PDA

View Full Version : Roku M500 + slimserver + flac/320CBR mp3 = breakups?



goofygrin
2006-02-20, 17:55
Just got my m500 up and running on my linksys router (supported).

160, 192 kbps mp3s play fine

320kbps cbr and flac breakup somewhat randomly.

I'm getting between 25-32 on my signal strength.

Running slimserver on my linux (gentoo) server (don't have a windows box to run anything else on). Server is hard wired on a 10/100 network (and can stream dvds all day long with no stutter).

I've played with my wireless channels (not much help), mtu size (down to 1500), and antenna placement (I've got an outboard antenna on my router).

Is there anything else I'm missing or can try?

Thanks!

snarlydwarf
2006-02-20, 18:09
Is there anything else I'm missing or can try?



I hate to be the one to say it, but....

Roku support probably?

25% signal strength is pretty bad.

Add in that Roku only supports 802.11b and there's your problem.

goofygrin
2006-02-20, 18:12
Slimserver isn't supported by Roku... so I posted here and on their forum.

It's not 25% signal... it's their "signal quality" reading.

I think it might be the 802.11b issue... but I'm still playing with it.

I just can't justify $250 for a squeezebox. I'll add another network drop if I have to.



I hate to be the one to say it, but....

Roku support probably?

25% signal strength is pretty bad.

Add in that Roku only supports 802.11b and there's your problem.

seanadams
2006-02-20, 20:07
the problem is also that the m500 is using a small buffer and has a questionable TCP/IP stack. Sorry, it is just not likely to do what you need.

I'd suggest trying out the Squeezebox3 with the 30-day return policy in mind. If you have any modest amount of time and/or money invested in your music collection, I'm certain you will find it's worth every penny.... especially since you're using FLAC, which I suppose means you want the best sound quality!

goofygrin
2006-02-20, 20:15
Sean you must not be married :)

My wife sees $100 vs. $300 and the conversation ends. Period. If I'm going to spend $300 per room, I'm going to look much closer at the Sonos because their remote is way better and wife friendly. Their 40k song limit + some other things hold me back. Eventually I'm looking at 4+ devices, and that's when the whole $100 vs. $300 ($250 when you buy two) comes into play.

I set up slimserver to auto transcode to 256kbps and its helping... I think its the 802.11b + little buffer working against me here... My server's got the spare cycles, so I'm good there...

Frankly I dislike slimserver too. As a application developer I feel like I'm playing some some high school project whenever I have to do something in it. It's just not a good UI. I'd prefer to not have to run a server software, but I understand why it's there (to manage large libraries).

Thanks for responding. Luckily I didn't spend a lot on the Roku and can probably make my money back on ol' ebay if I need to.



the problem is also that the m500 is using a small buffer and has a questionable TCP/IP stack. Sorry, it is just not likely to do what you need.

I'd suggest trying out the Squeezebox3 with the 30-day return policy in mind. If you have any modest amount of time and/or money invested in your music collection, I'm certain you will find it's worth every penny.... especially since you're using FLAC, which I suppose means you want the best sound quality!

seanadams
2006-02-20, 20:41
Sean you must not be married :)


heh - why do you think I'm posting here 24hrs a day?

WRT to the user interface, I forgot to mention: to get a better idea of what Squeezebox is like, you might want to try out SoftSqueeze. You'll see the high-res display, fast response time, FLAC support etc. Roku's remote was not designed for our interface, so it's a bit funky to use.

goofygrin
2006-02-20, 22:31
heh - why do you think I'm posting here 24hrs a day?

:D (I just snuck upstairs before bed -- she'll be calling my phone soon!)


WRT to the user interface, I forgot to mention: to get a better idea of what Squeezebox is like, you might want to try out SoftSqueeze. You'll see the high-res display, fast response time, FLAC support etc. Roku's remote was not designed for our interface, so it's a bit funky to use.

It's not the unit's interface that's the problem. I used softsqueeze (ugh, java) for a week or so before the Roku got here. It's quirky, but it's not horribly difficult to figure out (the hardest part was the arrows to get around, I'm much more used to clicking "OK" to choose something, not hitting the right arrow).

