PDA

View Full Version : I love my Squeezebox, but it NEVER works perfectly



dspeirs
2005-11-04, 19:00
I love my Squeezebox, don't get me wrong, BUT I always have to tinker with it to get it to work. Almost everytime I turn on my computer I either have to restart SlimServer or hold down the power button on the remote and force a restart of the hardware. Question, does anyone else go through this? Again, I love the squeezebox but just hate the fact it requires so much time. Because of this I stopped recommended it to freinds because I hated getting calls all the time and walking them through the process of rebooting and debugging.

Now, I would like to find out what I am doing wrong and what I should be doing to get my system bullet proof. I want squeezebox to work EVERYTIME I boot my computer. Help.

My System:
I have a dedicated Hp P4 system running XP Home. I have two 200 MB hard drives that are redundant and backup on a dayily basis (using SmartSync Pro). The computer has almost no other applications on it as I use it exclusively for Squeezebox and iPod. I run iTunes to manage my music and use EAC to rip music to a folder hen use iTunes to add it to the library and add artwork and so on. I am currently using 6.2.0 - 4753 Windows XP - EN - cp1252.

For example, I booted my computer today and slimserver automatically stats. When I open a browser and go to http://localhost:9000/ it says my Player was not found. This happens all the time. If I reboot the hardware it will work. But, I shouldn't have to do this.

Anyone have any ideas what I should do? What other info can I provide?

Again, I don't mean to harp on SlimDevices or Squeezebox - I do love it (when it works). I do think, though, that this SHOULD work without the problems I have.

Dan

thespaugh
2005-11-04, 19:59
I can't agree with you more. I've had my SB2 for a month and it seems like I troll these forums nightly trying to figure out what tweaks need to be done so that I have consistently good results. I LOVE MY SB2 and it works great - IF I don't touch it. Unfortunately, when I switch from FLAC to Internet radio, or try to synchronize Softsqueeze, or something else "wrong", I hold my breath because I know too often it means I have a squeezeBRICK2 in my living room and I'm rebooting.

I've held off on ordering additional units and recommending the SB to others until SlimDevices develops a more finished product. I understand the rush to get a product up and going while keeping it cutting edge but these SB2s still feel very beta. I'm hoping in a month or two the bugs will be ironed out through firmware updates / Slimserver revisions so that I can feel comfortable ordering additional units as well as telling others "buy one!"

My 2 cents - I know SlimDevices has to consider aesthetics, especially given today's hot consumer technology products like the Nano, but I think they should have allocated their money & resources to solidifying the software/firmware on the SB2 rather than producing a "prettier" wrapper (SB3).

Michaelwagner
2005-11-04, 20:15
I booted my computer today and slimserver automatically stats. When I open a browser and go to http://localhost:9000/ it says my Player was not found. This happens all the time. If I reboot the hardware it will work.This started happening to me recently too. I assumed it was just my unit. Perhaps something about the auto find each other code broke.

bossanova808
2005-11-04, 20:16
..and yet there are hundreds of us using the SB2 all day every day with zero problems and nothing but satisfaction....

It seems like 99% of the problems people have are through:
- Dodgy networks (wireless or otherwise - often seem the router is at fault)
- Crappy ripping/tagging technique
- Mistakes/bad/old plugins/itunes

If you're like me - ripped with EAC and flacattack, basic win XP server box with some disks and slimserver on it, and one good quality wireless router to link everything together, then the whole thing is pretty much a no-brainer, and the quality and versatility is truly fantastic

(only big thing missing is smart dynamic playlists natively, and that will come with version 6.5 I believe...)

I've had one (just one) problem - whne I installed 6.2 the slimservice service disappeard. Took about 10 mins to solve, and in the other 6 months the player has benn 100% perfect. I had more hassle from my old (very expensive) CD player!!

dspeirs
2005-11-04, 20:42
Bossa,
Like you I have a dedicated machine and still having problems. I don't have old plugins installed and dont have any oddball ones active (other than Audioscrobbler Submitter).

I use a netgear router which has been solid for me for all other equipment. I also rip with either EAC or iTunes and keep to MP3 or AAC.

Side question: If I want to strip my machine of unnessesary stuff is it worth it? Will it speed up my machine and is it hard to do? Is there a site that shows how to do this?

Where do I start to find out how to fix my Squeezebox so it works everytime?

Dan

thespaugh
2005-11-04, 22:57
Bossa,

Just to add to my point (that the SB still feels a little beta to me) look at the server change logs from 6.1 to 6.2. In the bugs section (I know not all items are “bugs”) there are over 230 items that were fixed/manipulated. http://www.slimdevices.com/Changelog6.html

Many of these 230 items are independent of: Dodgy networks, Crappy ripping/tagging technique, plugins...18 items mention “crash” in their title.

I know SlimDevices will fix many bugs/issues in 6.5 and add more and more cool features, but right now my device doesn’t work 100% of the time. In my case it’s ~90% of the time, yet I still love it. I am however waiting for them to improve it even more before purchasing my next two...hopefully before Dec 1st so I can use 100of2 promo code. ;-)

Cleve
2005-11-05, 06:15
I'm inclined to think, after a week of usage, that Squeezebox's Slimserver is 99% there. In other words, late beta - but not *quite* ready for prime time, since not all the features work reliably.

I didn't have any connectivity or network problems, but software has intermittent problems playing supported file types like AIFF. Since I have tons of storage space, I had planned to rip all my cds into AIFFs and store on my HDDs, but I'm kind of on "hold" with that, until I get an answer back from slimserver tech support as to why it can read .WAV files fine, but only about 90% of .AIFF files in the SAME directory!

For comparison, I've been using Winamp since 1998, and never ONCE has Winamp failed to play an uncorrupted file of any type. Yet this is a frequent, recurring problem with the Slimserver software.

kefa
2005-11-05, 07:44
I use slimserver every day (v6.1.1 on Fedora Core 4) and have never had to restart. I am extremely impressed with it to date.

I've problems with choppy sound (turned out to be poor wifi reception - buffer emptying) and garbled sound in Alien BBC plugin (turns out to be an mplayer bug) but that's about it.

