

--
Mike Kozlowski
http://www.klio.org/mlk/

Michael Scott
2005-01-06, 15:25
Quoting Bart Maguire <bartmaguire (AT) yahoo (DOT) co.uk>:

> it within Slimserver. If the web interface was keyboard-shortcut
> enabled, if moving tracks around the playlist didn't involve moving
> them one place at a time and waiting for a refresh(!) I would be

That is no simple task in a web interface (unless you load up on java stuff,
which has it's own problems).

> happier. If the software was properly integrated into the shell so that
> I could use the native file search and management facilities and then
> send tracks to the playlist, that would be best.

Yes, but into WHAT shell would you integrate it? Think multi-platform and
you'll see that is unreasonable. The Windows shell, Mac OS, X86, OS/2? Not
everybody runs the same OS and slimserver runs on a lot of different platforms!

Because it's open source, you are welcome to write a module to do this and maybe
even find others who would use it. If you do, don't forget to include the GEM
desktop interface on MS-DOS 6.0. :-)

----------------------
- Mike Scott
- mscott (AT) pyewacket (DOT) org

kdf
2005-01-06, 15:35
Quoting Michael Scott <mscott (AT) pyewacket (DOT) org>:

> Quoting Bart Maguire <bartmaguire (AT) yahoo (DOT) co.uk>:
>
> > it within Slimserver. If the web interface was keyboard-shortcut
> > enabled, if moving tracks around the playlist didn't involve moving
> > them one place at a time and waiting for a refresh(!) I would be
>
> That is no simple task in a web interface (unless you load up on java stuff,
> which has it's own problems).

actually browsers have keyboard control built-in. its just a painful overuse of
the tab key in order to navigate the links.
-kdf

Dan Sully
2005-01-06, 15:39
* kdf shaped the electrons to say...

>> > it within Slimserver. If the web interface was keyboard-shortcut
>> > enabled, if moving tracks around the playlist didn't involve moving
>> > them one place at a time and waiting for a refresh(!) I would be
>>
>> That is no simple task in a web interface (unless you load up on java stuff,
>> which has it's own problems).
>
>actually browsers have keyboard control built-in. its just a painful overuse of
>the tab key in order to navigate the links.

Or if someone is creative and looks at how GMail is doing keyboard (non-tab)
shortcuts with their cross platform Javascript, that would work too. :)

-D
--
<iNoah> my pdp goes to 11.

Phil Thien
2005-01-07, 06:52
Exactly. I couldn't agree more with this post. Initial reaction from new
users is interesting, but so often they tell you how the product didn't meet
their original expectations ("disappointed because no native Windows
software with Windows interface," for example). It is only after they've
used the product for several days to months that they really begin the
underlying beauty of open-source cross-platform. I suppose some of them,
due to the fact that they really only use Windows computers, will never see
the beauty of cross-platform.

I wonder how many programmers are created by projects like this. You know,
someone identifies a change they'd like, can't find anyone else interested
in implementing it, and therefore decides to learn to do it themselves.
There have got to be a few.

Keep it open-source cross-platform!

I have used it (Slimp3) every day for at least two+ years and would never do
without.

-Phil

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Scott" <mscott (AT) pyewacket (DOT) org>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 4:25 PM
Subject: [slim] A user's perspective


> Because it's open source, you are welcome to write a module to do this and
> maybe
> even find others who would use it. If you do, don't forget to include the
> GEM
> desktop interface on MS-DOS 6.0. :-)
>
> ----------------------
> - Mike Scott
> - mscott (AT) pyewacket (DOT) org
>
>

Graham Ridgway at home
2005-01-07, 12:15
That's me! I don't see the beauty of open-source cross platform! Really I
don't.

You'll need to elucidate!

Graham
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Thien" <jpt (AT) cgallery (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 1:52 PM
Subject: [slim] A user's perspective


> It is only after they've used the product for several days to months that
> they really begin the underlying beauty of open-source cross-platform. I
> suppose some of them, due to the fact that they really only use Windows
> computers, will never see the beauty of cross-platform.

Daniel Cohen
2005-01-07, 12:32
On 7/1/05 at 7:15 pm +0000, Graham Ridgway at home wrote
>That's me! I don't see the beauty of open-source cross platform!
>Really I don't.

I don't expect a Windows user would see the value (beauty, point) of
a system that doesn't require a computer running Windows.

As a Mac user, many of the devices that are in the same area to a
Squeezebox are simply unusable.
--
Daniel Cohen

Jeff Coffler
2005-01-07, 12:35
> That's me! I don't see the beauty of open-source cross platform! Really
> I don't.
>
> You'll need to elucidate!