It's the server web software. It's painful. It feels like it was written in 2003 or something. The meta refreshes drive me nuts in IE with the clicking. I keep finding features I didn't know about (which is a good thing as there's lots of features), but they seem buried.

I've seen some suggestions on here for an ajax-y web app similar to google maps, and I really think that if you were to take the time to build a good app, that a non techy person could use (even have a "party" mode that makes it super simple to control), you'd be way ahead of the game. The Sonos has it's weaknesses, but the controller is really what makes it awesome.

Again, I'm a developer who does a lot of web apps (not websites, two very different things) for corporate clients. Been doing ajax since before it was ajax... Google has really upped the ante (and I'm happy since it's driving a lot of business :D)

mkozlows
2006-02-20, 22:37
It's the server web software. It's painful. It feels like it was written in 2003 or something. The meta refreshes drive me nuts in IE with the clicking.

Boy, mileage really does vary. I love SlimServer's UI, and think that not only is it a great Web app, but that it's also the best media player I've used.

(As for the IE clicking, the solution to that is to use Firefox for SlimServer.)

notanatheist
2006-02-20, 22:47
FWIW, I had a Roku M1000 for a short time (about a week). After picking up the Squeezeobx and seeing a HUUUUUGE performance difference I IMMEDIATELY repackaged the Roku and returned it. There is just no comparing them. If you want to justify the $250 then buy two without wireless and it's only $200 each AND you get a VFD display. The M500 is LCD. Trust me, you'll thank everyone here if you do. If the $100 off for two promo isn't going still then kindly ask Sean if he'll do it for you.

goofygrin
2006-02-20, 22:54
Boy, mileage really does vary. I love SlimServer's UI, and think that not only is it a great Web app, but that it's also the best media player I've used.

(As for the IE clicking, the solution to that is to use Firefox for SlimServer.)

Edit: I reread this post and I stand by it, but as a "software engineer"/"coder"/"developer" I realze that most computer people have soft skins... so please don't take this as a personal insult and make it your dying wish that my computers turn into dust. I'm not tossing stones at you or your baby, I'm voicing my opinion, which like cornholes and elbows, everyone's got one and they all stink.

Holy war territory, but if IE didn't have the security holes (not that FF and all the others are really secure) and wasn't made by microsoft, then people would use the heck out of it. Personally, I hate FireFox and all the other wanna be browsers. Why can't an app just do what it needs to do?

Tabbed browsing? Why? You can't alt-tab between browsers then? (anyone who programs-by-google knows how necessary having lots of browser windows open at one time is).

The only things that are nice with firefox are: greasemonkey scripts (when they work) and the javascript debugger. Everything else (including it's inability to render websites) isn't worth my time.

99% of my clients standardize on IE... most don't allow any other browser in their environment (from a support perspective).

Frankly, if you think that slimserver's web ui is a great ui, then you need to get out a little (I realize I'm kinda peeing on the host's dinner table and all, but I can be a little blunt sometimes :D).

There's some good in the UI, but there is *loads* of room for improvement. I'd say that if SlimDevices wants to get mass market appeal, then the app has to become significantly more user friendly. Joe Bob can't figure out how to get rid of AOL (but he can download mp3s via spyware loaded kazaa) and he wants one of them mp3 streamer thingees to get mp3s to his buddies trailer next door so they can play the same thing at the same time and have a real hoot hollerin' time! (sorry I live in Texas, so I can go there LOL). You expect him to be able to grok all of the crap going on in slimserver? How links don't look like links until you hunt them down and put your mouse over it (remember that most people don't know its a link unless it's underlined).