Haven't upgraded to 6.2 but plan to upgrade as soon as 6.2.1 is released

dfk
2005-11-05, 07:45
I have had my SB2 for 3 weeks and to date have reported four or five pretty frustrating bugs with the software. Its a great bit of kit and the software does let it down slightly but, I have noticed how dedicated the community of programmers from this forum are to solving these issues. Even the CEO gets involved.....

dfk

deksawyer
2005-11-05, 07:57
I'm on my second SB2 as the first died within a couple of months.

Unfortunately, the replacement has died in its sleep sometime during the night.

Both units had light use and I'm pretty frustrated at the whole thing. I've sent an email to Kevin in tech support so don't expect a reply until monday at least....

One thing I did notice with the replacement; about a min after it was switched on it would hang for about 15-20 secs then come back again.

Now it's actually on as I can ping it, but there is no sound and no display.

Anyone ever seen this behaviour before...??

Most frustrated!

D.

Jeff Coffler
2005-11-05, 08:04
From: "deksawyer" <deksawyer.1y141z (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>

> One thing I did notice with the replacement; about a min after it was
> switched on it would hang for about 15-20 secs then come back again.
>
> Now it's actually on as I can ping it, but there is no sound and no
> display.
>
> Anyone ever seen this behaviour before...??

Is it possible that it has a saved brightness that is totally dark?

When in this state, hit the "brightness" button on the remote. I suspect
that you'll then see the display.

-- Jeff

dspeirs
2005-11-05, 08:44
Hey, no offense, but I didn't start this thread as a "Everyone post your bitch" thread. I Wanted to know if there is anyone out there who can help figure out why my Slimserver/squeezebox is so dicey.

As expected, this AM when I booted my machine (Squeezebox did not need a reboot this time) I played a song. The song plays for 5 seconds and then stops for 5 seconds. It does this for a LONG time. The song does not continue to progress when it is silent, it literally stops and then 5 seconds later picks back up.

I went to debugging (slimserver is VERY slow to respond) and picked out Source (Is that the right one"?

Here is what I got...

2005-11-05 07:31:41.5828 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:31:59.9182 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:31:59.9185 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:32:08.5415 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:32:35.1298 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:33:03.7609 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:33:03.8124 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:33:03.8127 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:33:32.2920 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:33:37.9154 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:33:37.9157 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:33:56.8272 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:34:11.2380 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:34:11.2384 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:34:26.1694 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:34:46.7794 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:34:46.7797 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:34:51.5259 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:35:15.5304 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:35:25.7608 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:39:41.7833 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:39:55.0778 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:39:55.0781 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:39:58.4873 Reduced chunksize to 12873 at end of file (7320137 - 7307264)
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2026 Reduced chunksize to 0 at end of file (7320137 - 7320137)
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2029 end of file or error on socket, opening next song, (song pos: 7320137(tell says: . ), totalbytes: 7320137)
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2030 opening next song...
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2036 the next song is number 1, was 0
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2067 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2071 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2155 undermax = 1, type = mp3, squeezebox = 00:04:20:05:03:60, lame = C:\Program Files\SlimServer\server\Bin\MSWin32-x86-multi-thread\lame.exe
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2158 checking formats for: mp3-aif-squeezebox-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2159 checking formats for: mp3-aif-*-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2160 checking formats for: mp3-aif-squeezebox-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2160 checking formats for: mp3-aif-*-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2161 checking formats for: mp3-wav-squeezebox-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2162 checking formats for: mp3-wav-*-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2163 checking formats for: mp3-wav-squeezebox-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2164 checking formats for: mp3-wav-*-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2165 checking formats for: mp3-mp3-squeezebox-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2166 checking formats for: mp3-mp3-*-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2166 checking formats for: mp3-mp3-squeezebox-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2167 checking formats for: mp3-mp3-*-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2168 Checking to see if mp3-mp3-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2169 enabled
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2169 Found command: -
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2174 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2177 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2216 Matched Format: mp3 Type: mp3 Command: -
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2219 opening next song (old format: mp3, new: mp3) current playmode: play
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2220 Adding song index 1 to song queue
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2221 Clearing out song queue first
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2223 Song queue is now 1
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2229 openSong on: file:///D:/My%20Music/Echo%20&%20the%20Bunnymen/Crystal%20Days_%201979-1999%20(3%20of%204)/02%20Over%20Your%20Shoulder.mp3
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2256 openSong: getting duration 247.693, size 6934674, endian and offset 12288 for file:///D:/My%20Music/Echo%20&%20the%20Bunnymen/Crystal%20Days_%201979-1999%20(3%20of%204)/02%20Over%20Your%20Shoulder.mp3
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2262 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2265 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2287 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2290 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2329 undermax = 1, type = mp3, squeezebox = 00:04:20:05:03:60, lame = C:\Program Files\SlimServer\server\Bin\MSWin32-x86-multi-thread\lame.exe
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2332 checking formats for: mp3-aif-squeezebox-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2333 checking formats for: mp3-aif-*-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2334 checking formats for: mp3-aif-squeezebox-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2334 checking formats for: mp3-aif-*-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2335 checking formats for: mp3-wav-squeezebox-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2336 checking formats for: mp3-wav-*-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2337 checking formats for: mp3-wav-squeezebox-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2338 checking formats for: mp3-wav-*-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2339 checking formats for: mp3-mp3-squeezebox-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2340 checking formats for: mp3-mp3-*-00:04:20:05:03:60
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2341 checking formats for: mp3-mp3-squeezebox-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2341 checking formats for: mp3-mp3-*-*
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2342 Checking to see if mp3-mp3-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2343 enabled
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2344 Found command: -
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2348 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2352 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2390 Matched Format: mp3 Type: mp3 Command: -
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2391 openSong: this is an mp3 file: file:///D:/My%20Music/Echo%20&%20the%20Bunnymen/Crystal%20Days_%201979-1999%20(3%20of%204)/02%20Over%20Your%20Shoulder.mp3
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2393 file type: mp3 format: mp3 inrate: 224 maxRate: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2393 command: -
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2395 openSong: opening file D:\My Music\Echo & the Bunnymen\Crystal Days_ 1979-1999 (3 of 4)\02 Over Your Shoulder.mp3
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2399 seeking in 12288 into D:\My Music\Echo & the Bunnymen\Crystal Days_ 1979-1999 (3 of 4)\02 Over Your Shoulder.mp3
2005-11-05 07:40:02.2404 Streaming with format: mp3
2005-11-05 07:40:02.7626 Negative position calculated, we are still playing out the previous song.
2005-11-05 07:40:02.7628 realpos -90169 calcuated from bytes received: 7320137 minus buffer fullness: 90169
2005-11-05 07:40:02.7632 Negative position calculated, we are still playing out the previous song.
2005-11-05 07:40:02.7633 realpos -90169 calcuated from bytes received: 7320137 minus buffer fullness: 90169
2005-11-05 07:40:06.6390 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:40:11.2256 Negative position calculated, we are still playing out the previous song.
2005-11-05 07:40:11.2258 realpos -45 calcuated from bytes received: 7320137 minus buffer fullness: 45
2005-11-05 07:40:11.2598 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:11.2601 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:40:19.9328 Negative position calculated, we are still playing out the previous song.
2005-11-05 07:40:19.9333 realpos -45 calcuated from bytes received: 7320137 minus buffer fullness: 45
2005-11-05 07:40:19.9337 Negative position calculated, we are still playing out the previous song.
2005-11-05 07:40:19.9339 realpos -45 calcuated from bytes received: 7320137 minus buffer fullness: 45
2005-11-05 07:40:21.2063 Negative position calculated, we are still playing out the previous song.
2005-11-05 07:40:21.2065 realpos -45 calcuated from bytes received: 7331817 minus buffer fullness: 11725
2005-11-05 07:40:21.2069 Negative position calculated, we are still playing out the previous song.
2005-11-05 07:40:21.2073 realpos -45 calcuated from bytes received: 7331817 minus buffer fullness: 11725
2005-11-05 07:40:37.1328 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:41:07.6768 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:41:07.7319 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:41:07.7325 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:41:37.8001 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:41:45.8402 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:41:45.8407 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:41:59.5413 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:42:21.1724 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:42:21.1728 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:42:25.2884 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:42:53.8194 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play
2005-11-05 07:43:01.2202 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:43:01.2207 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 07:43:22.8411 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode: play


