PDA

View Full Version : Have accepted fact that SB3 not properly sorted out :(



stedes
2005-12-08, 12:32
Guys...Let's just say it by what it is...the SB3 has either been released too early to the market or not been sorted out properly before release. It's very frustrating to pay extra for a feature that worked flawlessly in the SB2 (which i now wish i bought instead) only to find that it doesn't work half the time and when it does you cannot get encryption!!! I don't know about you but I wouldn't want my neighbour messing about with my network!

At first it seemed only certain brands of routers have problems but I think people have had problems with many brands...it all adds up to the SB3 being at fault and not routers or their settings.

I think the company should step up and offer refunds or new firmware to fix this. I refuse to buy another router and I've changed my whole setup to use the SB3 with ethernet but surely this is just unacceptable....considering that the extra money from the wired only SB3 buys you another respectable router to have next to your SB3.

Await your comments with interest....

SB3
Belkin F5D7630uk4a router (works with all other wireless things inc SB2)
Tried 4 days worth of setting changes...nada, nil, zilch!

snarlydwarf
2005-12-08, 12:43
The catch to your logic is that there isn't a huge difference between the SB2 and the SB3, and there is zero difference in firmware.

So it's not a firmware bug that is the problem you're having: it's Something Else.

I don't see a post here with whatever your problem is with the SB3.. could it be signal strength (since you have an SB2, have you tried moving the SB2 to where the SB3 is?), could it be the router is being grumpy about seeing the SB3 move from Wireless -> Wired -> Wireless? (Ie, it learned the SB3 was wired if you set it up wired to play with it, then when you moved it to wireless it refused to play nice, "that mac is over there on my wired port, I'm ignoring you!" -- some routers do that... you have to cycle them...)

But it's highly unlikely that it's a firmware bug, since it's the exact same firmware as the SB2 (hence why the logo changed from "Squeezebox2" to "Squeezebox"... it would have been confusing if the SB3 showed SB2 in the boot logo).

Try putting a wireless SB2 in the same physical location the SB3 is at now: does it work? If so, then it's some setting in the setup of the SB3 (key correctly? no extra spaces at the end?) or the router (reboot it just in case it's annoyed at seeing things move between interfaces).

If the SB2 doesn't work in that location: you have an interference/reception problem.

ezkcdude
2005-12-08, 13:12
Honestly, I think all these problems (full disclosure clause: I've had them, too) have much more to do with wi-fi technology and internet connectivity issues (e.g. anti-virus software, DHCP, etc.), than with the SB3. It's easy to criticize a product that depends on many other technologies for its own operation. Sometimes, even very simple "gadgets" don't work due to unexpected compatibility issues. For example, when I got an iPod Shuffle several months ago, for the life of me, I could not get my Win XP box (saving the name for a couple of sentences from now) to recognize it. I tried plugging it into every USB 2.0 slot, and no success. However, it did work flawlessly on my Apple PowerBook. So, I went on the Apple Forums and every told me that the USB 2.0 ports on my DELL (you saw that coming, I hope) were the problem. Of course, I was indignant. Dell couldn't possible have non-standard USB ports, could it? Well, it turns out, that was the case. Dell has crappy, non-standard parts. End result, my iPod stays, but I will never buy another Dell. I think this is similar with the SB3. It is a perfectly fine device, but it depends on many other "upstream" components to work. If any link in that chain is broken, it can affect the SB3. In essence, that is why it is so hard to pin down some of the problems brought up in this forum.

stedes
2005-12-08, 13:36
Guys I do understand what you're saying. No offence but I'm not a newbie. I have been dealing with pcs and networks for about 21 years now. I have tried all (READ ALL) possible configurations including formatting pc/cold resetting router/SB3 and no ethernet anywhere.
SB3 is next to (READ TOUCHING) the router and SB2 next to that....one connects with DHCP, SB3 doesn't.
All "extra" settings on router are off...no encryption (and yes i did check for extra spaces when I tried to use encryption) and I have also tried b, g and mixed modes. Have also tried b only and g only with every channel separately.

Believe me....there is nobody who would like this to work more than myself. It's just that I cannot see this as an isolated insident. The forum is full of reports of wireless problems with many (read so called good) brands of routers. And altough I am happy with using it wired...and I do LOVE IT...I would like to use what i paid for.