Here's what I'd change (in no order, and by no means complete, off the top of my head):

- get rid of the frames.
- separate out the admin stuff. Go to tabs. Floating divs (see meebo.com for examples). Something. Make it an MDI in a webpage for all I care. There's too much going on here and it's really confusing.
- use ajax rather than meta refreshes. That would solve some of the timing issues I get as well.
- drag and drop
- dynamic reordering
- font sizes are locked down and are very small. Not all of us have 20/15 vision :)
- I'm thoroughly confused with the whole "left side has config and browse my playlist stuff and right side has a control for the media player downstairs/in the other room stuff". If I was joe bob, and I see a play button, I'd be wondering why isn't it playing in my window? Why did the box in Jimmy Joe Jack's trailer just start making noise?
- Someone else mentioned that their spouse can't use the UI, they prefer Itunes. Man I hate Itunes. That's a horrible Windows UI (slow, buggy, controls are not consistent with other windows apps). But it's simple. Once you learn a couple quirks, you can play music. With slimserver, the cost of entry is too high. There's no way I could get people to use this without lots of help.

Look at all the major players in the media player space: winamp, windows media player, itunes, etc. They are all simple to use, support drag and drop, do what you expect them to do, etc. It's not a case of trying to break the mold... it's a case of going across the grain and making it painful to gain acceptance.

If slimdevices wants to get out of the niche market, they'll need to be more competitive from a software and pricing standpoint...

goofygrin
2006-02-20, 23:10
I don't want to have to add network drops if I can help it (in some places I can't add them), so I'm stuck at the $250 per (assuming the $100 off two). Now if I could get the $100 off two of the sb2's...

I realize the component costs are higher. When I was trying to determine if I could manufacture a sonos clone, I came to the conclusion that the cost of 1-5offing the hardware (let alone writing the software) was prohibitive.

The hardware in the Squeezeboxen is better... but I mean, $150 is a lot of diapers and such.



FWIW, I had a Roku M1000 for a short time (about a week). After picking up the Squeezeobx and seeing a HUUUUUGE performance difference I IMMEDIATELY repackaged the Roku and returned it. There is just no comparing them. If you want to justify the $250 then buy two without wireless and it's only $200 each AND you get a VFD display. The M500 is LCD. Trust me, you'll thank everyone here if you do. If the $100 off for two promo isn't going still then kindly ask Sean if he'll do it for you.

mkozlows
2006-02-20, 23:12
Frankly, if you think that slimserver's web ui is a great ui, then you need to get out a little

Thanks for the gratuitous insult. Really classes up the conversation.


- font sizes are locked down and are very small. Not all of us have 20/15 vision :)

Font sizes are only locked down if you use IE. In Firefox, you can adjust them easily.

goofygrin
2006-02-20, 23:14
Thanks for the gratuitous insult. Really classes up the conversation.


That's me... love me or hate me, but there's no mouth/brain filter. (brain/finger in this case)


Font sizes are only locked down if you use IE. In Firefox, you can adjust them easily.

This is actually just bad programming. A simple css change would solve the issue and wouldn't force a particular browser on the users (for a software that runs on 3-4 platforms, this seems quite interesting).

snarlydwarf
2006-02-21, 00:03
and I rarely use the web interface at all...

that's why i have a remote...

(and no pc at all in the bedroom where one sb is...)

crooner
2006-02-21, 00:24
Me neither. I do have a laptop in my bedroom but I turn it off when I listen to music.

That's the real beauty of the Squeezebox.

I briefly owned the Roku and I returned it immediately. Inferior in every way...


and I rarely use the web interface at all...

that's why i have a remote...

(and no pc at all in the bedroom where one sb is...)

Fifer
2006-02-21, 01:28
This might be a really daft question (I know very little about the Roku) but why is someone with a Roku who obviously dislikes SlimServer, not using the Roku software instead of something third party, unsupported (and apparently inferior) for his device?

Also, am I wrong in thinking that the version of Slimserver which is compatible with the Roku is quite old by current standards? Is goofygrin not dissing an obsolete, superseded version?

Finally, I'd advise anyone considering the Sonos for it's better remote to explore the Squeezebox/Nokia 770 combination. It's a great setup and cheaper than the Sonos.

cliveb
2006-02-21, 02:55
(Re. Firefox): Everything else (including it's inability to render websites) isn't worth my time.
The fault is with the websites, not Firefox. You tell us that you're a software engineer, so you should know this. You seem to be condoning websites which use IE-specific features that cause them not to render in other browsers: do you really mean that?