Again, anyone help me figure out what is wrong?

Dan

dspeirs
2005-11-05, 09:12
And one more thing to add. after having these previously described drops, it usually stops after 30 to 60 minutes and then works fine (at least until the next time I reboot).

Now, here is my log...

2005-11-05 08:10:18.4665 Found command: [sox] -t ogg $FILE$ -t raw -r 44100 -c 2 -w -s $-x$ - | [flac] -cs --compression-level-0 --totally-silent --endian big --channel 2 --bps 16 --sample-rate 44100 --sign signed -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4668 checking formats for: ogg-mp3-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4673 Checking to see if ogg-mp3-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4675 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4678 Found command: [sox] -t ogg $FILE$ -t raw -r 44100 -c 2 -w -s $-x$ - | [lame] --resample 44100 --silent -q $QUALITY$ --abr $BITRATE$ -r - -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4681 checking formats for: rtsp-flc-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4684 Checking to see if rtsp-flc-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4686 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4689 Found command: [mplayer] -really-quiet -vo null -cache 128 -af volume=0,resample=44100:0:1 -ao pcm:file=#PIPE# $FILE$ | [flac] -cs --totally-silent --compression-level-0 -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4693 checking formats for: rtsp-mp3-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4695 Checking to see if rtsp-mp3-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4698 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4700 Found command: [mplayer] -really-quiet -vo null -cache 128 -af volume=0,resample=44100:0:1 -ao pcm:file=#PIPE# $FILE$ | [lame] --silent -q $QUALITY$ -b $BITRATE$ - -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4704 checking formats for: rtsp-wav-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4706 Checking to see if rtsp-wav-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4709 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4711 Found command: [mplayer] -really-quiet -vo null -cache 128 -af volume=0,resample=44100:0:1 -ao pcm:nowaveheader:file=#PIPE# $FILE$
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4715 checking formats for: shn-flc-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4717 Checking to see if shn-flc-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4720 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.4723 Found command: [shorten] -x $FILE$ - | [flac] -cs --totally-silent --compression-level-0 --endian little --sign signed --channels 2 --bps 16 --sample-rate 44100 -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5028 drat, missing binary shorten
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5031 checking formats for: shn-mp3-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5034 Checking to see if shn-mp3-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5037 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5039 Found command: [shorten] -x $FILE$ - | [lame] --resample 44100 --silent -q $QUALITY$ --abr $BITRATE$ - -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5371 drat, missing binary shorten
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5375 checking formats for: shn-wav-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5378 Checking to see if shn-wav-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5380 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5383 Found command: [shorten] -x $FILE$ -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5691 drat, missing binary shorten
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5695 checking formats for: wav-flc-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5698 Checking to see if wav-flc-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5700 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5703 Found command: [flac] -cs --totally-silent --compression-level-0 --skip=$START$ --until=$END$ -- $FILE$
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5706 checking formats for: wav-mp3-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5709 Checking to see if wav-mp3-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5712 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5714 Found command: [lame] --resample 44100 --silent -q $QUALITY$ --abr $BITRATE$ $FILE$ -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5718 checking formats for: wav-wav-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5720 Checking to see if wav-wav-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5723 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5729 Found command: -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5732 checking formats for: wma-flc-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5735 Checking to see if wma-flc-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5738 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5740 Found command: [wmadec] -r 44100 -b 16 -n 2 $FILE$ | [flac] -cs --totally-silent --compression-level-0 --endian little --sign signed --channels 2 --bps 16 --sample-rate 44100 -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5747 checking formats for: wma-mp3-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5750 Checking to see if wma-mp3-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5753 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5755 Found command: [wmadec] -r 44100 --abr 16 -n 2 $FILE$ | [lame] -x --resample 44100 --silent -q $QUALITY$ --abr $BITRATE$ - -
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5759 checking formats for: wma-wav-*-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5762 Checking to see if wma-wav-*-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5765 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5768 Found command: [wmadec] -r 44100 -b 16 -n 2 $FILE$
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5771 checking formats for: wma-wma-squeezebox2-*
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5774 Checking to see if wma-wma-squeezebox2-* is enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5777 enabled
2005-11-05 08:10:18.5779 Found command: -
2005-11-05 08:10:36.0488 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 08:10:36.0494 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320
2005-11-05 08:11:06.3144 Setting maxBitRate for Family Room to: 320

stinkingpig
2005-11-05, 09:17
dspeirs wrote:

>...
>As expected, this AM when I booted my machine (Squeezebox did not need
>a reboot this time) I played a song. The song plays for 5 seconds and
>then stops for 5 seconds. It does this for a LONG time. The song does
>not continue to progress when it is silent, it literally stops and then
>5 seconds later picks back up.
>
>
>
Smells like an external factor -- either poor network performance or a
resource-starved machine.