And just a little prediction for the future....we will probably see a "new version" with maybe an external antenna (SB3 shows 69% signal strength btw) or and this is my hope...new firmware to solve problems.

P.S.

seanadams
2005-12-08, 14:08
stedes

It certainly doesn't sound like a signal strength problem. Can you check something for me:

Please Look at the label on the underside of your SB2. It should say "Can contain an approved RF module FCC ID: ....."

Older SB2s have N13-AT53V216 (older Atheros chipset)
Newer SB2s and SB3 both have Q72WLANTPBG (newer Atheros chipset)

Which do you have?

kevin
2005-12-08, 14:12
Does this router you're using have an option called "g Nitro" on its wireless settings page?

Is it enabled?

Could you possibly try disabling it and see if this SB3 can now connect?

radish
2005-12-08, 14:12
I think the company should step up and offer refunds or new firmware to fix this.
They already do offer no-quibbles refunds within 30 days of purchase. New firmware comes out frequently as well.

JJZolx
2005-12-08, 14:26
The forum is full of reports of wireless problems with many (read so called good) brands of routers. And altough I am happy with using it wired...and I do LOVE IT...I would like to use what i paid for.
Don't look now, but this is the BEGINNERS forum. All of the connection problems that I've read about here (and yes, there have been many) were eventually resolved by the user, usually with an understandable explanation - firewall issues, password problems, router settings, etc.

Any chance you've just got a bum unit?

seanadams
2005-12-08, 14:34
Since sb2 works, in this case I think it could be a failed wireless card in the sb3.

Let us know after you check the above things and then contact support and we will arrange a replacement if needed.

JJZolx
2005-12-08, 14:44
Since sb2 works, in this case I think it could be a failed wireless card in the sb3.

Let us know after you check the above things and then contact support and we will arrange a replacement if needed.
Are the cards interchangeable between the SB2 & the SB3? If so, it should be an easy enough test in swapping them.

Sean, did you ever post the internal pics of the SB3 that you promised?

ezkcdude
2005-12-08, 15:24
The forum is full of reports of wireless problems with many (read so called good) brands of routers. And altough I am happy with using it wired...and I do LOVE IT...I would like to use what i paid for.P.S.

stedes, my point was that we all have wireless problems with other devices. I have a PowerBook which half the time isn't able to connect to the same router. I know that's not the fault of the PowerBook. I think we all have cell phones that drop out. That's not the phone, it's the signal. Let us pray that we never fully switch over to satellite/wi-fi internet, because it is just more pain than it is worth. If my internet service were disrupted as often as my cell phone, I'd call it a day, and give up surfing the web. In fact, I should probably just buy a long ethernet cable and hook up my SB3 that way. It's "cooler" to say the device is Wi-Fi, but it's not really that practical always, especially if it's being placed in the same room as the computer.

Michaelwagner
2005-12-08, 21:24
Dell couldn't possible have non-standard USB ports, could it? Well, it turns out, that was the case. Dell has crappy, non-standard parts.
Really?

Every one of my USB devices runs fine on every one of my Dells (of which I have 4 in this room, and about 10 more in my office).

Of course, the ones only spec-ed for USB 1 only run at USB 1 speeds ....

stedes
2005-12-09, 04:42
SB2 is N13. Now maybe it's starting to make sense.
I also borrowed another router last night (very late), also Belkin from a friend (newer model) and tried to connect....guess what guys...first time!!

Somewhat depressing but at least i know that my beloved SB3 is good...even though it doesn't like my router.

So move router in bedroom with SB3 (wired) and rest works wirelessly anyway.

By the way...just used the SB3 via 24/192 DAC and my valve pre/power combo....phenomenal sound quality!

Kyle
2005-12-09, 07:29
Stedes, which was the router that worked? I have a new Belkin pre-N model, which has excellent range. My SB3 arrives Monday (for some reason 2-day shipping that shipped on Thursday takes until Monday -- go figure). I'm anxious after reading about folks having problems and hoping I'll have better success than you have had.

stedes
2005-12-11, 17:20
Not sure which model it was but it was newer than mine (about 1 year old) whereas mine is about 18 months...