The beauty of the open-source cross platform architecture for me (and for
basic music, I don't "tinker" - I just want it to work):

1. Open Source: If you want to do something the manufacturer didn't
necessarily envision, then without an open source architecture, you're
screwed. In my case, I have a AMX NetLinx home automation system (a fairly
sophisticated device that controls tons of stuff in my house - not just A/V,
but lighting, HVAC, alarm system, and other stuff). It wasn't too difficult
to extend SlimServer to easily and efficiently allow music selection and
control on my AMX home automation system.

Now to be clear, I don't "tinker". I don't care much what format my music
is (prefer lossless, though), as long as it works. I want skip-free,
uninterrupted playback, and my expectation is that it "just works". I have
that reliably (with wired SB's). If I didn't, then the SB wouldn't live
long in my house.

And if I couldn't control it from the NetLinx system, it's value would be
significantly reduced to me. I hit one button on my NetLinx panel, and the
TV is turned off (if on), the receiver is turned on (if off), and the
Squeezebox input is selected. Other stuff (DVD player, VCR, etc) is turned
off if on. Now I'd have to put that down the panel and pick up the
Squeezebox remote? No thanks ...

Because it's open source, I push "Music", and I get a control screen that
totally controls that Squeezebox via it's CLI (TCP/IP) interface.

2. Cross platform: Initially, I deployed SlimServer on Windows. I had
Windows, it's up all the time, and it was the logical choice. Since that
time, I've been using UNIX more and more. I've noted that my UNIX system is
FAR more reliable than my Windows system. I can keep my UNIX system fully
patched, up to date, and up for 6-12+ months at a time. In fact, I've NEVER
needed to reboot my UNIX system for anything except moving the hardware,
power failures, etc.

The Windows system, on the other hand, commonly needs to be rebooted to
install critical security patches. I have time to do that right after I put
our twin boys to bed. But that's one of the exact times that the music
system needs to work (since the kids listen to music as they go to sleep).
This makes it non-trivial to keep my Windows system patched and up to date.

Because SlimServer is cross-platform, no sweat. Move the music files to
UNIX, install SlimServer there, and I'm ready to go.

Phil had said:

> It is only after they've used the product for several days to months that
> they really begin the underlying beauty of open-source cross-platform. I
> suppose some of them, due to the fact that they really only use Windows
> computers, will never see the beauty of cross-platform.

I totally agree with this. I've only had Squeezebox's for perhaps four
months. But over that time, I've grown to totally appreciate it's
open-source cross-platform design. It's a key differentiator.

-- Jeff


----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Ridgway at home" <graham (AT) ridgworld (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 11:15 AM
Subject: [slim] A user's perspective


> That's me! I don't see the beauty of open-source cross platform! Really
> I don't.
>
> You'll need to elucidate!
>
> Graham

Jack Coates
2005-01-07, 14:31
....
> 2. Cross platform: Initially, I deployed SlimServer on Windows. I had
> Windows, it's up all the time, and it was the logical choice. Since
> that time, I've been using UNIX more and more. I've noted that my UNIX
> system is FAR more reliable than my Windows system. I can keep my UNIX
> system fully patched, up to date, and up for 6-12+ months at a time. In
> fact, I've NEVER needed to reboot my UNIX system for anything except
> moving the hardware, power failures, etc.
>
> The Windows system, on the other hand, commonly needs to be rebooted to
> install critical security patches. I have time to do that right after I
> put our twin boys to bed. But that's one of the exact times that the
> music system needs to work (since the kids listen to music as they go to
> sleep). This makes it non-trivial to keep my Windows system patched and
> up to date.

muwhahaha...
[jack@felix jack]$ w
13:20:06 up 134 days, 2:25, 3 users, load average: 0.14, 0.14, 0.09

I've seen Windows systems with good uptime starting to pop up since
Server 2003 was released, but as you point out they've got a bunch of
security holes still in place because they haven't rebooted.

twin boys? Yikes :)

--
Jack at Monkeynoodle dot Org: It's a Scientific Venture...
Riding the Emergency Third Rail Power Trip since 1996!

Graham Ridgway at home
2005-01-07, 15:09
still don't!
what's it go to do with Windows users?
Graham
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Cohen" <danco (AT) f2s (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 7:32 PM
Subject: [slim] A user's perspective


> On 7/1/05 at 7:15 pm +0000, Graham Ridgway at home wrote
>>That's me! I don't see the beauty of open-source cross platform!
>>Really I don't.
>
> I don't expect a Windows user would see the value (beauty, point) of
> a system that doesn't require a computer running Windows.
>
> As a Mac user, many of the devices that are in the same area to a
> Squeezebox are simply unusable.
> --
> Daniel Cohen
>

kdf
2005-01-07, 15:19
Quoting Graham Ridgway at home <graham (AT) ridgworld (DOT) com>:

> still don't!
> what's it go to do with Windows users?

because windows users never have to fight to find something that works with
windows. Finding a webcam that works with OSX is painful. Finding any
peripheral that work with linux is the third level of hell. Cross platform
means none of the users of OSX or Linux have to wait for the port, and the
developers can write for all versions with the same effort. Usually, the
windows drivers/appplications come out and the rest of us have to wait while
the company decides if they want to bother. Even if they do, its often a
half-cocked attempt. If thats just a bit to left of centre for you, thats fine.
Not everyone appreciates a good scotch either. You don't have to.