(FWIW, I have some issues with Firefox, particularly its huge working set. But it is my browser of choice most of the time).

CardinalFang
2006-02-21, 03:57
Frankly, if you think that slimserver's web ui is a great ui, then you need to get out a little (I realize I'm kinda peeing on the host's dinner table and all, but I can be a little blunt sometimes :D).

Well how about posting the URLs of some of the sites you've built so that we can judge your view of good UI design and affordance?

I think you'll find that being direct isn't an issue, but personal insults don't fall into that category, they are still insults. If you want people to help, being rude isn't the best opening gambit, especially in this case as you're trying to get help for a competitive product. Also, this is a board where you have time to consider your response - it isn't spoken. Not taking the time probably does you a disservice as reader will only remember and focus on the bad parts.

I don't particularly like the SlimServer UI either, but since I never use it except to set up things it doesn't ruin my experience on a daily basis. Speed of response is my bugbear - what I'd really like is a Sonus type remote and a clean, fast UI.

What I would love to see and I have mentioned this before, is a way to get data tunneled through the SB IR to the SlimServer, so that a IR device, such as a smartphone, could get the same level of access as a Wifi device. With that I could put together a Symbian app to browse artwork and control the SB.

Paul

oreillymj
2006-02-21, 04:33
Reading through these posts, it was mentioned that Slim should take a look at meebo.com for an example of floating DIV usage.

I popped over there for a look and what do I get get. A page requesting that I create a user id. 4 username/password login dialogs for IM clients.

Hmmm, so what exactly does this web-site do??? I'll just give them my personal details so I can find out, eh no I don't think so.

This is just 1 of a number of web-sites I've seen, who in their haste to hop on the Web2.0 bandwagon, couldn't be bothered to explain to the user what exactly their site is going to provide.

Oh, but they do include a "About" link to some fluff about the devs hobbies, bio's etc..

The About link is 1 of a number which uses underlined text, so they I intuitively know they are links, but there is also a non underlined link called "Join meebo now", which opens a popup explaining what the site does.

Sorry but no thanks meebo. Not a shining example of good UI design. And not a very compelling business model either if you ask me.
But then again, I'm not a dot com millionaire http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/

Pale Blue Ego
2006-02-21, 05:39
I agree that a more dynamic ui is needed, and wouldn't be suprised if that is being worked on by the slim developers.

goofygrin seems to have good ideas about when is needed and how to go about it, so why not take a hack at the slimserver web ui, gg? Maybe if you create something good, the guys at Slim will mail you a few SB3s.

goofygrin
2006-02-21, 08:41
This might be a really daft question (I know very little about the Roku) but why is someone with a Roku who obviously dislikes SlimServer, not using the Roku software instead of something third party, unsupported (and apparently inferior) for his device?

Also, am I wrong in thinking that the version of Slimserver which is compatible with the Roku is quite old by current standards? Is goofygrin not dissing an obsolete, superseded version?


Good point. I'm actually using the most recent version of slimserver, so we're ok there. The reason I'm using slimserver is because of it's linux support. My mediaserver runs linux, and I don't have any windows boxes that are up 100% (everything else is a laptop or an xbox in my household)...



Finally, I'd advise anyone considering the Sonos for it's better remote to explore the Squeezebox/Nokia 770 combination. It's a great setup and cheaper than the Sonos.

I've read a little about this, and it seems a little hacky. If it was a more supported configuration, then it might be worthwhile...

goofygrin
2006-02-21, 08:43
The fault is with the websites, not Firefox. You tell us that you're a software engineer, so you should know this. You seem to be condoning websites which use IE-specific features that cause them not to render in other browsers: do you really mean that?

(FWIW, I have some issues with Firefox, particularly its huge working set. But it is my browser of choice most of the time).

I'm torn since I generate a lot of IE specific code (remember my clients are ok with this, as I mostly develop stuff for internal client use, if it's external facing, I make sure I follow standards).

Personally, I'd prefer it if there was, say, a common HTML/etc. rendering engine that was the standard and all that the different flavors of browsers just skinned this engine (similar to the mozilla model). I think then that we'd get the best of both worlds and everyone could be happier.