Now for some more news...and a question to the techies as well....is the SB3 802.11b compliant? Reason I am asking is that I found that my router is using a non standard 54g mode (ie not properly 802.11g) but the SB3 still won't connect to 11b mode....so if the SB3 is just 11g then I have solved the mystery (my friend's Belkin router is "proper" 11g).

So guys....SB3 802.11b or not?

P.S. SB3 now in bedroom and so is the router, connected via ethernet...flawless...!

Michaelwagner
2005-12-11, 17:33
As I understand it, 802.11g includes all of 802.11b.

BUT, I believe that only means that an 802.11g device must be able to connect with an 802.11b (older) device.

I don't know if it defines that a properly behaving 802.11g device can force a misbehaving one to back down to 802.11b protocols.

stedes
2005-12-11, 17:49
I don't get it either. At the moment I am happy that it works (albeit not wirelessly).
On the plan anyway is a better router (Draytek maybe) with VPN, A better firewall and client filtering so that I can log on to my music collection remotely without worries of security.

Does anyone know if Draytek works with SB3?

jimwillsher
2005-12-19, 04:50
For what it's worth, my new SB3 will not connect to my NetGear WG602, even though my SB1 connected flawlessly. I now have the SB3 sitting about 2 feet from the Access Point, and it happily sees the SSID, but just will not connect.

Jim

Michaelwagner
2005-12-19, 06:17
Some people have reported compatability problems with "super-G" or "Turbo-G" routers.

I gather this turbo thing is not a standard and is not supported by the chip set in the SB.

FWIW

jimwillsher
2005-12-19, 06:29
Mine's just a 54Mbps device theough, there is no turbo facility.

Thanks anyway.


Jim

kevin
2005-12-19, 13:17
For what it's worth, my new SB3 will not connect to my NetGear WG602, even though my SB1 connected flawlessly. I now have the SB3 sitting about 2 feet from the Access Point, and it happily sees the SSID, but just will not connect.

Jim

Jim--what hardware and firmware version of the WG602 are you using? Are you using encryption? If so what type?

If you're using WEP what do you have set for the authentication type?

jimwillsher
2005-12-19, 13:29
WG602 V3, firmware 3.2rc6.

On the SB1 I used WEP64, followed by WEP128, very reliably. The authentication was "Open System".

On the SB3 I'm currently using WPA (one of the reasons for getting the SB3) though I get the same results with all enryption-types, even "no encryption". The NetGear calls it "WPA-PSK", the SB3 called it "WPA Personal".

You'll see that I've posted other threads. I now have it working, but only under the following scenario:

1) Enable SSID Broadcast
AND
2) On the SB3 ignore the broadcast SSID, choose to join a network manually, and then type exactly the same SSID that was broadcast! I know I've typing it correctly because you don't actually type, you just press the right-button to confirm all the characters in the SSID.

Choosing the broadcast SSID will not work.

To reiterate, identical results even if using no encryption.

Jim

ianjohnson_nz
2005-12-19, 13:38
WG602 V3, firmware 3.2rc6.

On the SB1 I used WEP64, followed by WEP128, very reliably. The authentication was "Open System".

On the SB3 I'm currently using WPA (one of the reasons for getting the SB3) though I get the same results with all enryption-types, even "no encryption". The NetGear calls it "WPA-PSK", the SB3 called it "WPA Personal".

Jim

I've just re-built my pc and changed from WEP to WPA. I couldn't get my SB2 to connect. It found the wireless AP ok, but the AP was allocating a strange IP address (should have been in the range 192.168.1.something but was 169.blah. Then when trying to find the slimserver it would always try the same address even though my laptop had been allocated a different address.

In the end I found doing a factory reset seemed to kickstart the SB2. It's as if it retained a memory of the previous settings, and didn't like being changed. A factory reset meant I could re-input the SSID, WPA password and it all worked beautifully.

Maybe try that.

Regards, Ian

jimwillsher
2005-12-19, 13:42
Hi Ian,

Thanks for that. Somebody earlier in the day had also suggested a factory reset so I did that (and also learnt how to do it, since I never needed to on my SB1). However, it didn't help me much.