-kdf

Graham Ridgway at home
2005-01-07, 15:39
all true kdf, but it doesn't really benefit me wrto the slim system. It
works (well, but not the "brilliant" it used to be) on my platform. So to
the question of fully appreciatin' the beauty of cross-platform, surely
that's for the developers and tinkerers, not your boggo users like me?

Graham

BTW lest anything understandably think otherwise, I really like my slim
devices system. I just want to work a bit better!
----- Original Message -----
From: "kdf" <slim-mail (AT) deane-freeman (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 10:19 PM
Subject: [slim] A user's perspective


> Quoting Graham Ridgway at home <graham (AT) ridgworld (DOT) com>:
>
>> still don't!
>> what's it go to do with Windows users?
>
> because windows users never have to fight to find something that works
> with
> windows. Finding a webcam that works with OSX is painful. Finding any
> peripheral that work with linux is the third level of hell. Cross
> platform
> means none of the users of OSX or Linux have to wait for the port, and the
> developers can write for all versions with the same effort. Usually, the
> windows drivers/appplications come out and the rest of us have to wait
> while
> the company decides if they want to bother. Even if they do, its often a
> half-cocked attempt. If thats just a bit to left of centre for you, thats
> fine.
> Not everyone appreciates a good scotch either. You don't have to.
>
> -kdf
>

Jules Taplin
2005-01-07, 16:07
But, Graham, this is a two way street.

Consider the amount of 3rd party software available for slimserver. A
LOT of that software runs on Windows, and wasn't written by Windows
developers. AlienBBC, for example, WILL finally work on Windows, but
would never have been written for a windows platform in the first place,
because, quite frankly, most windows users aren't into producing
software, and I wouldn't have bought into the Squeezeboxes in the first
place, if it was a closed, windows-server only product.

Equally, and this is a slightly more advanced point - I genuinely
believe that Slim Devices insisting on cross-platform support is a large
part of the reason that Squeezeboxes have the breadth of support for
music formats, and the capabilities that it currently enjoys. It's
forced the development of the software down a line that emphesises the
importance of open standards, and in a market where all the content
producers are desparate to push us down a rights destroying path,
slimserver runs beautifully with none of that nonsense, and provides an
example of the sort of capabilities that a DRM-encumbered, closed system
will find incredibly difficult to emulate (you try to find a DRM
encumbered system that allows me to stream my music to work as easily as
I play it within my home, is prepared to stream any audio format it
supports to anything that can read an mp3 file - or that is prepared to
play music you own directly digitally right the way from it's original
source to a digital out). Bear in mind that even the current Windows
driverse for my SOUND CARD disable the digital output, if they're told
that the data might be protected - it's my data, and my sound card, and
my speakers, but apparently I can't listen to it as clearly as I'd like,
because I MIGHT be a bad man who steals music that I was clearly about
to pay for otherwise.

I know I get on my high horse about this stuff once in a while, but this
stuff MATTERS - if we don't build the systems that allow us to have
these capabilities now, before we know it - the entire technology sector
will be patented to the point where we CAN'T build them, or legislation
will be passed to prevent these kinds of clearly fair-use activities
taking place.

So.... you may not care for tinkering with this stuff - but it's a
genuine good that there are people out there who are. And don't worry
about slim wasting time developing stuff that's not important to you -
they're not. We are, and we're giving it away to you for free. So...
everybody's happy, right?


-- Jules



Graham Ridgway at home wrote:

> all true kdf, but it doesn't really benefit me wrto the slim system.
> It works (well, but not the "brilliant" it used to be) on my
> platform. So to the question of fully appreciatin' the beauty of
> cross-platform, surely that's for the developers and tinkerers, not
> your boggo users like me?
>
> Graham
>
> BTW lest anything understandably think otherwise, I really like my
> slim devices system. I just want to work a bit better!
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "kdf" <slim-mail (AT) deane-freeman (DOT) com>
> To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 10:19 PM
> Subject: [slim] A user's perspective
>
>
>> Quoting Graham Ridgway at home <graham (AT) ridgworld (DOT) com>:
>>
>>> still don't!
>>> what's it go to do with Windows users?
>>
>>
>> because windows users never have to fight to find something that
>> works with
>> windows. Finding a webcam that works with OSX is painful. Finding any
>> peripheral that work with linux is the third level of hell. Cross
>> platform
>> means none of the users of OSX or Linux have to wait for the port,
>> and the
>> developers can write for all versions with the same effort. Usually,
>> the
>> windows drivers/appplications come out and the rest of us have to
>> wait while
>> the company decides if they want to bother. Even if they do, its
>> often a
>> half-cocked attempt. If thats just a bit to left of centre for you,
>> thats fine.
>> Not everyone appreciates a good scotch either. You don't have to.
>>
>> -kdf
>>