Not gonna happen though :)

goofygrin
2006-02-21, 08:47
Well how about posting the URLs of some of the sites you've built so that we can judge your view of good UI design and affordance?


Most of my work is internal, so I can't do this... but you're right, I preach, but can't back any of it up...



I think you'll find that being direct isn't an issue, but personal insults don't fall into that category, they are still insults. If you want people to help, being rude isn't the best opening gambit, especially in this case as you're trying to get help for a competitive product. Also, this is a board where you have time to consider your response - it isn't spoken. Not taking the time probably does you a disservice as reader will only remember and focus on the bad parts.


Agreed, but I'll still stand by my statement that if slimserver is the posted "creme-de-la-creme" then he's got a short list of good applications.



I don't particularly like the SlimServer UI either, but since I never use it except to set up things it doesn't ruin my experience on a daily basis. Speed of response is my bugbear - what I'd really like is a Sonus type remote and a clean, fast UI.

What I would love to see and I have mentioned this before, is a way to get data tunneled through the SB IR to the SlimServer, so that a IR device, such as a smartphone, could get the same level of access as a Wifi device. With that I could put together a Symbian app to browse artwork and control the SB.

Paul

I'm all about my wife being able to use it :) Which means I
a) don't have to show her how to use it
b) don't have to constantly tinker when it doesn't work (this is why I got rid of my htpc)
c) doesn't cost an arm and a leg :)

goofygrin
2006-02-21, 08:50
Reading through these posts, it was mentioned that Slim should take a look at meebo.com for an example of floating DIV usage.

I popped over there for a look and what do I get get. A page requesting that I create a user id. 4 username/password login dialogs for IM clients.

Hmmm, so what exactly does this web-site do??? I'll just give them my personal details so I can find out, eh no I don't think so.

This is just 1 of a number of web-sites I've seen, who in their haste to hop on the Web2.0 bandwagon, couldn't be bothered to explain to the user what exactly their site is going to provide.

Oh, but they do include a "About" link to some fluff about the devs hobbies, bio's etc..

The About link is 1 of a number which uses underlined text, so they I intuitively know they are links, but there is also a non underlined link called "Join meebo now", which opens a popup explaining what the site does.

Sorry but no thanks meebo. Not a shining example of good UI design. And not a very compelling business model either if you ask me.
But then again, I'm not a dot com millionaire http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/

I was pointing to meebo as a site for internal floating divs. Meebo is a tool for people who can't get to IM servers because of their corporate firewalls or whatever. Basically if you login to, say AIM, it will open a mini chat client in the browser. If you take a sec to try it out, imagine slimserver/softsqueeze working something like this (even imagine a web based winamp or the like).

While I think that a lot of the web 2.0 stuff is bleeding edge and half baked (remember when Flash came out and *everything* was in flash?), we're going to see a lot more of it sprinkled here and there. Even Amazon is using it to help provide more useful information to their users.

radish
2006-02-21, 08:54
(As for the IE clicking, the solution to that is to use Firefox for SlimServer.)
Or just switch off the click (Control Panel/Sounds).

As for the whole anti-Firefox rant, everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but that's a pretty unique one in my experience. As someone with a little knowledge in the area (up until recently I was a senior developer of the largest financial services website you've never seen) I can safely say everyone I've worked with is looking forward to the day when browsers actually adhere to standards and we stop having to target individual apps and work around their bugs. None of them are perfect yet, but IE has by far the furthest to go.


Personally, I'd prefer it if there was, say, a common HTML/etc. rendering engine that was the standard and all that the different flavors of browsers just skinned this engine (similar to the mozilla model). I think then that we'd get the best of both worlds and everyone could be happier.

Not gonna happen though :)
That would be a disaster. You need to read up on biodiversity and how it relates to internet security.

goofygrin
2006-02-21, 08:56
I agree that a more dynamic ui is needed, and wouldn't be suprised if that is being worked on by the slim developers.

goofygrin seems to have good ideas about when is needed and how to go about it, so why not take a hack at the slimserver web ui, gg? Maybe if you create something good, the guys at Slim will mail you a few SB3s.