However, your posting raises an alarming issue. If you experienced problems back in the SB2 days, then what's the prospect if the issue getting resolved by a firmware update? Very unlikely, I would say! I know that that SB2 and SB3 share the same firmware, but if this issue has persisted this long then it's likely to remain a permanent feature.

Hint hint, Sean/Dean.....any chance of getting this resolved, so that SB2 AND SB3 users can benefit?


Jim

Michaelwagner
2005-12-19, 20:11
the AP was allocating a strange IP address (should have been in the range 192.168.1.something but was 169.blah.
If memory serves, 169. is the range that is "auto-assigned" when DHCP isn't working.

jimwillsher
2005-12-20, 00:21
Yes, except DHCP clearly is working....otherwise I wouldn't be writing these messages. All my PCs use DHCP, so if there is an issue with DHCP then it must be on the SB3.

Another poster has suggested that there is a flaw in the SB3's DHCP implementation.


Jim

snarlydwarf
2005-12-20, 02:03
Yes, except DHCP clearly is working....otherwise I wouldn't be writing these messages. All my PCs use DHCP, so if there is an issue with DHCP then it must be on the SB3.

Or it could be an issue with wireless authentication: if the 802.11g layer doesn't come up, WAP won't come up, if 802.11g is found, but the encryption doesn't match, then the server won't see the DHCP packets...

ie, it may not be DHCP at all: it's more likely to be a symptom of a wireless problem.

Robin Bowes
2005-12-20, 02:23
jimwillsher said the following on 20/12/2005 07:21:
> Yes, except DHCP clearly is working....otherwise I wouldn't be writing
> these messages. All my PCs use DHCP, so if there is an issue with DHCP
> then it must be on the SB3.
>
> Another poster has suggested that there is a flaw in the SB3's DHCP
> implementation.

I've seen problems with my SB2 when connecting wirelessly.

I don't disconnect all that often, but when I do it's hit or miss
whether it reconnects.

Sometimes I get the 169.x.x.x address but if I leave it alone it
connects anyway.

I think there's definitely some sort of issue with the wireless
networknig/dhcp implementation, certainly in the SB2 and, by extension
(since they use the same firmware) in the SB3.

R.

stedes
2006-02-02, 16:08
Hello again Slim people.
This is a follow to my problem and as we all now know quite a common SB3 problem..."Unable to connect to wireless network".

Bought my SB3 some months ago and after a lot of aggrevation and countless hours repeating settings I accepted that my SB3 (firmware 28) would just not connect wirelessly to my Belkin (7230uk4a latest firmware)...so i bought big cables and moved everything around and used it via ethernet. No problems there....

Except that I paid for a wireless SB3...
Now, about 2 months later I decided that it was time for a new router...so I got myself a Draytek 2800G...supporting proper 802.11g and WPA/WPA2 which the SB3 (???) supports.

You can imaging my surprise (or lack thereof) when I realised that the SB3 will NOT connect to this router either...it sees the SSID, connects, obtains a DHCP IP Address and then goes into an endless cycle of crash/restarts until i remove power and do a factory reset.

Some data before people start posting suggestions...

- Router sees MAC Address of SB3....it is the same as the bottom of the SB3. Message log says encryption pass failed.

- Router is working on 802.11g mode...no fancy super duper turbo modes enabled.

- SSID is visible

- Trials with WEP/WPA and no encryption all failed

- This is not a signal problem. Two other machines connect fine to router

- SB3 Firmware is 29

- Router firmware is the newest one

I will be really curious as to what Slim CEO and CTO have to say. I accept the fact that certain wireless products are in fact incompatible with each other but this seems to be a more common occurence than that. One can regularly see in these forums problems with routers from Draytek, Belkin, Buffalo, Netgear, D-Link, and Linksys....not trying to be sarcastic or anything but these represent about 90% of the WLAN router market.

Again don't get me wrong. I love the damn thing and I think it's the dog's b......s but COME ON!!! Some proper support would be nice here...rather than just saying "We are aware and testing and new firmware is coming etc etc etc"

kdf
2006-02-02, 16:17
Quoting stedes <stedes.22mjub (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:


> Again don't get me wrong. I love the damn thing and I think it's the
> dog's b......s but COME ON!!! Some proper support would be nice
> here...rather than just saying "We are aware and testing and new
> firmware is coming etc etc etc"
>

that IS proper support. The wireless driver for the chipset has some
problems with certain wireless AP's. FW29 fixes a few, but other
still remain. Testing is how you get to new firmware. come on, indeed.