>I went to debugging (slimserver is VERY slow to respond) and picked out
>Source (Is that the right one"?
>
>
>
Slimserver is slow to respond to the web interface? That sounds like
starved machine, though it's possible that you're browsing over the same
dodgy wireless network that's killing your songs...

>Here is what I got...
>
>2005-11-05 07:31:41.5828 00:04:20:05:03:60: Underrun while this mode:
>play
>
>
>
buffer underruns every 30 seconds sounds like trouble. Here's d_source
from my wired player:

2005-11-05 08:12:36.7217 openSong: opening file /mnt/music/Badly Drawn
Boy/Hour of Bewilderbeast/Badly Drawn Boy_Hour of Bewilderbeast_01_The
Shining.mp3
2005-11-05 08:12:36.7219 seeking in 1834 into /mnt/music/Badly Drawn
Boy/Hour of Bewilderbeast/Badly Drawn Boy_Hour of Bewilderbeast_01_The
Shining.mp3
2005-11-05 08:12:36.7221 Streaming with format: mp3
2005-11-05 08:12:36.7415 00:04:20:05:bc:40 New play mode: play
2005-11-05 08:12:36.7461 00:04:20:05:bc:40: Current playmode: play
2005-11-05 08:12:36.7591 We need to send 0 seconds of silence...
2005-11-05 08:12:36.7594 sending 0 bytes of silence
2005-11-05 08:12:36.8950 Got a track starting event
2005-11-05 08:12:36.8953 Song 0 has now started playing
2005-11-05 08:12:36.8960 Song queue is now 0
....

I saw that you're running on Windows... is the machine clean? What does
taskmgr show you for CPU and pagefile usage? Is the disk light on
steadily? Slimserver's disk activity when not rescanning is a tap on the
disk every two or three seconds; more than that probably indicates
memory paging.

--
Jack At Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture!
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin
so across the Western ocean I must wander" -- trad.

Triode
2005-11-05, 09:25
>
> And one more thing to add. after having these previously described
> drops, it usually stops after 30 to 60 minutes and then works fine (at
> least until the next time I reboot).
>

Has the server completed scanning your music collection? [The banner on the web page changes from rescanning to the number of songs
you have when it is done] Performance is alway compromised whilst rescanning, but it should complete after a short while.

Do you have iTunes or other plugins active for scanning your music library?

If you are running 6.2, you could go to the "Network and Server Health" section of the help web page, enable performance monitoring
and then follow the instructions.
If you queue up a set of songs to play, reset the counters, leave it for a while and then post the graphs shown it will give us a
good indication of what the server process and network are doing.

dspeirs
2005-11-05, 09:34
I saw that you're running on Windows... is the machine clean?
Yeah, I use it exclusively for itunes, slimserver and EAC

What does
taskmgr show you for CPU and pagefile usage? CPU around 4% to 7% with short, infrequent jumps to 60% PF useage is 316 MB (steady)

Is the disk light on steadily? Nope

Slimserver's disk activity when not rescanning is a tap on the
disk every two or three seconds; more than that probably indicates memory paging.
I really don't see that going on.

My CPU is a P4 1.5ghz, 768 MB of RAM. Hard drive 1 (system) is a 150mb drive 134 free 14.4 used. The second disk is for music and has 125 used 64 free.

Any other ideas?

Dan

dryden555
2005-11-05, 09:34
In short, I wouldn't reccomend a slimdevice for a non-techie.

The problem:
Open architecture is not always a 100% positive. The voices on this forum are heavily from developers. Users like myself get a lot of friendly support on the forum which is cool.

But developers dont mind bugs as much as the rest of us users who bought the device do. We dont have time for uninstalling and tweaking. We just want the standard functionality to work out of the box. We generally dont care about bugginess in esoteric plug-ins.

No one will agree with me in this developer-centric forum but, seriously, these great hardware devices are far too much trouble for a non-technical person. You'll never see them in BestBuy because there would be a 90% return rate on them. Users would be utterly clueless when they encounter the first bug.

Sorry for the negativity but sheesh the bugs really got to me!

dspeirs
2005-11-05, 09:40
[QUOTE=Triode]>
> And one more thing to add. after having these previously described
> drops, it usually stops after 30 to 60 minutes and then works fine (at
> least until the next time I reboot).
>

Has the server completed scanning your music collection? [The banner on the web page changes from rescanning to the number of songs
you have when it is done]

Performance is alway compromised whilst rescanning, but it should complete after a short while.
I set the rescan for every 500,000 - My library size is big so it take a LONG time.


Do you have iTunes or other plugins active for scanning your music library?
Active Plugins
Audioscrobbler Submitter
Date and Time
Favorites
iTunes
Podcast Browser
Random Mix
Rescan Music Library
Save Playlist
XML-RPC/JSON-RPC Interface

QUOTE]

stinkingpig
2005-11-05, 09:42
dspeirs wrote:

>I saw that you're running on Windows... is the machine clean?
>Yeah, I use it exclusively for itunes, slimserver and EAC
>
>

try disabling the iTunes plugin.

--
Jack At Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture!
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin
so across the Western ocean I must wander" -- trad.

Triode
2005-11-05, 09:50
Assuming you are accessing & updating the library with iTunes too, it is likely that the iTunes plugin is causing rescans - try
disabling this for the moment to see if it avoids the problems you are seeing.

