PDA

View Full Version : SqueezeNetwork - Fundamental Question



JJZolx
2005-05-18, 12:20
Ok, I've tried it out and I think SqueezeNetwork is pretty slick. But my question now is: Why?

If you run a SlimServer 24x7 are there any reasons to use SqueezeNetwork? Is it going to make content available that isn's available using the local server? If not, who exactly would use SqueezeNetwork?

I can see people that:

- Only want to listen to Internet radio. They don't have a PC capable of running SlimServer or they don't want to deal with managing one. They don't rip CDs or download mp3s. So SqueezeNetwork turns the Squeezebox2 into a $250-$300 Internet radio/alarm clock.

- Don't want to leave a PC running 24x7, so they'd use SqueezeNetwork for their alarm, or to play music after the PC has been shut down at night, or maybe when they just don't want to run the server.

I could be wrong, but unless I'm missing something this seems like a pretty small audience.
________
Honda CL360 (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Honda_CL360)

Jacob Potter
2005-05-18, 12:31
On 5/18/05, JJZolx <JJZolx.1p8sbn (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> I can see people that:
>
> - Only want to listen to Internet radio. They don't have a PC capable
> of running SlimServer or they don't want to deal with managing one.
> They don't rip CDs or download mp3s. So SqueezeNetwork turns the
> Squeezebox2 into a $250-$300 Internet radio/alarm clock.
>
> - Don't want to leave a PC running 24x7, so they'd use SqueezeNetwork
> for their alarm, or to play music after the PC has been shut down at
> night, or maybe when they just don't want to run the server.

I think you're underestimating the size of that second group :)

- Jacob

seanadams
2005-05-18, 12:36
>
> - Don't want to leave a PC running 24x7, so they'd use SqueezeNetwork
> for their alarm, or to play music after the PC has been shut down at
> night, or maybe when they just don't want to run the server.


The goal of the 1.0 feature set is to address exactly this need.
Future plans for Squeezenetwork services include integration with
SlimServer and your own music collection.

I believe the vast majority of people with broadband connections do
NOT want to have a home server running 24x7. There is also a huge
trend towards households having just a wireless network and one or
two laptops - not a convenient setup for serving music all the time.

The nice thing is that if you DO want to serve your own music
collection, you get the best of both worlds by still having the other
services when your PC is off.

JJZolx
2005-05-18, 13:13
I believe the vast majority of people with broadband connections do
NOT want to have a home server running 24x7. There is also a huge
trend towards households having just a wireless network and one or
two laptops - not a convenient setup for serving music all the time.

I take it the attitude of this vast majority is due to some kind of concern for security? Like if their PC runs 24 hours per day, they feel they're 12 times as likely to get hacked as when it's only run 2 hours? :-)

Are people are _really_ that stupid?
________
herbalaire (http://herbalairevaporizer.com)

Christian Pernegger
2005-05-18, 13:13
> I believe the vast majority of people with broadband connections do
> NOT want to have a home server running 24x7. There is also a huge
> trend towards households having just a wireless network and one or
> two laptops - not a convenient setup for serving music all the time.

I'd have to agree. At the moment I use my 24/7 server as file server,
slimserver, nntp server, smtp server and network backup device and
printing server. It's absolutely essential to the operation of this
household.
BUT it will probably be possible to fulfill most of these functions on
seperate inexpensive commodity devices. After all, I could buy a
printer with ethernet / wireless bult-in. I could move my data to a
successor of a TeraStation that doesn't suck. Running your own mail
and web server is a geek's pastime with decent hosting becoming
available. And who needs newsgroups, that's so 90s ... We're not quite
there yet, but we might be soon.

And I'm perfectly happy with anything that makes the sb more
attractive to the "we use our computer twice a week to check e-mail"
crowd - as long as I can keep my geek toy :))

C.

sbjaerum
2005-05-18, 13:17
I take it the attitude of this vast majority is due to some kind of concern for security? Like if their PC runs 24 hours per day, they feel they're 12 times as likely to get hacked as when it's only run 2 hours? :-)

Are people are _really_ that stupid?