-k

stedes
2006-02-02, 16:49
Dear kdf,

Downgrading to FW 28 stops the endless restart cycles. Now the slim will again see the network but not connect...

DanWiggins
2006-02-02, 16:50
FWIW, I had no problem at all with a Linksys WRT54G router, and I used a Netgear WGR101 travel router at CES without a problem. Both kicked off fine right out of the box... I love the little Netgear - I can put it, my portable hard disk, and the SB3 in a small bag and have a fully wireless audio serving solution wherever I travel.

Not all PC equipment meets all published standards; I'm confident the Slim Devices guys will figure out what additional support is needed for a wider array of routers.

Michaelwagner
2006-02-02, 17:13
so I got myself a Draytek 2800G
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?RouterStatus
does say

Draytek 2600G 2.5.6 WPA-TKIP SB2 Appears to be bug in draytek
That wouldn't have been my first choice if I was trying to make a squeezebox work ... buying a box known not to work.

Not that I'm saying they shouldn't fix whatever they can w.r.t. the Drayteks, but it might not be within their ability, that is, it may well be what it says in the note, a Draytek problem.

slimdemage
2006-02-02, 23:48
I believe Stedes is right on the money. I was sent a manufacturing defect that does not perform as advertised (SB3). Plain and simple. I ran into countless hours of frustration trying to make an SB3 function on an otherwise flawless wireless network. I have enough respect for the intelligent people at Slim Devices to assume someone there knows all about the bad SB3 units. You are right Stedes, this product is not ready. I expected Slim Devices to recognize my obviously faulty unit and replace it, but instead they just gave me a refund. Maybe they are out of working wireless cards?

seanadams
2006-02-03, 00:47
I believe Stedes is right on the money. I was sent a manufacturing defect that does not perform as advertised (SB3). Plain and simple. I ran into countless hours of frustration trying to make an SB3 function on an otherwise flawless wireless network. I have enough respect for the intelligent people at Slim Devices to assume someone there knows all about the bad SB3 units. You are right Stedes, this product is not ready. I expected Slim Devices to recognize my obviously faulty unit and replace it, but instead they just gave me a refund. Maybe they are out of working wireless cards?

Ouch! We've been very open here.

I'm sorry that you had problems with wireless, but please be fair. Your insinuations about "the bad SB3 units" as if there were a high defect rate are simply wrong. However, there are indeed some driver bugs and compatibility issues which are openly documented on our web site, and we're working VERY hard on these and sharing as much as possible along the way.

If you'd like, please email me your contact info and I will let you know when we get to the bottom of the problem you were having. I will ask our support lead for his troubleshooting record and we will look at the returned unit to see if it's a software or hardware issue.

Thank you for your understanding,
Sean

Pale Blue Ego
2006-02-03, 05:46
One solution to the wireless headaches:

Just order the wired SB and spend the $50 you saved on a wall-plugged ethernet bridge. Gives you a flawless 14 mbps connection with zero setup hassles. Just plug 'em in and they work.

Michaelwagner
2006-02-03, 06:27
I believe Stedes is right on the money. I was sent a manufacturing defect that does not perform as advertised (SB3). Plain and simple. I ran into countless hours of frustration trying to make an SB3 function on an otherwise flawless wireless network. I have enough respect for the intelligent people at Slim Devices to assume someone there knows all about the bad SB3 units. You are right Stedes, this product is not ready. I expected Slim Devices to recognize my obviously faulty unit and replace it, but instead they just gave me a refund. Maybe they are out of working wireless cards?
Well, I don't work for Slim and I certainly don't speak for Slim, but I think you have to be fair here.

Wireless is a jungle. Anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't been paying attention. There are at least 3 different competing base standards (802.11a, 802.11b and 802.11g - although the last 2 have some areas of compatability between them) and one upcoming standard 802.11n. In order to get a marketing edge, vendors add all sorts of non-standard protocol extensions. It's hit and miss if two cards from different vendors even talk to each other. Hell, I couldn't get two cards from the same vendor from the same generation to talk to each other reliably a few weeks ago.