kdf
2005-01-07, 16:28
Quoting Graham Ridgway at home <graham (AT) ridgworld (DOT) com>:

> all true kdf, but it doesn't really benefit me wrto the slim system. It
> works (well, but not the "brilliant" it used to be) on my platform. So to
> the question of fully appreciatin' the beauty of cross-platform, surely
> that's for the developers and tinkerers, not your boggo users like me?

my opinion happens to be that "Windows users" generally have no appreciation
whatsoever of other operating systems, what it takes to build applications or
even the intricacy of the PC itself. That's not a fault, its what Windows was
designed to do: create a market where people think they need WindowsXP and the
fastest P4 in order to surf the 'interweb'.

What is of benefit to you is wholly up to you. You seemed to be asking why a
lack of appreciation might be linked to the label of 'windows user', so I
answered.

> BTW lest anything understandably think otherwise, I really like my slim
> devices system. I just want to work a bit better!

So do I. In fact, the whole reason I'm involved in this list and involved in
writing code is because of that. Getting right down to it, it could be said
that I dont really care what any given user wants, aside from me. I want the
server to be better, I send in a patch. If I'm lucky, then other users will
think its better too. There will always be those who don't. Thankfully I'm not
the only person writing any code, so the odds are amongst those who do that the
majority of users' will all get what they define as 'better'.

From the other side of the wall, I dont hate users. I just want them to be a
bit easier to write code for :) It's frustrating to have music stutter. It's
just as frustrating to try to write code to fix a bug you can't see while being
asked "how hard could it be?" (I know that you didn't do this...but its my
favourite example)

At this point, the thread has gone way off on a tangent, but I will say that I
really liked the original post. Its a great thing to try and consider the
squeezebox as an appliance. In many ways, networked streaming music players
are still very much in their infancy. More like the black and white, round
screen days of TV when you had to stand on a chair with the rabbit ears,
looking like an integral, in order to see Uncle Milty in his latest dress than
the slick 42" diagonal 4" deep plasma tv that you hang on your wall. Even PC's
with more than 20 years of maturity still can't handle 'instant on'. We all
want it to 'just work'. Many things do. But, people still demand features.
Take a look at bugs.slimdevices.com. 353 currently open reports, of which 153
are enhancement requests, and every one of them has a user anxously waiting to
get their request granted. The flexibility and open source nature of
slimserver means that all of those people have a good chance of having that.
For them, THAT makes their experience of squeezebox better, and they may or may
not appreciate the beauty either :)

-kdf

Daniel Cohen
2005-01-08, 00:36
On 7/1/05 at 10:39 pm +0000, Graham Ridgway at home wrote
>all true kdf, but it doesn't really benefit me wrto the slim system.
>It works (well, but not the "brilliant" it used to be) on my
>platform. So to the question of fully appreciatin' the beauty of
>cross-platform, surely that's for the developers and tinkerers, not
>your boggo users like me?

It doesn't benefit *you* but it does benefit *me*.

Alright, Mac users are a small minority ( and Linux users even
smaller), but many of us are "boggo users" not "tinkerers". I'm
grateful to be catered for.
--
Daniel Cohen

Kevin O. Lepard
2005-01-08, 09:24
>On 7/1/05 at 10:39 pm +0000, Graham Ridgway at home wrote
>>all true kdf, but it doesn't really benefit me wrto the slim
>>system. It works (well, but not the "brilliant" it used to be) on
>>my platform. So to the question of fully appreciatin' the beauty
>>of cross-platform, surely that's for the developers and tinkerers,
>>not your boggo users like me?
>
>It doesn't benefit *you* but it does benefit *me*.

I would argue that it does benefit him as--particularly for a small
company--a larger base of users is better.

I would also argue that having the slimserver as open source offers
some level of protection from obsolescence if the slim folks ever go
out of business. The perl can still be used and modified to keep
your hardware useful.

Before you say that no one would do this, I can point you to two
communities (and I'm sure there are others) that actively support
obsolete hardware: Newton and Vectrex.

Kevin
--
Kevin O. Lepard
kolepard (AT) charter (DOT) net

Happiness is being 100% Microsoft free.