>> Do you have iTunes or other plugins active for scanning your music
>> library?
>> Active Plugins
>> Audioscrobbler Submitter
>> Date and Time
>> Favorites
>> iTunes
>> Podcast Browser
>> Random Mix
>> Rescan Music Library
>> Save Playlist
>> XML-RPC/JSON-RPC Interface
>>
>> QUOTE]

stinkingpig
2005-11-05, 09:52
dryden555 wrote:

>In short, I wouldn't reccomend a slimdevice for a non-techie.
>
>The problem:
>Open architecture is not always a 100% positive. The voices on this
>forum are heavily from developers. Users like myself get a lot of
>friendly support on the forum which is cool.
>
>But developers dont mind bugs as much as the rest of us users who
>bought the device do. We dont have time for uninstalling and tweaking.
>We just want the standard functionality to work out of the box. We
>generally dont care about bugginess in esoteric plug-ins.
>
>No one will agree with me in this developer-centric forum but,
>seriously, these great hardware devices are far too much trouble for a
>non-technical person. You'll never see them in BestBuy because there
>would be a 90% return rate on them. Users would be utterly clueless
>when they encounter the first bug.
>
>Sorry for the negativity but sheesh the bugs really got to me!
>
>
>
>
the world is not a perfect place. this is because it's full of people,
who suck. Increasingly these people use computers, which also suck. Add
in the fact that there's a work component in just about everything, and
work obviously sucks. So there ya go. Listen to some Morrisey albums,
and appreciate the Slimserver bugs as memento mori reminders.

Another way to put it... what piece of consumer gear would you consider
acceptably usable? Say the 300-disc Sony CD changer that I replaced with
my first SliMP3 because it couldn't play half of my CDs? How about my
mother-in-law's Linksys DSL router that crashes every month, or my
neighbor's NetGear DSL router that couldn't talk to the DSL modem
without a firmware upgrade? My wife's two-year old Sony Vaio laptop with
the failing screen and dead keyboard? Or her iPod that helpfully deleted
all of its audiobooks when she switched computers? The Magellan GPS that
takes twenty minutes to locate satellites and figure out that you've
moved it to a new location? Oo, I know, the simple kitchen mop with a
replaceable head... heads that are never, ever, ever in stock in the
same county where you bought the mop.

--
Jack At Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture!
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin
so across the Western ocean I must wander" -- trad.

MrC
2005-11-05, 10:01
In short, I wouldn't reccomend a slimdevice for a non-techie.
Computers, wireless access points, hi-tech gadgets, and many pieces of software are not yet geared towards non-techies or those that are unable to dedicate some time to becoming knowledgable in the product. These products are still in the early years of maturation, much of this is still nascient technology, and we're all on the early part of the learning curve. Consider that most folks cannot set the clocks on their VCRs or set a timed-recording, and its clear that most folks are flummoxed by even more complexity and the steep learning curve required.

We are well beyond the time when life was as simple as pulling a cart. And it seems unlikely that we will ever reduce the operating complexities of any high-tech gadgets to less than setting the clock on a VCR.



The problem:
Open architecture is not always a 100% positive. The voices on this forum are heavily from developers. Users like myself get a lot of friendly support on the forum which is coo

I would challenge you to find any product with such high standards; to expect such out of anything seems to me to be a recipe for disappointment.

Yes the developers here offer a lot of free help. They certainly now the product best. And there are also many knowledgable users here who help out as well. In all, its a very active, positive forum (some of us get a little curmudgeony at time - please forgive us).

kdf
2005-11-05, 10:52
On 5-Nov-05, at 8:34 AM, dryden555 wrote:

>
> In short, I wouldn't reccomend a slimdevice for a non-techie.
>
hmm..deja vu. does your mailer have a bug too?

Michaelwagner
2005-11-05, 11:20
All sarcasm aside, the people here have a point. Tinkerers who love to hack the code get what they want, but it doesn't say when you buy a slim that tinkering is required. There exist people who want a slim to work out of the box. Mine did. I bought a slim 1 and it worked. Until the web interface once helpfully told me that I could upgrade, so I did and it started failing.

My experience isn't unique.

I have the training and the inclination to fix it, but lots of people lack one or the other, and it should be possible to make a version of the code that works for them too.

I think a major component of getting there would be a better scheme for regression checking, which I am still pondering but will soon make a proposal. ...

Dan Sully
2005-11-05, 11:26
* Michaelwagner shaped the electrons to say...

>I think a major component of getting there would be a better scheme for
>regression checking, which I am still pondering but will soon make a
>proposal. ...

Quite true - and it's something I've started on, but only have so many hours in the day.

-D
--
It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

hashref
2005-11-05, 12:00
Dan,

If you're still having problems try downloading SlimCD and run you're setup from that. Here is a link: http://www.herger.net/slim/detail.php?nr=763

If you continue to experience the same problems then you know it is a hardware/network issue. That will have at least ruled out the bloated OS.

Next, if you're running your squeeze box using a wireless connection bite the bullet for your next jam session and hook it up with cat5. Does it still have problems?

Next, choose from server settings the "Light" interface. It looks pretty generic, but is there still a problem? If it is the interface causing the problem uninstall Slimserver, download a previous version that worked better for you and install that one. Rename the interface directory ( /HTML/<interface> ) that works for you. Upgrade to 6.2.1 and you should still see the interface from the previous version you installed which worked for you. I use ExBrowse and because of previous annoyances I began doing this and was able to pick and choose interfaces from previous versions which I was already comfortable with. I haven't noticed any problems with using older interface versions yet.

Not the interface? Ugh... The only time I have ran into a problem that sounds similar to yours is when running Windows MediaPlayer as another player elsewhere in the house. When I connected MediaPlayer in my office to listen to a different playlist while my SqueezeBox was playing in the living room I started hearing 'skips' every 5 - 15 seconds. It is/was either the slow system I am running SlimServer off of or the network. However, that was about a year ago on a much older version of SlimServer.

I'm running fine here on a system that is VERY slow. I also rarely shut it down. Some how its up time is comparable to my RH9/SmoothWall box:

PIII 550
768mb RAM
Windows 2000 Server
(lots of services running...poor thing)

Michaelwagner
2005-11-05, 12:08
Quite true - and it's something I've started on, but only have so many hours in the day.I know Dan, and I'm offering to help you out ...

dspeirs
2005-11-05, 17:41
I thought the iTunes plugin was important to be there if you use iTunes as your library? Is the iTunes plugin really for the iTunes updater?

Dan

Bonesteel
2005-11-05, 18:01
I'm actually surprised there isn't regression testing in place already. It actually explains quite a bit.