I have the time to toss stones, but not to work on someone elses stuff. =) I do this for a living because it pays the bills, but coming home (well I work from home, so "coming home") to work on another, non-paying, IT project just isn't going to happen.

I'm sure that the slimserver developers listen quite closely to these forums (Sean wouldn't have it any other way guessing by what I've seen here)... but if this is the only place where they get their info, then they'll be getting a limited vision of what they could be... Most of the people on these boards are fans, early adopters, and tweakers (come on, look at the esoteric discussions of ogg vs. wma lossless vs. flac vs. apple etc.). This type of user has much different requirements than Biff and Buffy Moneybags or Jim and Joan Smith at BestBuy.

I'm not sure what Sean's plans for slimdevices are, but lowering the cost of entry (from a technology standpoint, price point you can sell to an extent on quality), will allow slimdevices to really get ahead in the market. (I'm not saying Roku's technology is better/easier, but they lowered the other part of the equation -- but at an obvious quality cost).

goofygrin
2006-02-21, 09:02
Or just switch off the click (Control Panel/Sounds).

As for the whole anti-Firefox rant, everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but that's a pretty unique one in my experience. As someone with a little knowledge in the area (up until recently I was a senior developer of the largest financial services website you've never seen) I can safely say everyone I've worked with is looking forward to the day when browsers actually adhere to standards and we stop having to target individual apps and work around their bugs. None of them are perfect yet, but IE has by far the furthest to go.


No disagreement there... but as long as these things are written by individuals with different agendas, we'll never see a day where everything works correctly all at once.


That would be a disaster. You need to read up on biodiversity and how it relates to internet security.

You're worried about a single hack taking down everything (coming from the banking industry, I respect that). But what's worse? A single point of failure that can be controlled by a single patch across all users (that server would get hammered! :)) or users floating out there with different crap in differing states of disarray, etc.

Sure the 1%ers out there will want something special/different, but for 95% of the internet community, there will be a sigh of relief when everything is standardized, security and patches becomes centralized, and they can quit worrying about their personal information being stolen via a trojan installed through a security hole (why were they visiting the warez site in the first place is another conversation).

A solution like this would have to be open source, no other way around it... I'm sure that the people wrapping it would open up security holes anyway... so maybe the argument's futile... :/

Bill Burns
2006-02-21, 09:08
goofygrin wrote:

> Holy war territory, but if IE didn't have the security holes (not that
> FF and all the others are really secure) and wasn't made by microsoft,
> then people would use the heck out of it. Personally, I hate FireFox
> and all the other wanna be browsers. Why can't an app just do what it
> needs to do?

Umm, Firefox is a direct descendant, via Mozilla, of the Netscape
browser, which came *long* before Internet Explorer. IE is the wannabe.

--
Bill Burns
Long Island NY USA
http://ftldesign.com

CardinalFang
2006-02-21, 09:22
I'm all about my wife being able to use it :) Which means I
a) don't have to show her how to use it
b) don't have to constantly tinker when it doesn't work (this is why I got rid of my htpc)
c) doesn't cost an arm and a leg :)

Yes, me too, although I don't mind paying more for quality product, but it'd better be good! Right now, only I use the SqueezeBox, although one of my ten-year old twins will fire up songs now and then. Having said that she is on iTunes at least 20 times more often even though both are available.

I've watched her using iTunes and she usually searches for songs by part of the name and then plays that track, which you can do in both systems. I guess what she prefers is that you can use a keyboard on iTunes and also see the artwork so she knows it's the right track. Plus response time is soooo much faster.

goofygrin
2006-02-21, 09:43
Just as a followup -- I've given up on the Roku. I've spent too much time with it already. I think that Sean hit the nail on the head when he said that the buffer and TCP/IP stack are probably the issue (plus it's having to emulate another device, which can't be a good thing LOL).

Maybe if I hit the lotto I'll try a SB... or a Sonos (I've played with a Sonos at BestBuy).

Thanks for the interesting discussion everyone...

kolding
2006-02-21, 12:38
This is actually just bad programming. A simple css change would solve the issue and wouldn't force a particular browser on the users (for a software that runs on 3-4 platforms, this seems quite interesting).


Hey Goof,
You know it's an open source server. Why don't you make the change and submit it? I know, when you buy a product, you want it to work, but the cool thing about SlimServer is that you can help improve it. Heck, if you make some important or big enough improvements, I've heard they'll even send a Squeezebox your way. Program your way into your 4-way system.

goofygrin
2006-02-21, 15:03
Hey Goof,
You know it's an open source server. Why don't you make the change and submit it? I know, when you buy a product, you want it to work, but the cool thing about SlimServer is that you can help improve it. Heck, if you make some important or big enough improvements, I've heard they'll even send a Squeezebox your way. Program your way into your 4-way system.

Hmm... 100 hours of work for a $300 product? $3 an hour? For 4 of them? $12 an hour?

I'll stick to my paying gigs :D

kdf
2006-02-21, 15:49
Never underestimate the value of being able to have people tell you that your work sucks, and that they could do so much better if only they were desperate and had nothing better to do.

that's priceless.

goofygrin
2006-02-21, 15:52
Where's the tongue in cheek emoticon when you need it.

I assume that the main developers of slimserver are paid by SlimDevices...

snarlydwarf
2006-02-21, 15:58
I assume that the main developers of slimserver are paid by SlimDevices...

I don't know about 'main', since that implies doing line counts and such.

But certainly a huge chunk of code has come from people like kdf... note his 'title' on the board.

(And this doesn't even get into the plugins.)

Mike New
2006-02-21, 16:20
This is a familiar thread. Someone rants about the SlimServer UI, and it turns into a religious war about everything EXCEPT the UI.

I've purchased 5 Squeezeboxes, some as gifts. I may buy more, because they sound fantastic, are easy to use, and are driven by incredibly powerful server software . I've recommended SBs to friends, who also went out and bought them and now brag to their friends. My heartfelt congratulations go to Sean and everyone else involved. You have created something truly cool.

That said, the SlimServer UI is really bad. I buy SBs in spite of it. Just try changing the order of a song at the bottom of a long playlist sometime and you'll get the picture. Heck, just try to browse through a long playlist before the screen auto-refreshes you back to the top.

How do I build playlists? I use iTunes, which allows me to quickly preview a tune, easily listen to segues from one song to another, and simply drag things around until I like it. THEN I go to SlimServer and rebuild the entire list from scratch so I can listen to FLAC files. It's just too painful to build and edit the original list using SlimServer.

I have recommended AGAINST Squeezeboxes for people who are easily frustrated with computers. My neighbor bought a Roku and loves it -- and the iTunes that drives it. It would be easy to say, "they just don't get it," but this is a lost customer who listened to my highly superior Squeezebox, loved it, loved the remote, but then bought Roku because SlimServer was such a hassle to use.

So fight on about which browser is best and who has offended whom. While you do, someone else is going to get it right and walk away with all that money from all those consumers who just want convenient, on-demand music that sounds fantastic.

As for me, I'll keep buying Squeezeboxes and recommend them to my friends because they really are the best thing out there. But don't mistake that for loyalty to some Slim cause. I'm just a consumer who spends money on stuff I like.

You know, with a killer UI this product would be unstoppable.

crooner
2006-02-21, 16:40
my only "beef" with Slim Server is speed. I find building playlists very slow. But I guess these things will eventually get fixed.

But if you use a different program to build your playlists, this is no problem at all.

radish
2006-02-21, 18:43
But if you use a different program to build your playlists, this is no problem at all.
Or if you just don't use playlists. There are some of us out here you know :)

mkozlows
2006-02-21, 20:12
That said, the SlimServer UI is really bad. I buy SBs in spite of it. Just try changing the order of a song at the bottom of a long playlist sometime and you'll get the picture. Heck, just try to browse through a long playlist before the screen auto-refreshes you back to the top.

How do I build playlists? I use iTunes, which allows me to quickly preview a tune, easily listen to segues from one song to another, and simply drag things around until I like it. THEN I go to SlimServer and rebuild the entire list from scratch so I can listen to FLAC files. It's just too painful to build and edit the original list using SlimServer.

Well, don't do that. SlimServer is clearly not a playlist management tool. Build your playlists in your media management app, and then play them in SlimServer.

But this is what I mean when I say that mileage varies. I never, ever use playlists. What I love about SlimServer is that -- nearly unique among media players -- it lets you do a three-tier browse. Genre, artist, album; this is so fundamental and necessary that it continually amazes me that essentially no other player does this.

But apparently other people don't care, and they listen to playlists instead of albums, and it turns out that maybe different programs are good for different styles of usage.

crooner
2006-02-21, 20:16
Or if you just don't use playlists. There are some of us out here you know :)

I hear ya. I have found that the "new music" feature by album is the one I use most. I increased the number of songs to 2000, meaning that it will list all my recent FLAC rips for quick access. Pretty neat!

notanatheist
2006-02-21, 20:57
Umm, Firefox is a direct descendant, via Mozilla, of the Netscape
browser, which came *long* before Internet Explorer. IE is the wannabe.



*ahem* Mosaic *ahem*

Wait, I thought this thread was about the piss poor performance of the Roku devices? FWIW, I do still own an HD10000 but returned the M1001. High-def pics on the plasma are pretty cool. It ain't good for much else. Maybe if Roku *WROTE THEIR OWN SOFTWARE* instead of hitching a ride their products would be better. Of course their prices wouldn't be as low.

Another note, I'm glad Slimdevices isn't on the shelf of every BestBuy and Circus City. The product has grown leaps and bounds in the last few years and works beautifully as is. I've recommended them to other people but certainly not for a technophobe. Last thing we need is a forum full of users that don't know where the "Start" button is.

As far as the browser holy war, I've never even seen Slimserver in Internet Exploder so I'm not complaining. Then again, I'd need an available Windows box to do that. So... how does it render in Opera?

Finally, just for the sake of funny holy wars... nano roxxors vi and emacs. LOL!!

mikeb
2006-02-22, 08:57
goofygrin wrote:
> radish Wrote:
>
>> That would be a disaster. You need to read up on biodiversity and how it
>> relates to internet security.
>
> You're worried about a single hack taking down everything (coming from
> the banking industry, I respect that). But what's worse? A single
> point of failure that can be controlled by a single patch across all
> users (that server would get hammered! :)) or users floating out there
> with different crap in differing states of disarray, etc.

The answer is standards with various vendors. In the IETF things are
properly developed over a long period of time, various vendors
implement them in various ways, and ultimately users demand
interoperability. If you don't interoperate, people don't buy your
device.

The "HTML / Web" world can't seem to get it right. People who program
for only one browser or standardize their business to only one browser
only help to perpetuate the lack of standards and create the lack of
standardized web interface we live in. There are religious holy wars
on what is right and what is wrong with no one ever giving in. I have
equated the web community to high school art students trying to design
the Internet. Maybe the web community can wake up and learn from some
of the actually effective standards bodies some day.

The web browser vendors are not -directly- for profit, but they do
seek market share for indirect business reasons. If we push back and
say we won't use their products unless they standardize, they will
standardize.

--mikeb


> Sure the 1%ers out there will want something special/different, but for
> 95% of the internet community, there will be a sigh of relief when
> everything is standardized, security and patches becomes centralized,
> and they can quit worrying about their personal information being
> stolen via a trojan installed through a security hole (why were they
> visiting the warez site in the first place is another conversation).
>
> A solution like this would have to be open source, no other way around
> it... I'm sure that the people wrapping it would open up security
> holes anyway... so maybe the argument's futile... :/
>
>

stinkingpig
2006-02-23, 21:42
mkozlows wrote:

> But apparently other people don't care, and they listen to playlists
> instead of albums, and it turns out that maybe different programs are
> good for different styles of usage.
>

different people have different needs? But, but, doesn't everyone know
that I know what's right for everyone?

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