What about noise, heat generation and power consumption?

mherger
2005-05-18, 13:21
> I take it the attitude of this vast majority is due to some kind of
> concern for security? Like if their PC runs 24 hours per day, they
> feel they're 12 times as likely to get hacked as when it's only run 2
> hours? :-)
>
> Are people are _really_ that stupid?

No. But there are people who think energy consumption is a concern. Would
you call them stupid?

--

Michael

-----------------------------------------------------------
Help translate SlimServer by using the
StringEditor Plugin (http://www.herger.net/slim/)

JJZolx
2005-05-18, 13:39
> I take it the attitude of this vast majority is due to some kind of
> concern for security? Like if their PC runs 24 hours per day, they
> feel they're 12 times as likely to get hacked as when it's only run 2
> hours? :-)
>
> Are people are _really_ that stupid?

No. But there are people who think energy consumption is a concern. Would
you call them stupid?

Not at all. I was commenting only on Sean's "people with broadband connections" statement, which seems to point out a fear of keeping a PC powered up and connected to the Internet. I don't doubt for a minute that this is a very common, although misguided, fear.
________
vaporizers (http://vaporizer.org/reviews)

kdf
2005-05-18, 13:46
Quoting JJZolx <JJZolx.1p8vsn (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

> Not at all. I was commenting only on Sean's "people with broadband
> connections" statement, which seems to point out a fear of keeping a PC
> powered up and connected to the Internet. I don't doubt for a minute
> that this is a very common, although misguided, fear.

I believe the statement was meant to discern from those with dialup, who would
be unable to actually use the service without some pc powered up and dialed out
(not to mention not having near enough bandwidth.)

-kdf

nhopton
2005-05-21, 04:36
[...]
If you run a SlimServer 24x7 are there any reasons to use SqueezeNetwork? Is it going to make content available that isn's available using the local server? If not, who exactly would use SqueezeNetwork?

I can see people that:

- Only want to listen to Internet radio.
[...]


*Mainly* want to listen to Internet radio. There are going to be a lot of people like me whose main reason for buying the SB2 is its ability to stream Internet radio without messing about with a computer. I see this as the *major* market for the SB2 and it could be a huge one.

Regards,
Nick.

jackaninny
2005-05-21, 13:31
I take it the attitude of this vast majority is due to some kind of concern for security? Like if their PC runs 24 hours per day, they feel they're 12 times as likely to get hacked as when it's only run 2 hours? :-)

Are people are _really_ that stupid?

maybe people just don't think like you or have the same needs and value propositions?

relen
2005-05-22, 02:22
There are going to be a lot of people like me whose main reason for buying the SB2 is its ability to stream Internet radio without messing about with a computer. I see this as the *major* market for the SB2 and it could be a huge one.

I think SQN is a great idea technologically, but surely if you are targeting users who want to listen to Internet Radio (which I agree is an important capability), the best way to do this is to make the SB capable of accessing a reasonable number of preset URLs without any server (like Roku does) rather than using a remote server.

The other Internet Radio activity that may become increasingly important is the "Listen Again" facility like that offered by the BBC - I am using AlienBBC a lot since I installed it - and that may be a good reason for SQN.

And while we're at it, what happens on SQN with VIP streams in Live365? (though I suppose I'll find out in a few minutes as soon as I install SQN...)

--Richard E

grumpycrab
2005-05-22, 03:44
...[snip]
And while we're at it, what happens on SQN with VIP streams in Live365? (though I suppose I'll find out in a few minutes as soon as I install SQN...)

--Richard E

Well, do VIP streams work through the SqueezeNetwork?
--
Ian

nhopton
2005-05-22, 04:57
I think SQN is a great idea technologically, but surely if you are targeting users who want to listen to Internet Radio (which I agree is an important capability), the best way to do this is to make the SB capable of accessing a reasonable number of preset URLs without any server (like Roku does) rather than using a remote server.
[...]

Hello Richard, I think this is all coming for the SB2 isn't it? I'm sure I read something to this effect recently. One of the stations I really enjoy is K-JAZZ out of Long Beach but at present I have to access this stream using SlimServer, roll on the day when I will be able to store the URL of this stream in the SB2.

Can someone just confirm that the day is coming?