I've had the same experience Michael described many times with the Slim Server SW. I have a stable system with excellent performance, I see that an update is available, I install it, and the system falls down.

I posted a complaint to this effect a week or so ago and was summarily slapped down by many here. Essentially, I was told that I would need to tinker with my system or file bug reports to reclaim previous levels of performance. I do not have the time for this approach. Therefore I simply returned to an earlier release.

With appropriate regression testing this would not happen, but fair enough. Essentially, the final testing step has been pushed out to the consumer.

I would propose the following to help educate we "consumer users" in this decision.

If Slim Devices published performance metrics for each release that we could review it might make it easier to judge if we're willing to take the risk of an upgrade.

Clearly, there are virtually unlimted server scenarios given different OS versions, hardware configurations, and the like, but presumably pre-release testing is done on each platform. I propose that Slim publish what each testing platform is, and what tests are performed on it with specific timing results for each, e.g. it took xxx seconds to scan a library of 1000 MP3 songs. Slap all of these in a speadsheet where we can compare the metrics between releases and (more importantly) to my configuration, then I can decide if it's worth my time to accept the "New version of slim server" prompt.

JB

pfarrell
2005-11-05, 18:16
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 17:01 -0800, Bonesteel wrote:
> If Slim Devices published performance metrics for each release that we
> could review it might make it easier to judge if we're willing to take
> the risk of an upgrade.

I don't work for SD, I'm just a happy user, but I think
that it is prudent to approach new releases from nearly
any vendor with caution. I never install a new OS from Microsoft
until the first service pack is out. I let someone else
got the pioneer's arrows.

Just because something new is available, there is no reason
to install it unless you are unhappy with your installed version.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.


--
Pat
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html

kdf
2005-11-05, 18:36
On 5-Nov-05, at 5:16 PM, Pat Farrell wrote:

> On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 17:01 -0800, Bonesteel wrote:
>> If Slim Devices published performance metrics for each release that we
>> could review it might make it easier to judge if we're willing to take
>> the risk of an upgrade.
>
> I don't work for SD, I'm just a happy user, but I think
> that it is prudent to approach new releases from nearly
> any vendor with caution. I never install a new OS from Microsoft
> until the first service pack is out. I let someone else
> got the pioneer's arrows.
>
> Just because something new is available, there is no reason
> to install it unless you are unhappy with your installed version.
> If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
>
As a volunteer developer, AND a user, I suffer from the same
frustration of broken builds (sometimes after an update right before
sleep time)
I also see the pressure to release ("why do we have to keep downloading
nightly builds?")
There are always a number of people who try a nightly, see something
wrong and uninstall it without saying a thing. On release, someone else
gets burned.

That being said, at every release, I've wished that there were NO
changes for several days on a beta release. Let it get out to those
who test, CLOSE bug reports on anything aside from that beta (avoid the
clutter). Then spend a few days taking specific reports and cleaning
out issues. The downside is that it requires patience from both users
and marketing. Not always easy to do, and this wouldn't be the first
place I've seen these problems. There are valid reasons for some
software providers not releasing product updates for months, if not
years.

-k

Michaelwagner
2005-11-05, 18:53
I'm actually surprised there isn't regression testing in place already.If you go back and check, that's not what I wrote.

a major component of getting there would be a better scheme for regression checkingThere is regression checking, but it's inadequate - I surmise - because it didn't find these problems. I don't think Slim knew that 6 would be a problem but released it anyways. There is an extensive beta test program within the slim development group, and a regression checker. I think, though, that beta testers, either by virtue of who they are or by virtue of the fact that they run big machines, don't notice certain types of problems. So I don't think relying solely on the experience of beta testers who are all quite experienced and an old regression checking suite is enough. Which is why I volunteered to help with a better regression checker.


I was told that I would need to tinker with my system or file bug reports to reclaim previous levels of performance. I do not have the time for this approach. Therefore I simply returned to an earlier release.I sympathize with both sides of this problem.

Clearly I am a user and sympathize with that side. Let me tell you about the other side.

A software system like this works across a network, on at least 2 platforms (player and server). It can operate on up to 6x6 combinations of platforms (clients: SLiMP3, Squeezebox 1, Squeezebox 2, Squeezebox 3, Softsqueeze, Winamp. Server: Windows, Linux, Unix, Mac OSX, Linksys NSLU2, Buffalo Linkstation, maybe more).

Diagnosing such problems is quite complex. Just showing up and saying "It doesn't work" without telling us which IT you have and how exactly it isn't working doesn't really get anyone anywhere. No one can help. Imagine calling a car dealer and saying "It doesn't work". They'd say "drive it down here and we'll look at it". Doesn't work well trans-atlantic.


the final testing step has been pushed out to the consumer.I'm not a Slim employee and I don't speak for them, but I don't think that's fair. There are many different combinations of server software, server hardware, client hardware. It's pretty hard to test them all. Add wireless, and interference from the microwave oven in the next apartment to yours and no one can test an environment just like yours, because there is no environment just like yours.

All the major configurations get a workout, but maybe not yours.


If Slim Devices published performance metrics for each release A good idea.


presumably pre-release testing is done on each platform.the resources needed for this would be astronomical. Even the matrix I showed you above, 6 server configurations, 6 client configurations, would be a 36 test matrix. Add low memory, regular memory, fast processor, slow processor configurations, and you're at 144 combinations (well, a few less, because there is no memory size variation available for the NSLU2).

I agree your need needs to be addressed. I'm just not sure how, since the requirement is more complex than you seem to envison.

Bonesteel
2005-11-05, 20:08
A spritied defense, yet the simple fact is that until they identify what platforms they test it on and what tests they perform, the unknown gaps in testing indeed get pushed to we consumers. The limited regression testing increases the number of these instances we need to deal with.

For instance -

If I had any warning that a making the jump from my well performing 6.0.2 release to a 6.2 release with unusable performance (library scan and UI reponse) with NO OTHER CHANGES to hardware, software, or network, I would not have tried it. And, if I needed a specific level of RAM/Mhz/system software to support the upgrade it should have been posted in the read me. As it was, all I saw was the OS version (which I met).

