PDA

View Full Version : Softsqueeze on Win98?



aubuti
2005-10-29, 10:47
Hi all. I don't have a Squeezebox yet, but to check it out I've recently set up slimserver 6.2 on a Linux box (running Ubuntu 5.10), and have had only very few problems using Softsqueeze 2.2 to connect to the slimserver. Softsqueeze is running on a Win XP machine and on a Win 2000 machine. Everything is running over a fairly standard home wired/wireless LAN.

Today I tried adding an old Win98 computer to the mix, and Softsqueeze won't connect. In the preferences I can see that it found the hostname of the server. But it doesn't know what version of slimserver is running on the server, and the screen perpetually displays:

Please wait
Connecting to Slim Server

Where it waits and waits. Any clues? I've just done a fresh re-install of Win98 on this computer, which is an old Toshiba Pentium MMX (166MHz). Likewise the Java is a fresh install.

Any advice appreciated. Thanks.
-Ken

aubuti
2005-10-29, 12:26
Sorry to reply to own post, but now it's connected. Just before posting I installed the java mp3 plugin, and it still didn't connect. But after posting, and after it stewed there for 5-10 more minutes it connected.

Unfortunately, the results were no good once connected. The music was cutting in and out in 1-2 second cycles and basically unlistenable, even when it was the only softsqueeze connected.

Is the configuration on that computer below the minimum system requirements (which I couldn't find anywhere)? To recap, Pentium MMX 166MHz, 64MB RAM, running Win98SE. Don't have the sound card details handy. No big deal if it's too wimpy -- just an idea I had before sending it off for donation or recycling.

Thanks.
-Ken

Music Machine
2005-10-29, 19:23
Here's a link to the systems requirements page:

http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_specs.html

Regards

aubuti
2005-10-30, 06:36
Thanks, but that's for the requirements for the server machine (i.e., the machine running slimserver). I meant the system requirements for the Softsqueeze java application, which is the "virtual" Squeezebox. Sorry for the ambiguity in my request.

mherger
2005-10-30, 13:49
> I meant the system requirements for
> the Softsqueeze java application, which is the "virtual" Squeezebox.
> Sorry for the ambiguity in my request.

I once had slimserver stream a real stream through alienbbc (mplayer) to a
softsqueeze on a P/200 with 64MB RAM. It did work (CPU at 100% load), but
was rather touchy. I think SoftSqueeze alone might be ok. But you'll know
for sur if you just launch your machine and do the test yourself!

--

Michael

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

aubuti
2005-10-31, 09:09
Thanks. As per my earlier posts (10-29) it's not working well, with music cutting in and out, and really slooowww Softsqueeze menus. So I was asking for more info to try to determine if it was a completely lost cause on that relic machine, or if there were some things I could tweak to get it working.

From the sounds of your experience with the P200, I'm probably beating a dead horse.....

Maybe there's player software that works well with slimserver but is less demanding of resources than Softsqueeze? (That is, something other than the standard Windows Media Player that downloaded the whole stream from http://localhost:9000/stream.mp3 until the hard drive filled up!!).

Thanks again.

snarlydwarf
2005-10-31, 10:40
Maybe there's player software that works well with slimserver but is less demanding of resources than Softsqueeze? (That is, something other than the standard Windows Media Player that downloaded the whole stream from http://localhost:9000/stream.mp3 until the hard drive filled up!!).

Hah... i find that WMP story amusing. ;P

Winamp works "fine" with the stream.mp3 URL, but it's nowhere near as nice as SoftSqueeze (when you have the resources for it... Java seems to always ... well, suck) and SoftSqueeze is nowhere near as nice as a real Squeezebox.

If you can deal without the menus and such and especially if you don't change tracks a lot (for me, the buffering on Winamp or XMMS gets annoying since it's something the server can't say "stop, I'm moving to another track, just throw away what you have!"), then I'd try Winamp. It should be a much lighter client load than Softsqueeze.

Or break down and get a squeezebox for that location. :P

aubuti
2005-10-31, 14:46
Thanks for the advice. I was wondering about Winamp or maybe foobar2000. The current Winamp demands more than this system has, but I have an old Winamp 2.80 (and maybe a 3.x as well) that might work with this.

But you're right, in the end it probably just means I'll get a Squeezebox for that location sooner rather than later. Fortunately it's in a place where it's pretty easy to run ethernet cable, and a wired SB2 is a deal these days.

-Ken

aubuti
2005-11-01, 07:52
I tried it with Winamp 2.80 and it works well. It was a little "fiddly" getting the stream started (for some reason the slimserver web interface kept wanting to send the stream to a different player, until I made it forget that player), but then it played through with no hiccups.

The real solution is clearly to put a squeezebox in this location, but for now it's a zero-cost solution for getting music to that location. Although my wife thinks it's just something I made up to avoid throwing out an old computer ;o)