So buying a wireless slim is a different proposition than buying a wired one. Wired ethernet has worked flawlessly forever. For Slim and for everyone else. Wireless isn't there yet. But that doesn't make the Slim box "defective". It's more like, if you chose to take your car down a dirt road, it's slower, messier, more prone to accidents and there is a greater possibility that you will damage the car or get stuck. But that's not the car's fault - people don't have the same performance expectations from dirt roads that they have from 4 lane superhighways.

If Slim is willing to give you a refund because wireless didn't work out in your area, I think that's big of them, and congratulations to them for being so big, but wireless is like a dirt road and they don't maintain the dirt roads (or the wireless airspace) in your area, so they can't be responsible for it.

I am a hobby dance DJ in my spare time. We did a big dance workshop a half year ago, and the wireless microphones worked flawlessly until evening, when another DJ in another hall in the same facility turned on his identical microphone, programmed to the same channel, and blew us out of the water. We had to go find him, and convince him to change channels (turned out, he didn't need the wireless at all and plugged the cord in instead).

The point is, when you buy wireless technology, you have to assume a different skill set as the user. Or at least understand the limitations of the technology you're buying. You have to be able to do at least minimal diagnosis of wireless problems, be skilled at problem source determination and interference avoidance. This is inherent in using a shared medium like wireless. Just like wireless telephones or my wireless microphones. Slim didn't set up the 802.11 frequencies too close so they overlap and interfere, and they certainly can't change that. It's a lousy standard with insufficient bandwidth and insufficient separation. It works well in some places (out in the country, far from neighbours) and not so well in others (apartment buildings).

That doesn't amount to a manufacturing defect, that's a standards problem.

This is not to say that there aren't defective Squeezeboxes out there. I had a display go bad on one of mine. And I've heard of wireless cards that were broken on delivery or died shortly after delivery.

But much of the time, what we find here on the forums is that the problems are configuration problems, or wireless access points that are defective or deficient or nonstandard. It's hard to blame Slim for a fault they had nothing to do with.

Michaelwagner
2006-02-03, 06:30
One solution to the wireless headaches:

Just order the wired SB and spend the $50 you saved on a wall-plugged ethernet bridge. Gives you a flawless 14 mbps connection with zero setup hassles. Just plug 'em in and they work.
They're not universally available, and they have their own problems. They share the signal with everyone on the same transformer leg as you. In an apartment building, that's probably fewer people than are sharing the 802.11 airspace, but it's still not just you. In a housing district, it's probably your 6 nearest and dearest neighbours. But yes, the sharing is down to single digits as opposed to hundreds of people, telephones and microwave ovens, which is what 802.11 airspace is like here.

Christian Pernegger
2006-02-03, 07:02
> Wireless is a jungle. Anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't been paying
> attention. There are at least 3 different competing base standards
> (802.11a, 802.11b and 802.11g - although the last 2 have some areas of
> compatability between them) and one upcoming standard 802.11n. In order
> to get a marketing edge, vendors add all sorts of non-standard protocol
> extensions.

I've used quite a bit of wireless equipment both at my home and
various unis -- zero problems with any WiFi certified 802.11b or g
device, even in a mixed setting. The various proprietiary MIMO
implementations are another thing, but these can hopefully be
disabled.

> It's hit and miss if two cards from different vendors even talk to each other.
[...]
> That doesn't amount to a manufacturing defect, that's a standards problem.

Please don't spread an attitude like that, users might get to think
it's "normal", like grave bugs in commercial software. A WiFi device
that does not communicate properly with other such devices is plenty
defective in my book. Question is, who doesn't play ball.

I'm not saying SD is at fault either. Prime suspects, in order:

1) users: setting up a wireless network isn't easy with the different
encryption methods
around
2) the software/hardware component for wireless, that SD's obviously
sourcing from a third
party: at the very least it doesn't handle user error very
gracefully, but I suspect it's just
not-very-compliant crap. Nothing to be done about that for the
current generation of
units.
3) AP vendors: who might somehow neglect the standards compliant modes
in favour of
their turbo-whatever. Lock-in has always been a popular marketing tactic.

C.

Millwood
2006-02-03, 09:28
One mistake that's easy to miss is forgetting that you have mac address filtering enabled. If you do, you need to add the new device's mac address to the list.

Millwood
2006-02-03, 11:27
Just got my SB3. Am running b only wireless.

It took a few cycles of messing around, reboots, etc to get things working. I'm not sure why but it did.

My config is 128 bit WEP, static ip etc. (I see no reason for a fixed location device to DHCP, particularly when its IP address matters to the server).

One quibble - I have a second AP on the same wireless network - and I'd like to know which the SB is talking to. The thing I need is the mac address of the AP its associated with.

Mad Chemist
2006-02-03, 11:58
I just got a SB3 a couple of days ago. Works fine with my Linksys WCG200 v2. Running in "g" mode with WPA Personal TKIP, DHCP enabled, SSID disabled, Mac filtering enabled. Also tested WEP 64, WEP 128, and No encryption which all work fine. WPA AES did not. WPA2 Personal in any form did not work. SB3 connected to wireless network but could not find the server.

slimdemage
2006-02-03, 13:41
"It's hard to blame Slim for a fault they had nothing to do with."

I understand your gripe about the wireless standard. I configure wireless networks for a living. The fact is this product is non-functional, and does not work as advertised. What did Slim have to do with this? They released this product to the public.

Like I said, I have a flawless wireless network. My Toshiba laptop has basic Atheros integrated wireless capability, and it works perfectly everywhere I take it: the office, my home, internet cafe's, even jumping onto random wireless networks anywhere I might go. I stays connected, and it works properly. Most modern wireless products function very consistently. I am very sorry the Squeezebox is not up to this standard.

By not admitting the reality of this situation, Slim Devices is growing a list of frustrated customers. It's not interference, and its not your ability to set-up your network. As the product claims, it SHOULD take only minutes to set up, and the fact is: it does not work.

Pale Blue Ego
2006-02-03, 13:56
They're not universally available, and they have their own problems. They share the signal with everyone on the same transformer leg as you.

There's an encryption feature (56-bit DES) which should be enough to keep neighbors out. Another nice feature of wall-plugged is you can move it around as your needs change. Want ethernet in the barn for the weekend? No problem. Sure beats running 100 yards of cat-5. It's not a perfect solution, but generally a lot less hassle (and more reliable) then wireless, and in many cases (especially apartments) it's simpler and better than running wires.

seanadams
2006-02-03, 14:13
By not admitting the reality of this situation, Slim Devices is growing a list of frustrated customers. It's not interference, and its not your ability to set-up your network. As the product claims, it SHOULD take only minutes to set up, and the fact is: it does not work.

It works just fine except for specific situations of which we are aware, which are openly communicated to the best of our knowledge, and for which there are generally simple work-arounds, such as disabling a proprietary router mode etc. You can find this information here:

http://bugs.slimdevices.com/

and here:

http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?RouterStatus

The fact that this information is so carefully documented in a public way should be taken as an indication of how serious we are about resolving all of them, and that Slim Devices has no problem "admitting the reality of this situation". You are the one who seems to be extrapolating YOUR situation to the entire user base.

I have offered to investigate your situation further and offer a solution as soon as we have one.

If you just want to vent, I understand, but we really are interested in resolving the problem. Thanks,

Sean

Michaelwagner
2006-02-03, 15:32
zero problems with any WiFi certified 802.11b or g device, even in a mixed setting.
That's not my experience.


The various proprietiary MIMO implementations are another thing, but these can hopefully be disabled.
The experience here on the forum (other people's, not mine) is that MIMO hasn't been the major problem, it's been 108Mb Turbo implementations.


A WiFi device that does not communicate properly with other such devices is plenty defective in my book. Question is, who doesn't play ball.
Well, one of the devices is defective. The problem, as you say, is determining which one isn't playing ball. On this forum, and in this thread, the presumption seems to be "I bought the Squeezebox last, and everything else works, so it must be the Squeezebox". This is not proper problem source determination. And that, fundamentally, was my point.

Michael

Michaelwagner
2006-02-03, 15:41
There's an encryption feature (56-bit DES) which should be enough to keep neighbors out. Another nice feature of wall-plugged is you can move it around as your needs change. Want ethernet in the barn for the weekend? No problem. Sure beats running 100 yards of cat-5. It's not a perfect solution, but generally a lot less hassle (and more reliable) then wireless, and in many cases (especially apartments) it's simpler and better than running wires.

Thanks. I think I'll look into that technology some more.

I just spent the day wandering around my factory with my laptop running netstumbler. There are other people in this factory district radiating and running WAPs, and I know kids drive around here at night. Perhaps they are wardriving. I'd just as soon not share my data with them ....

seanadams
2006-02-03, 16:08
Slimdemage,

We did check out your RMA and identified a failed wireless module. Sorry - these are individually tested here, but sometimes hardware still fails, and we do our best to minimize these. If you'd like to try another SB3 please contact us. Otherwise sorry for your troubles, and I at least hope you feel that we were responsive and straightforward with you.

Regards,
Sean

slimdemage
2006-02-03, 17:41
Fair enough. Slim Devices has been responsive, although the bad component did cost me a lot of frustration. It was the several other posts from people with the same problems that led me to make generalizations. It may be possible that several units are shipping out with this problem. Do the wireless cards you use vary in make and model? I am really looking forward to seeing the Squeezebox function consistently.

seanadams
2006-02-04, 00:50
No, same cards.

SoundBoy
2006-02-04, 14:03
Howdy - I am running a local wifi with a mac as the music server, a SB3 with powered speakers and a airport express with airtunes with powered speakers.
The airtport client and the SB3 client are 10ft far away from the LinkSysWRT54g, both in line of sight.

The airport picks up the signal and streams music just fine into the kitchen. The SB3 has drop outs all the time in the bedroom. Switching the airport with the SB3 (so trading places), just reverses the situation. Great music now in the bedroom, drop outs in the kitchen.

Fact: So, how to explain that? Either Apple has a secret to stream faster and better under the same quality of WiFi signal delivered from the router, or SB3 has simply a poor reception. It has nothing to do with standards or jungle.. I am not looking for excuses, I am looking for a fix. Mine is to order a cable for the SB3.

Cheers

seanadams
2006-02-04, 15:25
Signal strength will of course vary depending on the orientation of the access point and the Squeezebox. Please try going to Settings -> Information -> Player Settings -> Wireless Signal Strength

What are you getting? You may find a huge improvement by moving things around just a little bit.

Pale Blue Ego
2006-02-04, 19:56
Thanks. I think I'll look into that technology some more.

It may be a case of security through obscurity. These powerline units aren't very common, and the chance of somebody on the same transformer having one is small. The 56-bit encryption should foil everyone but the Feds or a well-funded hacker.

I just added another unit today (Netgear XE102) and again, it works flawlessly. Getting the full 14 mbps on all the links. Never had a problem except once after a power outage, and a simple unplug/replug fixed it.

Netgear has a new model XE104 with 85 mbps throughput and 4 RJ-45 jacks, but that's overkill for my situation.

EnochLight
2006-02-04, 23:14
Sorry to see the original author is having so many problems.. I can report, however, that my SB3 works fine wirelessly with a Netgear WPN824 wireless router. Sure, I had to disable the "Advanced 108Mbps Features" but that's why there's the ability to turn it on and off in the router's settings. That said, I have the "eXtended Range(XR) Feature" turned on and all is well.

I almost beg to differ that it's your router that's to blame, not your Squeezebox 3...

At any rate, I hope you see that from the responses you got in this thread from Slim Devices themselves that their intentions are good. Anyway...if you were having trouble with your unit...why didn't you bother returning it within the 30-days that is offered?

Mind you, I'm not badgering - just playing devil's advocate. I might be biased though - my Squeezebox 3 works as advertised and I couldn't be happier with this community. ;-)

SoundBoy
2006-02-05, 20:38
Howdy - I should do OK in terms of signal strength, usually I get around 80% drops once a while down to 65% but not lower.. Kevin tried to assist, but we had to give in. Time for a Cat5.. I still love the device, because of the nice display.. smile..



Signal strength will of course vary depending on the orientation of the access point and the Squeezebox. Please try going to Settings -> Information -> Player Settings -> Wireless Signal Strength

What are you getting? You may find a huge improvement by moving things around just a little bit.