I admitted it would be too complex a task to detail all configurations available in my post, BUT I see no reason why they can't identify what they test it on and how it compares to the last release. If I can see the deltas in their tests and on the platform they tested on it stands to reason I should be able to estimate what would happen on my configuration. I'd also be able to see if they didn't test anything near my configuration, thus leaving the guess work to me.

If I have to jump in and become my own tester, I'd like to see what my baseline is.

Michaelwagner
2005-11-05, 20:47
I see no reason why they can't identify what they test it on and how it compares to the last release.Nor I. Good idea, in my opinion.

stinkingpig
2005-11-05, 21:49
Michaelwagner wrote:
....

>>resources needed for this would be astronomical. Even the matrix I
>>
>>
>showed you above, 6 server configurations, 6 client configurations,
>would be a 36 test matrix. Add low memory, regular memory, fast
>processor, slow processor configurations, and you're at 144
>combinations (well, a few less, because there is no memory size
>variation available for the NSLU2).
>
>
....

I just want to point out a couple more complicating factors: plugins
take the matrix out to 1000x1000 or so, and each test needs to run for
at least two or three songs to make sure that transition errors are
caught. Oh, forgot synchronization issues, make that 2000x2000.

--
Jack At Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture!
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin
so across the Western ocean I must wander" -- trad.

MrC
2005-11-05, 21:51
A spritied defense, yet the simple fact is that until they identify what platforms they test it on and what tests they perform, the unknown gaps in testing indeed get pushed to we consumers.

Perhaps you can share the names and methodologies of other small, for-profit developers that do likewise such that they might be used as role-models.

The magic forumla of functionality, performance, schedule, and quality is very intriguing indeed.

stinkingpig
2005-11-05, 21:53
Bonesteel wrote:

>A spritied defense, yet the simple fact is that until they identify
>what platforms they test it on and what tests they perform, the unknown
>gaps in testing indeed get pushed to we consumers. The limited
>regression testing increases the number of these instances we need to
>deal with.
>
>
>

I'm beginning to get that "why am I bothering" feeling here, but I'll go
ahead one more time.... You are getting better support for far less
money than you understand. Go buy some commercial enterprise software
some time, you'll see more bugs, worse support, and a hole in your
wallet that looks like a fleet of luxury cars.

--
Jack At Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture!
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin
so across the Western ocean I must wander" -- trad.

PAUL WILLIAMSON
2005-11-05, 22:30
>>> MrC.1y26pn (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com 11/05/05 11:51 PM >>>
> Perhaps you can share the names and methodologies of other
> small, for-profit developers that do likewise such that they might
> be used as role-models.
>
> The magic forumla of functionality, performance, schedule, and
> quality is very intriguing indeed.

I don't write code, but I try to do my best to download the latest
nightly at least 2-3 times a week to go through a bunch of
tests. It's not exactly scientific, but there have been occasions
where I find little bugs and try to fix them or report them.
It's not often, but I still run the nightlies anyway.

I used to be a corporate software tester. The job of those
schmoes is to verify the software works like intended, not
as people would try to use it. So, you'll always have
things pop up in commercial software once it's released.
I would say Dan, Victor, KDF, and all the other
software devs (working for slim or not) are a whole
lot more talented than most of the people I worked with
developing commercial software.

Oh, and I've only been stranded twice running the
nightlies with my slimp3 or sbg. None recently, so
much so that my wife has been hinting around at
wanting to get a couple more.

Paul

danco
2005-11-06, 02:00
On 5/11/05 at 17:36 -0800, kdf wrote
>That being said, at every release, I've wished that there were NO
>changes for several days on a beta release. Let it get out to those
>who test, CLOSE bug reports on anything aside from that beta (avoid
>the clutter). Then spend a few days taking specific reports and
>cleaning out issues. The downside is that it requires patience from
>both users and marketing. Not always easy to do, and this wouldn't
>be the first place I've seen these problems. There are valid reasons
>for some software providers not releasing product updates for
>months, if not years.

I had something of a feeling that 6.2 was released too early, perhaps
because SB3 was just coming out.

What I mean by too early is that there seemed to me to be a very
short period of time between the release of 6.2 beta (as distinct
from the nightlys, which we know are going to get changed) and the
full 6.2, and I was surprised that there wasn't a lot more time
allowed for testing the beta.
--
Daniel Cohen

dryden555
2005-11-06, 10:36
And I'm told I am being too negative! Non-techies are not to generalized as "people who suck." You're actually supporting my point that this forum has a way of programatically alienating non-developers.

Anyway, I want to thank M Wagner again for helping me with the suggestion to revert to 5.4.1. That worked perfectly with my sb1. Listening to it right now.

Honestly I was completely ready to give up on my sb1 after several versions of the software had bugs in the standard functionality of the device. This isn't just about ver 6.2. I hope someone within the company is reading my posts as a substantive sign that many consumers dont have time for bug reports, re-installing and forum posts.

"your average consumer"



dryden555 wrote:

>In short, I wouldn't reccomend a slimdevice for a non-techie.
>
>The problem:
>Open architecture is not always a 100% positive. The voices on this
>forum are heavily from developers. Users like myself get a lot of
>friendly support on the forum which is cool.
>
>But developers dont mind bugs as much as the rest of us users who
>bought the device do. We dont have time for uninstalling and tweaking.
>We just want the standard functionality to work out of the box. We
>generally dont care about bugginess in esoteric plug-ins.
>
>No one will agree with me in this developer-centric forum but,
>seriously, these great hardware devices are far too much trouble for a
>non-technical person. You'll never see them in BestBuy because there
>would be a 90% return rate on them. Users would be utterly clueless
>when they encounter the first bug.
>
>Sorry for the negativity but sheesh the bugs really got to me!
>
>
>
>
the world is not a perfect place. this is because it's full of people,
who suck. Increasingly these people use computers, which also suck. Add
in the fact that there's a work component in just about everything, and
work obviously sucks. So there ya go. Listen to some Morrisey albums,
and appreciate the Slimserver bugs as memento mori reminders.