Regards,
Nick.

dean
2005-05-22, 08:10
On May 22, 2005, at 2:22 AM, relen wrote:
>> There are going to be a lot of people like me whose main reason for
>> buying the SB2 is its ability to stream Internet radio without
>> messing
>> about with a computer. I see this as the *major* market for the
>> SB2 and
>> it could be a huge one.
>>
>
> I think SQN is a great idea technologically, but surely if you are
> targeting users who want to listen to Internet Radio (which I agree is
> an important capability), the best way to do this is to make the SB
> capable of accessing a reasonable number of preset URLs without any
> server (like Roku does) rather than using a remote server.
SqueezeNetwork provides a Favorites section that lets the user save
an number of preset URLs.

The "remote server" provides a much better user experience than just
having a short list of URLs to enter manually.

For example, the Live Music Archive of the Internet Archive <http://
www.archive.org/audio/etree.php> is available for browsing and
playback, as are a large number of environmental sounds (I find
Thunder and Rain very soothing), an alarm clock, a "staff favorites"
section called Slim Devices Picks and, of course, access to the
indices of several streaming music providers (SHOUTcast, radioio,
etc...)

> The other Internet Radio activity that may become increasingly
> important is the "Listen Again" facility like that offered by the
> BBC -
> I am using AlienBBC a lot since I installed it - and that may be a
> good
> reason for SQN.
Exactly. Our plans are to continually provide access to more content
over time.

> And while we're at it, what happens on SQN with VIP streams in
> Live365?
> (though I suppose I'll find out in a few minutes as soon as I install
> SQN...)
Right now, the Live365 access isn't turned on in SQN, but we're only
getting started... :)

-dean

JJZolx
2005-05-22, 12:22
I think SQN is a great idea technologically, but surely if you are targeting users who want to listen to Internet Radio (which I agree is an important capability), the best way to do this is to make the SB capable of accessing a reasonable number of preset URLs without any server (like Roku does) rather than using a remote server.

The other Internet Radio activity that may become increasingly important is the "Listen Again" facility like that offered by the BBC - I am using AlienBBC a lot since I installed it - and that may be a good reason for SQN.

And while we're at it, what happens on SQN with VIP streams in Live365? (though I suppose I'll find out in a few minutes as soon as I install SQN...)

My initial thoughts as well. But either implementation can work. In order for you to listen to an Internet radio station, you'll need an good link to the Internet, so accessing the Squeezenetwork first to get this functionality shouldn't make much difference.

But there are certainly some tall challenges ahead for Slim Devices in providing this service.

First, the network must _always_ be available. We all know what happens when key servers go down - "bad" things are said, buyer confidence wains, sales plummet, companies disappear. Now, 100% uptime is very nearly achievable, but it's costly and requires a lot of planning - equipment redundancy, quality datacenters with multiple upstream providers, good power backup, generators, etc.

Secondly, they'll probably need to have server installations physically located all over the world for UI performance reasons. At the very least, one in Europe. With the same caveats regarding near 100% availability.

I expect to see this functionality in a number of other consumer devices, but more likely embedded in firmware. Take an XBox 360 or Playstation 3, or the typical DVD player with an added ethernet port and a little programming, and you'll have 90% of the Squeezenetwork functionality without the 'network' concerns or costs.
________
herbal vaporizer (http://herbalvaporizers.info)

nhopton
2005-05-22, 12:37
[...] SqueezeNetwork provides a Favorites section that lets the user save an number of preset URLs. The "remote server" provides a much better user experience than just having a short list of URLs to enter manually. [...]

This is all good stuff, of course, but the facility needs to exist to enter and store URLs by hand as well. Some of the Internet radio streams I listen to aren't listed by Shoutcast, et cetera and I need to be able to enter the URLs for these manually into 'Favourites' either from the PC or by using the remote.

Do confirm that it will be possible to do this before too long.

Regards,
Nick.

grumpycrab
2005-05-24, 13:49
...[snip]
Right now, the Live365 access isn't turned on in SQN, but we're only
getting started... :)

-dean
Tell me when Live365 VIP access is turned on (I assume this will be May as you state in all the SQN blurb :-) and I'll buy a Squeezebox2. Simple as that.
--
Grumps