Another way to put it... what piece of consumer gear would you consider
acceptably usable? Say the 300-disc Sony CD changer that I replaced with
my first SliMP3 because it couldn't play half of my CDs? How about my
mother-in-law's Linksys DSL router that crashes every month, or my
neighbor's NetGear DSL router that couldn't talk to the DSL modem
without a firmware upgrade? My wife's two-year old Sony Vaio laptop with
the failing screen and dead keyboard? Or her iPod that helpfully deleted
all of its audiobooks when she switched computers? The Magellan GPS that
takes twenty minutes to locate satellites and figure out that you've
moved it to a new location? Oo, I know, the simple kitchen mop with a
replaceable head... heads that are never, ever, ever in stock in the
same county where you bought the mop.

--
Jack At Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture!
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin
so across the Western ocean I must wander" -- trad.

stinkingpig
2005-11-06, 10:58
dryden555 wrote:

>And I'm told I am being too negative! Non-techies are not to
>generalized as "people who suck." You're actually supporting my point
>that this forum has a way of programatically alienating non-developers.
>
>
>
>
You're misunderstanding me and applying your own agenda to my statement.
"People suck" does not mean "Non-techies are people who suck", it means
that human beings are continually driven to push their toys past
breaking point and then cry to the skies that the toy is broken. I am
people, and I suck. So do you. If you meet someone perfect, join their
monastery and hope to learn, but I can promise you there won't be any
computers or Squeezeboxen in there. Why not? Because computers suck. As
our first attempt at recreating ourselves, they are an excellent example
of why we suck: flexible, general purpose systems designed through the
time-honored bandaid accretion methodology, and then asked to perform
like a Platonic ideal at seventeen million different functions at once.
The marvel is that they work at all, not that they suck.

>Anyway, I want to thank M Wagner again for helping me with the
>suggestion to revert to 5.4.1. That worked perfectly with my sb1.
>Listening to it right now.
>
>
>
If you browse the archives back to the release of 5.4.1 you can read
this same argument there. But now it's a paragon of stability because it
works for your use case.

>Honestly I was completely ready to give up on my sb1 after several
>versions of the software had bugs in the standard functionality of the
>device. This isn't just about ver 6.2. I hope someone within the
>company is reading my posts as a substantive sign that many consumers
>dont have time for bug reports, re-installing and forum posts.
>
>"your average consumer"
>
>
>

The forums are diligently read and replied to by SDI's fine owners, who
are much more positive in outlook than me -- let's all hope they stay
that way :)

--
Jack At Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture!
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin
so across the Western ocean I must wander" -- trad.

Michaelwagner
2005-11-06, 11:06
Non-techies are not to generalized as "people who suck." And that's not what was said. All people suck, not just non-techies. Us too. Including when we don't respond as well as we might on these forums (forae?).

I'm glad 5.4.1 worked for you. I actually had to go back to 5.4.0 to get it to work for me. The point is, the software base is moving fast, and if you don't need the shiny new features and don't want to test them out, stay behind the bleeding edge a bit.

I think it's correct that 2 things need to happen
1. Slim shouldn't release things so close to the bleeding edge
2. Since there are millions of facets to this software, what's close to the edge for me might not be for you (or vice versa). A way of describing this better, in laymans terms, would be useful. I just can't imagine how to manage it. But maybe brighter heads will prevail.

Craig, James (IT)
2005-11-07, 04:03
iTunes plugin = from iTunes
iTunes Update plugin = to iTunes

James
--------------------------------------------------------

NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited.

oreillymj
2005-11-07, 10:41
Just a couple of points

1)
If you go back to the very start of this thread, there was someone with a problem. This seems to have been completely forgotten.

2)
After reading all the posts, there seem to be camps. The people who are happy to accept the latest software will perhaps have a few problems and are knowledgable to get on with life.
And the people who have installed the latest software and somehow got burned. Both groups are entitle to have a working system.

Here's my 2c.
Before upgrading, always have a backout plan. You have 40Gb of Mp3, you can afford 20mb to zip up your Slimserver directory before upgrading.
Then if something goes belly-up, you can restore your setup to the way it was before.
These threads are full of people looking for new features and customisations. If the ideas are worthy and useful to most user, they worked on. But that adds complexity. look at the amount of settings in the software already. So you can't have it both ways. More features = More bugs. Thats a fact of life. Every honest software developer will tell you that.


Going back to Dan's original issue, are you using DHCP or either your server or SB? I suspect something happens everytime you reboot causing one or the other to loose it's IP/connection. As a general rule, anything being used as a server should not be using DHCP.

dspeirs
2005-11-13, 17:20
OK, back to my problem with Squeezebox/Slimserver...

When I disable the iTunes plugin it works perfectly. but, it no longer uses iTunes which I want it to use. When I tell it to rescan it reverts to not using iTunes. When I switch it to use iTunes it plays music for a few seconds then stops then picks back up. What should I do?

Dan

Craig, James (IT)
2005-11-14, 03:39
> When I disable the iTunes plugin it works perfectly. but, it
> no longer
> uses iTunes which I want it to use. When I tell it to rescan
> it reverts
> to not using iTunes. When I switch it to use iTunes it plays
> music for
> a few seconds then stops then picks back up. What should I do?

Most likely the iTunes rescan is running. Music playback will be patchy
until this completes.

It can take a while depending on the size of your library so you may
want to adjust the iTunes rescan interval accordingly.
(otherwise SlimServer may just rescan iTunes continuously)

James
--------------------------------------------------------

NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited.

dspeirs
2005-11-14, 21:54
James I have a large library of over 10,000 songs but my iTunes reload interval is 500,000 . What should it be? Why is my Slimserver performing so bad when using iTunes? Without iTunes it works perfectly. Is anyone having this problem with 6.2?

Craig, James (IT)
2005-11-15, 02:41
I think it is a common problem.
It seems to be affecting Mac users more than XP users. Or maybe there
are just more iTunes users on Mac?

The iTunes rescan changed significantly from 5.4 6.2 and produces a
different performance profile than before.
It has to both parse the iTunes XML and scan the files, so much more
work than the filesystem scan only.
But it is now a lot more accurate in my experience, and you have the
option to only scan playlists.

For me, (10,000 songs on 2Ghz Xp box) the SlimServer is unlistenable
(although menus are usable) during the scan.

I'd recommend setting your automatic rescan interval to 0 (disabled) and
using the rescan plugin to schedule a daily rescan at a time you won't
be using the system.

James
--------------------------------------------------------

NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited.