PDA

View Full Version : Ideas for Squeezebox 4



fm2n
2006-12-07, 22:10
Ok, I was just thinking some crazy possibility for the new squeezebox:

Larger display.

Bluetooth:
Display receiving phone text message on SB4's display.
Or when a call comes in to the cell phone, it'll display caller ID on SB4.
Bluetooth headphones - useful for sleeping.
or for Palm Pilot control, etc.
Stream MP3s off your cell phone's storage.


Thats really all I can think of for now. I can't imagine the SB being any better than it already is.

perhaps SB should impliment a SB chat client built into squeezenetwork. Where SB users can add each other as buddies, and can forward messages back and forth from SB to SB, or the ability to recommend a station to someone - All through the remote! Would be nice to turn on my squeezebox and it prompting me: you have one message in your Inbox, and 3 recommended stations. Then all the recommended stations go into the "Recommended" section which includes the station and who you received the link from.


WOW, I should be paid for these ideas!

Andy

2006-12-08, 01:41
> Larger display.

Agreed. Both Taller and Wider, making it easier for my aging eyes to read it from 20 or 30 feet away.

> Or when a call comes in to the cell phone, it'll display caller ID on
> SB4.

I believe there is a way to do this now with an appropriate plug-in and software on the server.

My personal level of interest in at best ambivalent about the rest of the ideas. I can see how some people would like them, but they also seem to be outside the primary focus of the device. I'm not knocking them as ideas, but they would not be selling points to me.

I like the concept of wireless bluetooth headphones, but my experience with bluetooth wireless headsets on my phone is that they are spotty at best. Definitely not hi-fi IMO, and I'm not even a "real" audiophile.

I'd also like to see a return to something more along the lines of the SB2 form factor, but I know lots of people prefer the SB3 form factor, too. Again, just personal preference on my part.

I'd still like to see a decent SB/Boombox I can carry around the house and yard. :-)

The idea of a SB2 combined with that fancy display audio remote from logitech has some appeal, too. But the problem with that, IMO is that I prefer to have one universal remote. Maybe that could be combined with the Harmony remote series in some way.

> WOW, I should be paid for these ideas!

With a pony! :-)

killie99
2006-12-08, 06:48
how about having more onboard memory to minimise dropouts when using wireless - buffer the downloaded data into memory and voila .....
USB port to let you attach an external disk - then you can use slimserver running on a pc to point to the SB disk and you will definately have no wireless drop out.

aubuti
2006-12-08, 07:27
USB port to let you attach an external disk - then you can use slimserver running on a pc to point to the SB disk and you will definately have no wireless drop out.
Not really. If I understand slimserver correctly (which isn't guaranteed) even if the data are coming from the external USB disk, it has to go to slimserver to create the stream that feeds the SB. If it's a wireless SB, then you have a two-wireless-hop situation, which *increases* the likelihood of dropout.

Plus you'll have noisy hard disk in your listening room....

Paul_B
2006-12-08, 08:48
xPL and xPA plugins will allow caller-id from a landline to display on SB3

ezkcdude
2006-12-08, 10:27
How about adding a physical memory slot (SD would be nice, or USB port) for playing music directly off a thumb drive? This way, you could play music directly off the thumb drive without having to turn on the computer.

aubuti
2006-12-08, 11:16
How about adding a physical memory slot (SD would be nice, or USB port) for playing music directly off a thumb drive? This way, you could play music directly off the thumb drive without having to turn on the computer.
Were you planning to put the server software on the thumb drive, or in the SB (thus making it a fat device)? The SB only knows how to accept streams, and the average SD/USB memory doesn't know how to send them.

I think it's great to brainstorm ideas, but let's not lose sight of the basic functions that still need to be done.

ezkcdude
2006-12-08, 11:30
The thread is about what could be done, not how it would be done. I'm sure it would be relatively easy to figure out how to "stream" files from an external drive. How does SqueezeNetwork work? Not via SlimServer. Anyway, this would be a great feature, and worth quite a bit to me. I get tired of having my computer on all the time, but that's the only way to access my files right now. I don't think I'm alone. It comes up often in the forums that people would like to attach networked drives, too.

mherger
2006-12-08, 11:42
> How does SqueezeNetwork work? Not via SlimServer.

Oh yes, it is. Consider it a SlimServer cluster.

--

Michael

-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.herger.net/SlimCD - your SlimServer on a CD
http://www.herger.net/slim - AlbumReview, Biography, MusicInfoSCR

aubuti
2006-12-08, 12:37
The thread is about what could be done, not how it would be done.
Okay, now we're talking. Then I want a *real* wireless model, with no cord for the power and no cables to my amp. ;o)

EDIT: and a pony!!


I get tired of having my computer on all the time, but that's the only way to access my files right now. I don't think I'm alone. It comes up often in the forums that people would like to attach networked drives, too.
Right, so that's what people (myself included) do: attach network drives. NASs have the processor and memory to create the stream that feeds SB. "Dumb" USB external drives and thumb drives are a completely different story.

Marc Sherman
2006-12-08, 12:39
ezkcdude wrote:
> The thread is about what could be done, not how it would be done. I'm
> sure it would be relatively easy to figure out how to "stream" files
> from an external drive. How does SqueezeNetwork work? Not via
> SlimServer.

Yes, via slimserver. The slimserver in question happens to be running at
SD headquarters.

- Marc

stinkingpig
2006-12-08, 13:02
Yeah, like cake. When will it make cake, dammit?

On 12/8/06, aubuti <aubuti.2iienb1165602001 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> ezkcdude;160775 Wrote:
> > How about adding a physical memory slot (SD would be nice, or USB port)
> > for playing music directly off a thumb drive? This way, you could play
> > music directly off the thumb drive without having to turn on the
> > computer.
> Were you planning to put the server software on the thumb drive, or in
> the SB (thus making it a fat device)? The SB only knows how to accept
> streams, and the average SD/USB memory doesn't know how to send them.
>
> I think it's great to brainstorm ideas, but let's not lose sight of the
> basic functions that still need to be done.
>
>
> --
> aubuti
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> aubuti's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2074
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30399
>
>

ezkcdude
2006-12-08, 13:11
I apologize for suggesting something that is "hard". There must be no way to do this. I didn't realize there aren't enough smart folks at Slim to figure out how to implement this. My bad.

Oh, wait, I never said that. It's you guys who are implying they can't do it. Let's just stick to candy-colored faceplates and fancy display upgrades. Jokers.

Gildahl
2006-12-08, 13:28
I am definitely with the folks saying that we don't want to lose site of the core functionality of the SB. Let's keep the client thin. That said, here are my suggestions.

1. The SB3 has great sound now, but everything and anything that can be done to improve sound even more without increasing the cost should be near the top in terms of priority.

2. I do view the display as a part of the core functionality (it's one of the keys to making the SB such a blast to use). A larger display might be nice, but what I'd love to see even more would be a small or medium sized auxiliary color LCD panel centered below the main fluorescent display that could be used to display an album cover or graphic screensaver (like a sound meter).

3. An accessory Sonos-like remote, sold separately. This concept could be expanded to include a headphone jack and/or line outs on the remote.

Dave

jschnur
2006-12-08, 13:54
Better power supply
Improved DAC for the same price
HDMI output (audio only)for new receivers
2-3 color display
some way to make this portable so we could stream to our cars
more color choices for the box itself
on off switch on the box
Perhaps a version a/b/c with different price points for with different options and audio quality.

Joel

kdf
2006-12-08, 13:57
Quoting Gildahl <Gildahl.2iiknz1165609801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:


> 1. The SB3 has great sound now, but everything and anything that can
> be done to improve sound even more without increasing the cost should
> be near the top in terms of priority.

I expect you will definitely see this in some form for another. When
Transporter was announced, it was said that many lessons were learned.
These lessons would then be applied back through the product line
where there is a good fit.


> 2. Now that would be neat.

expensive for a single-use hardware feature, but certainly not the
first time I've seen it requested.

> 3. A accessory Sonos-like remote. This concept could be expanded to
> include a headphone jack and/or line outs.

Logitech has a product that might just fit the bill:
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/detailsharmony/US/EN,CRID=2084,CONTENTID=12498

It takes a while for merging companies to get up and running in
conjunction, but tossing a few of these in the right hands could be an
easy motivator (expertly subtle hint, don't you think?)
-kdf

your momo
2006-12-08, 15:53
The thread is about what could be done, not how it would be done. I'm sure it would be relatively easy to figure out how to "stream" files from an external drive. How does SqueezeNetwork work? Not via SlimServer. Anyway, this would be a great feature, and worth quite a bit to me. I get tired of having my computer on all the time, but that's the only way to access my files right now. I don't think I'm alone. It comes up often in the forums that people would like to attach networked drives, too.

You are not alone ! I'm also "fighting" for such an improvment see this thread
-->http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080
...but this seems a "sensitive" topic, first answer sounds always "it's impossible"
For me today in 21th century, I belive on "it's impossible that's impossible" so I poursue my quest to get a slim navigation mode that permit to use SlimDevices product in stand alone.

ezkcdude
2006-12-08, 16:19
You are not alone ! I'm also "fighting" for such an improvment see this thread
-->http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080
...but this seems a "sensitive" topic, first answer sounds always "it's impossible"
For me today in 21th century, I belive on "it's impossible that's impossible" so I poursue my quest to get a slim navigation mode that permit to use SlimDevices product in stand alone.

Thanks! It's obvious that this would be a great feature. Why some people are seemingly against it is a mystery to me.

Robin Bowes
2006-12-08, 18:15
ezkcdude wrote:
> your momo;160875 Wrote:
>> You are not alone ! I'm also "fighting" for such an improvment see this
>> thread
>> -->http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080
>> ...but this seems a "sensitive" topic, first answer sounds always "it's
>> impossible"
>> For me today in 21th century, I belive on "it's impossible that's
>> impossible" so I poursue my quest to get a slim navigation mode that
>> permit to use SlimDevices product in stand alone.
>
> Thanks! It's obvious that this would be a great feature. Why some
> people are seemingly against it is a mystery to me.


People aren't "seemingly against" this (direct streaming from storage
devices). It's just that the current slim architecture doesn't support it.

They're called "slim devices" for a reason - the actual hardware
(slimp3, Squeezebox 1,2,3, Transporter) doesn't do an awful lot. It
converts sound that is streamed to it, it displays text that is sent to
it, it sends back IR commands that it receives.

But in order to do anything useful it needs a brain, and that function
is currently performed by slimserver.

Sure, it would be possible to build a brain into each client device -
anything's possible, right? - but it would be a significant departure
from the current architecture.

Hope that makes things clear.

R.

stinkingpig
2006-12-08, 19:01
On 12/8/06, ezkcdude
<ezkcdude.2iijz01165608902 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> I apologize for suggesting something that is "hard". There must be no
> way to do this. I didn't realize there aren't enough smart folks at
> Slim to figure out how to implement this. My bad.
>
> Oh, wait, I never said that. It's you guys who are implying they can't
> do it. Let's just stick to candy-colored faceplates and fancy display
> upgrades. Jokers.
>
>

I totally agree with you -- looking at the advances in robotics and
things like automatic bread makers, it is so obvious that the
Squeezebox could be made to make cake. Why doesn't it do so yet? Damn
it! I want my cake!
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

radish
2006-12-08, 19:07
Thanks! It's obvious that this would be a great feature. Why some people are seemingly against it is a mystery to me.

Because it's such a departure from what we have now that it would basically mean throwing everything we have away (meaning firmware, hardware design & slimserver) and starting again. I like what we have now, so I don't want to see it go away. I also don't want to have a pause of 6 months (or longer) in new stuff while the entire team at SD work on this feature I'm not interested in. So yes, I'm being selfish, but hey - that's what being a customer is all about :)

Ben Sandee
2006-12-08, 20:35
On 12/8/06, radish <radish.2ij0en1165630201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> ezkcdude;160883 Wrote:
> > Thanks! It's obvious that this would be a great feature. Why some people
> > are seemingly against it is a mystery to me.
>
> Because it's such a departure from what we have now that it would
> basically mean throwing everything we have away (meaning firmware,
> hardware design & slimserver) and starting again. I like what we have
> now, so I don't want to see it go away. I also don't want to have a
> pause of 6 months (or longer) in new stuff while the entire team at SD
> work on this feature I'm not interested in. So yes, I'm being selfish,
> but hey - that's what being a customer is all about :)


Do you really think the entire team has been working on a black faceplate
and the Logitech acquisition since the Transporter was released? They've
got something in the fire.

Personally I think it would be pretty nice as a possibility. I don't think
I would use it -- I never go anywhere and my linux server is always
running. But I can see the value -- particularly to those used to iPods and
the like.

Ben

aubuti
2006-12-08, 20:45
Thanks! It's obvious that this would be a great feature. Why some people are seemingly against it is a mystery to me.
No one said that this was impossible, or even hard, or that SD was incapable of producing such a thing. Indeed, there are species like what you describe in the wild <www.olive.us>. Like Robin & radish said, it is a huge departure from the current engineering, and is close to starting over from scratch. I can imagine that it could have more mass market appeal than the current server + slim client architecture, although the significant price bump (associated with putting the server functions in the SB) would likely dampen that appeal.

Personally, I don't see the value in making SB more expensive so that you can either add a noisy external HDD or a puny USB/SD drive. But maybe someone else does, so more power to them.

But ezkcdude, you still haven't addressed the simple question: do you propose the server functions (hardware & software) go in the SB or in the USB/SD device?

And in that spirit, here's one way to do the completely wireless SB that I (jokingly) proposed. Lose the cables to the amp <http://www.speakerworks.net/wireless.html> and the power cord to the mains <http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_274.html>.

fm2n
2006-12-08, 21:19
No thoughts on my Messenger idea???? :(

You would have to admit that in this age of communication, the notion of keeping in contact with friends makes a good selling point. Most cell phones these days comes with built-in AOL IM chat or Yahoo Chat. Teens, even adults will pay a bunch for cell phones with those capabilities. I don't doubt that SB would want to cash in on any additional features that would help drive sales.

After a long while of using SB, the old stations starts to get boring. It would be a neat concept to receive stations' links from friends, or just randomly bored people. Hell, one could even subscribe to a Genre group and exchange links, etc.. Think MYSPACE!

aubuti
2006-12-08, 21:40
No thoughts on my Messenger idea???? :(
My thoughts are that it's nothing I can imagine ever using. Just can't see myself sitting around with my remote texting other SB users. Phone, email, forums, IM, SMS, Skype, showing up at the front door with a 6-pack, etc already provide enough options for me. But someone might love the idea.....

Skunk
2006-12-08, 21:57
Why doesn't it do so yet? Damn
it! I want my cake!
--

Patches welcome.

peter
2006-12-09, 02:11
Robin Bowes wrote:
> ezkcdude wrote:
>
>> your momo;160875 Wrote:
>>
>>> You are not alone ! I'm also "fighting" for such an improvment see this
>>> thread
>>> -->http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080
>>> ...but this seems a "sensitive" topic, first answer sounds always "it's
>>> impossible"
>>> For me today in 21th century, I belive on "it's impossible that's
>>> impossible" so I poursue my quest to get a slim navigation mode that
>>> permit to use SlimDevices product in stand alone.
>>>
>> Thanks! It's obvious that this would be a great feature. Why some
>> people are seemingly against it is a mystery to me.
>>
>
>
> People aren't "seemingly against" this (direct streaming from storage
> devices). It's just that the current slim architecture doesn't support it.
>
> They're called "slim devices" for a reason - the actual hardware
> (slimp3, Squeezebox 1,2,3, Transporter) doesn't do an awful lot. It
> converts sound that is streamed to it, it displays text that is sent to
> it, it sends back IR commands that it receives.
>
The SB's are basically thin clients connecting to a server.
I've compared them to the old teletype terminals with a display, a
keyboard (remote) and a sound interface.
A very flexible design because the functionality may be expanded almost
endlessly by changing the server software (& hardware).
That's why my old SliMP3 still works and can still do almost everything
the Transporter can (I just miss streaming WMA radio stations).

Regards,
Peter

peter
2006-12-09, 02:21
aubuti wrote:
> But ezkcdude, you still haven't addressed the simple question: do you
> propose the server functions (hardware & software) go in the SB or in
> the USB/SD device?
>
The best way to make this a plug & play option is perhaps to create a
dedicated slimserver box with a USB interface that you connect one or
more HD's to and a wired ethernet interface that connects to your wired
network or wireless access point. Store the OS (Linux of course) and the
slimserver code in flash (with some update function), add Samba to allow
PC's to transfer files and you're done. Many, many people dislike the
idea of leaving PC's on all the time. This would be the answer to that.

Such a device could be made for $200-$300 and would make the SD system
pretty much plug and play and ready for a whole new market.

BTW, we need a name for the whole system, how do I refer to it?
Slimserver/SliMP3/SqueezeBox/Transporter?
This sounds to complicated for newcomers.

Regards,
Peter

morberg
2006-12-09, 06:30
I'd like to be able to view album art in my listening room. Could be implemented with a stand-alone square color display or integrated in a new SB. Or with a high-end sonos like remote for that matter.

I want an iPod dock and the possibility to use the SB as an interface to my iPod without having my computer turned on. It's silly to think this would make the SB fat or mess up the current architecture.

Balthazar_B
2006-12-09, 06:31
Quoting Gildahl <Gildahl.2iiknz1165609801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:


> 3. A accessory Sonos-like remote. This concept could be expanded to
> include a headphone jack and/or line outs.

Logitech has a product that might just fit the bill:
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/detailsharmony/US/EN,CRID=2084,CONTENTID=12498


-kdf

A remote like this, optimized a bit to support the Slim command set (without losing its universal functionality), Wi-Fi or RF capable, and bundled with the Transporter, would be precisely the cat's meow.

Pale Blue Ego
2006-12-09, 08:05
I'll go with:

Linear power supply
Improved DAC
Larger display for less scrolling

Sort of a SB/TP hybrid, I guess. Maybe it would bump the price too much, though. SB needs to stay affordable.

ezkcdude
2006-12-09, 08:35
Like Robin & radish said, it is a huge departure from the current engineering, and is close to starting over from scratch.

I wasn't suggesting the entire architecture be scrapped. I think this feature (reading from external USB or flash) should be added. I wouldn't want to take anything away.


I can imagine that it could have more mass market appeal than the current server + slim client architecture, although the significant price bump (associated with putting the server functions in the SB) would likely dampen that appeal.

Tell you what. I am happy with the SB3, but I would pay $100-200 more to have this feature added. I think it's worth more than any audiophile upgrade the Transporter has, and that's $2000! I think there are quite a few folks who would agree. If we are really going to replace CD players/transports, this is the must-have feature, not Jung-regulators and miracle DAC's.


Personally, I don't see the value in making SB more expensive so that you can either add a noisy external HDD or a puny USB/SD drive. But maybe someone else does, so more power to them.

Puny? There are 8GB flash cards now. That's a lot of music - enough for a week or more for my listening habits.


But ezkcdude, you still haven't addressed the simple question: do you propose the server functions (hardware & software) go in the SB or in the USB/SD device?

I'd prefer everything be in the SB.

aubuti
2006-12-09, 09:34
Puny? There are 8GB flash cards now. That's a lot of music - enough for a week or more for my listening habits.
8GB is about 20-25 CDs in compressed lossless format. That's probably a week's worth by my listening habits, too. Thing is, I have no clue at the beginning of the week *which* 20-25 CDs worth of tracks I might want to listen to that week.

But the bottom line is that it sounds like the all-in-one box you're proposing would work for you, and probably for a lot of others. And Logitech probably understands that market well. So I wouldn't be surprised if SD + Logitech come up with something along these lines. And maybe, just maybe, with the advantages of volume they could bring it in for under $500 (or less if they go with a less expensive display).

Frankly, I don't care if SB replaces CD players or not. For me it already has, simply by virtue of having access to my entire music collection in any part of the house that has an SB (3 and counting). If you don't want to lose that in your all-in-one solution, don't forget adding the capability for it to serve *other* SBs. Having to trot an external drive or memory card around to wherever I wanted to listen would be a huge step backwards.

Pale Blue Ego
2006-12-09, 09:59
IMO, the whole idea of an on-device server and storage is a huge step backwards. There are plenty of other companies doing these fat clients. Feel free to choose one then live with the closed server, limited drive space, noise, and expense.

I do think one viable solution in this direction would be a more sophisticated router, which could be configured to run the server and have memory card or USB slots for storage devices.

stinkingpig
2006-12-09, 10:36
On 12/9/06, Pale Blue Ego
<Pale.Blue.Ego.2ik5lz1165683601 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> IMO, the whole idea of an on-device server and storage is a huge step
> backwards. There are plenty of other companies doing these fat
> clients. Feel free to choose one then live with the closed server,
> limited drive space, noise, and expense.
>
> I do think one viable solution in this direction would be a more
> sophisticated router, which could be configured to run the server and
> have memory card or USB slots for storage devices.
>

Imagining a powerful computer with a Linux OS, preinstalled
Slimserver, a terabyte or two of storage, and a wireless access point
built into it? Sounds good.

I'd still like to see a boombox form-factor Squeezebox though -- not
with a built-in server or media reading, just with speakers and an
FM/AM radio :)

--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

Marc Sherman
2006-12-09, 12:49
ezkcdude wrote:
>
> I wasn't suggesting the entire architecture be scrapped. I think this
> feature (reading from external USB or flash) should be added. I
> wouldn't want to take anything away.

If you think that feature can be added without scrapping the
architecture, then you need to learn more about the architecture. It
really is a fundamentally different type of device than the current
Squeezebox.

- Marc

Ben Sandee
2006-12-09, 15:24
On 12/9/06, Marc Sherman <msherman (AT) projectile (DOT) ca> wrote:
>
> ezkcdude wrote:
> >
> > I wasn't suggesting the entire architecture be scrapped. I think this
> > feature (reading from external USB or flash) should be added. I
> > wouldn't want to take anything away.
>
> If you think that feature can be added without scrapping the
> architecture, then you need to learn more about the architecture. It
> really is a fundamentally different type of device than the current
> Squeezebox.


I wouldn't use the feature, but I really don't think that it would be a
*massive* stretch to add a SB boot-time mode to play tracks off of locally
mounted media. I can see that it might be very limited, compared to
SlimServer. And rightly so. It would probably support MP3 w/ID3 tags and
FLAC/OGG with vorbis tags. These formats are all native to the device.
These changes could all be made without any help from SlimServer at all.
What would be nicer, and certainly more work, would be to hook it up so that
a locally run SlimServer could be used (or SqueezeNetwork!) while at the
same time having browse (or catalog merging?) of the locally mounted media.


These types of efforts would dovetail nicely with what I assume are ongoing
efforts to make SqueezeNetwork more seamless. Where is the ability to play
local files from your local SlimServer without disconnecting from SN and
SN-only services like Pandora? Having local media (particularly large USB
or fireware drives, not just flash devices) coupled with an advanced SN
could actually be flexible enough for a LARGE number of people. SN handles
streaming and advanced features like clock display/alarm/Favorites. The
device hooks up to a local USB HD and offers *simple* browsing (probably
folder-based, only) of local media.

There's nothing to scrap, it's just more options for us all.

Ben

bossanova808
2006-12-09, 16:47
Media servers with thin clients are the way of the future, discs are dying, hopefully soon to be dead.

While having some sort of mode to play local media might be useful to a few, it goes against the whole ethos of the slim design and to my mind would be too big a shift. Why not let the billions of NAS device makers come up with something that does this over ethernet (and is a little more powerful than current options) - leave it to them - this is their area of expertise. With one of those and a basic network, you've essentially got what you want, no?

I'd *much* rather see a bigger, better screen, a better DAC and general audio improvements, and maybe a TV/VGA out for album artwork/lyrics/visualisation (not as something required, just optional, and still streaming from a server). Having an optional TV/VGA out keeps the basic screen available for browsing etc (and complete operation WITHOUT a TV, very important), but the TV out DOES open a world of possibilities for visualisation and general prettiness not currently available, and probably not available without making the device itself much more expensive IF you go for a much better screen in the device itself. Even if people do NOT want a TV where there music is, they can choose to pop a small LCD into their stero area for visualisations instead, or live without.

Ethernet in every room is the future. It's so flexible - we've just added a streaming video player and while it's not without bugs it too is a major step forward. It ties into everything - basically, all our media comes from various sources (video cam, downloads, online stores, etc) - it's centralised and processed/cleaned up. And then it's available to everyone all over the house through thin clients, 24 hours a day, based off of one relatively powerful (but quiet) server. Not a NAS because I can't find one powerful enough to keep things super zippy.

This is a FANTASTIC way to live and make your media available - very very flexible, and you find yourself using things in all sorts of new ways - and you don't need a big, expensive, noisy PC in each room. Just the appropriate low power, quiet, clients ou want in that room.

ezkcdude
2006-12-09, 22:22
But the bottom line is that it sounds like the all-in-one box you're proposing would work for you, and probably for a lot of others.

If you don't want to lose that in your all-in-one solution, don't forget adding the capability for it to serve *other* SBs. Having to trot an external drive or memory card around to wherever I wanted to listen would be a huge step backwards.

Somewhere along the line, I think you got the mistaken idea that I want to ditch the server/streaming functionality. No! I love the streaming, and that would probably still account for most of my listening, even if I could stick in a flash card. My point was that I would like this one additional feature, because sometimes, it would be nice to turn off my computer. For example, when I go to sleep!

MelonMonkey
2006-12-10, 00:39
1. New thin client with LARGER and COLOR display. It should be at least 2-3 times taller than the current displpay and at least 1-2 inches wider. Keep sound quality at same level as SB3 and the price can remain the same as it is now very easily. logitech makes the difference here.

2. The Now Playing displays would have to be revammped for the above and at the same time should be tweaked for the current players (I'd like some additional options - though I may just mod these in myself for now since it's but small software touches)

3. Semi-HiRes WiFi control pad. Not simply a Nokia 770. Not as crap-tastic low resolution as the Sonos unit. Build quality at least equal to Sonos, priced significantly lower thanks to Logitech. Can be integrated with their Harmony product line or as strictly part of the Slim universe. Combining with Harmony would likely require a large price premium so it won't upset the touch screen remote market and margins. This should have its own dedicated control software and not simply be showing a web page served from the server.

4. Slimserver hardware for the home theater/listening room. Like the above is to Sonos, this would be to Olive. Logitech has the manufacturing contacts and resources to build something like this very cheaply. This would run the Slimserver software and would also run its own client software feeding its own display (same larger one mentioned above). It would feature on-board buttons in addition to a standard remote. It would be able to feed existing SB units just like any home-built server does now. Price it at $499-999 and sell sell sell.

5. Existing SB3 tech cost-reduced without lowering build or sound quality. $150-200 for WiFi model. This may require other sources for a display. Logitech's manufacturing power should be able to make a SB device silly cheap. They'll have amazing margins like they do now with the Harmony products (ludicrous margins in that space actually).

6. Overhaul Slimserver's web interface and APIs (some of this is already under way. This is necessary to move forward regardless of the above. A much more consumer-centric (and polished) interface is required.

Yeah, the points go beyond simply a next-gen SB. But I don't think the future is about simply a SB4. SB4 playing the same game SB-SB3 has will not bring in the revenue to make the acquisition justifiable. I'm very excited to see what Logitech announce next year. And glad I picked up a "classic" SB3 which will hopefully last years and years along side whatever new products are released.

Mark Lanctot
2006-12-10, 10:34
OK, it's fun for "blue sky" speculation, but you have to get it to fit within the existing technology. Even Logitech's resources can't make something that simply doesn't exist:


1. New thin client with LARGER and COLOR display. It should be at least 2-3 times taller than the current displpay and at least 1-2 inches wider. Keep sound quality at same level as SB3 and the price can remain the same as it is now very easily. logitech makes the difference here.

You'd have to move away from VFD, and that would be a crying shame for visibility and brightness. There's no such thing as a "VGA" VFD. You'd have to have tricolour pixels like a CRT. This isn't possible with the current VFD dot pitch. Even if it did exist, it'd be crazy expensive. Plus you'd have development costs of such a thing, which I doubt even Logitech could handle.

Also Slim is using about the largest displays Noritake makes. There are ones that are taller but they don't seem to get much wider. I have seen larger VFDs used in cash registers but these have larger pixels as well and look pretty crude.

Don't get rid of the VFD! It's one of the nicest things about the Squeezebox. An LCD or even OLED would be a big step backwards. I'd rather see a Sonos-style remote where you can do all this colour stuff, including album art. LCD/OLED works well for full-colour at close distance, but it doesn't work well for high brightness at longer distances. Even a TV-out would be preferable to scrapping the VFD. No one uses a VFD like Slim does anymore - it's what sets it apart and makes it so readable and bright.

The rest of the stuff is feasible and possible, but this just isn't if you stick with existing VFD technology.

MelonMonkey
2006-12-10, 11:30
We already have a VFD product. The SB3. No need to make an SB4 with the same VFD. OLED makes perfect sense for distance viewing if the display is big enough, but it's still pretty expensive.

I have an empeg (aka Riocar) which uses a Noritake VFD. I've had it since before the Squeeze product was a just glimmer in Slimdevice's eye, so I know all about its limitations and costs.

There's nothing "pie in the sky" about wanting a color display nor should future products look to stay within the paramters established by previous products. Otherwise perhaps we should go back to a character or segment-based display.

I don't want only a single of the items I suggested. I'd like them all. So if you look to the bottom of the list, there's the next gen mono SB product.

I'll say it again. I'm looking for Logitech to sell units to MILLIONS of people per year, instead of a couple of thousand. Their sales goals must be a couple of orders of magnitude beyond what Slim has been doing.

aubuti
2006-12-10, 11:31
Somewhere along the line, I think you got the idea that I want to ditch the server/streaming functionality. No! I love the streaming, and that would probably still account for most of my listening, even if I could stick in a flash card. My point was that I would like this one additional feature, because sometimes, it would be nice to turn off my computer. For example, when I go to sleep!
So you mean seamlessly switching between the built-in server/source and the external (traditional) server/source? Plus SN presumably? I'm sure it's technically feasible, but trying to do everything doesn't look like the best R&D investment from my point of view. Especially if it's just so the user can turn off the computer -- several NAS solutions already exist for that. And by the time you make an SB into a combined server + client, you have essentially made it into a computer anyway.

BTW, on further thought, that "under $500" I mentioned earlier should probably be revised substantially upwards. I guesstimated that amount based on NAS-grade processors and RAM, but I strongly suspect that the market for an all-in-one will want something considerably zippier. Starting to look more like an Olive every day.....

Kevin O. Lepard
2006-12-10, 12:30
>OLED makes perfect sense for distance viewing if the
>display is big enough, but it's still pretty expensive.

That would be great, though.

Kevin
--
Kevin O. Lepard

Happiness is being 100% Microsoft free.

ezkcdude
2006-12-10, 13:12
So you mean seamlessly switching between the built-in server/source and the external (traditional) server/source? Plus SN presumably? I'm sure it's technically feasible, but trying to do everything doesn't look like the best R&D investment from my point of view. Especially if it's just so the user can turn off the computer -- several NAS solutions already exist for that. And by the time you make an SB into a combined server + client, you have essentially made it into a computer anyway.

BTW, on further thought, that "under $500" I mentioned earlier should probably be revised substantially upwards. I guesstimated that amount based on NAS-grade processors and RAM, but I strongly suspect that the market for an all-in-one will want something considerably zippier. Starting to look more like an Olive every day.....

You keep saying things that I never said. I don't want the SB to have any internal storage. I just want it to read files off an external drive or flash card. NAS is not an easy or cheap solution. If it were, that's what I would do. If you can tell me how to do it (in step-by-step fashion) for under $200, I'm all ears. Otherwise, my suggestion stands. Give me flash or give me death!

Paul_B
2006-12-10, 14:03
Hmm problem with adding more features to the SB is you are increasing the components and this will get slated by semi-audiophiles as causing "compromised" sound. The SB3 and 2 are devices for playing music at a very good level (CD quality) not at the usual MP3 level. So pluging the SB3 into a $400 - $600 Amp is the same as playing the CD. I don't want the SB4 to compromise this as it is what differentiates the SB.

stinkingpig
2006-12-10, 14:06
On 12/10/06, ezkcdude
<ezkcdude.2im9az1165781701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
....
> You keep saying things that I never said. I don't want the SB to have
> any internal storage. I just want it to read files off an external
> drive or flash card. NAS is not an easy or cheap solution. If it were,
> that's what I would do. If you can tell me how to do it (in
> step-by-step fashion) for under $200, I'm all ears. Otherwise, my
> suggestion stands. Give me flash or give me death!
> ...

1) Open http://www.ebay.com and click Computers > Desktops > Buy It
Now. Scroll a bit, anything selling for about $100-$150 will do. Make
sure it has an Ethernet port, CD player and a USB 2.0 port. Click Buy
it Now, enter your payment and shipping information. Depending on
shipping options, you're probably pretty close to $200 now.

2) Download SlimCD from http://www.herger.net/slim/detail.php?nr=763
and burn it to a disc. Add 25 cents to your running total.

3) When the box arrives, hook up your external disc or media reader or
whatever to the USB 2.0 port. Put the SlimCD into the CD drive.
Connect the Ethernet port to your router. Turn it on.

You'll note that I assume you already have a router, some external
storage like a hard drive, and another PC to burn discs with. I also
already assume you have speakers, and appropriate cabling. I also
assume you have fingers, or some other method for typing and attaching
cables to ports. Point being that the baseline has moved, and the
target market for the Squeezebox already has infrastructure.

This is the point where some concerned shareholder says "But I want
the target market to increase!" and makes reference to Joe Sixpack,
the drooling straw man who haunts these discussions. Joe lacks a
stereo, a computer, and opposable thumbs, but still wants to buy a
Squeezebox if it can be made appealing to him.

Personally, I think we should just make it shinier, and maybe put a
flashing red button on the top that makes a cool "BWEEEP!!" noise when
you press it.
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

Mark Lanctot
2006-12-10, 14:13
nor should future products look to stay within the paramters established by previous products.

Why not? VFDs are the readability and brightness leaders.

Sure you don't have to stick with every single aspect of the design, but anything else in the display would be a step backwards.

Why change just for the sake of change? It would be different if the change was an improvement, but it isn't. You'd add colour while sacrificing readability and brightness. I don't think that's a good tradeoff.

bpa
2006-12-10, 14:24
Regarding a NAS
- the Kuro box is us$149 has 128MB RAM - can run 6.5 easily and AlienBBC. It needs a hard disk but it is easy to find a disk for us$50. Shipping will bring it a bit over budget.

ezkcdude
2006-12-10, 16:57
1) Open http://www.ebay.com and click Computers > Desktops > Buy It
Now. Scroll a bit, anything selling for about $100-$150 will do. Make
sure it has an Ethernet port, CD player and a USB 2.0 port. Click Buy
it Now, enter your payment and shipping information. Depending on
shipping options, you're probably pretty close to $200 now.


The whole point was to be able to use the SB without turning on a computer.

adamslim
2006-12-10, 17:37
I'd like a better remote control. It doesn't seem such a mad idea with the Logitech deal, but I really don't need it to control my entire system.

All I want it to do is have a very simple system that shows what I'm browsing - like the handheld/7700 skin, but actually simpler would be fine. Why not lie a B&O remote:
http://www.bang-olufsen.com/page.asp?id=198

Simple is what works for me. I'm shocked that B&O didn't buy Slim - it would have been a great fit. Sad for us audiophiles, but good for B&O.

aubuti
2006-12-10, 18:11
You keep saying things that I never said. I don't want the SB to have any internal storage. I just want it to read files off an external drive or flash card. NAS is not an easy or cheap solution. If it were, that's what I would do. If you can tell me how to do it (in step-by-step fashion) for under $200, I'm all ears. Otherwise, my suggestion stands. Give me flash or give me death!
I bought my LinkStation (HD-HG250LAN) in January for $240. The same very reliable vendor (www.techonweb.com) is selling it now for $160 + shipping. Then follow Marc Fields' excellent instructions: http://www.fieldnetworks.com/slim/linkstation.html . I don't know if he has updated it to reflect 6.5, but there are plenty of instructions for that over in the 3rd Party Hardware forum.

Or go with bpa's very reasonable KuroBox solution. Either way, enjoy. It really is an excellent solution, especially because the hard disk can sit in the basement or somewhere else outside the listening room, unlike a USB hard disk connected directly to the SB.

And FTR, other than the offhand Olive comment at the end, I never said anything about on-board storage. It's putting the processor, software, and RAM in the SB that would make it a server.

stinkingpig
2006-12-10, 19:09
On 12/10/06, ezkcdude
<ezkcdude.2imjpz1165795201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> Jack Coates;161314 Wrote:
> >
> >
> > 1) Open http://www.ebay.com and click Computers > Desktops > Buy It
> > Now. Scroll a bit, anything selling for about $100-$150 will do. Make
> > sure it has an Ethernet port, CD player and a USB 2.0 port. Click Buy
> > it Now, enter your payment and shipping information. Depending on
> > shipping options, you're probably pretty close to $200 now.
> >
>
> The whole point was to be able to use the SB without turning on a
> computer.
>

Um, for you. But anyway, there's still "plug in the Squeezebox, join
your network, activate SqueezeNetwork, and listen to Pandora" :)

In all honesty, if you want to listen to digital music on your stereo
without turning on a computer, why are you buying a Squeezebox? Buy a
dock for your portable MP3 player, it's a lot cheaper.
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

sterling1989
2006-12-10, 19:37
An actual On/Off switch. Something like a rocker switch on the back so when I'm away or even at work for the day the thing is actually off off. Not so much for the tiny bit of power its using but to save wear and tear on the display and the IC's.

pfarrell
2006-12-10, 19:57
sterling1989 wrote:
> An actual On/Off switch. Something like a rocker switch on the back so
> when I'm away or even at work for the day the thing is actually off
> off. Not so much for the tiny bit of power its using but to save wear
> and tear on the display and the IC's.

I'm not an EE, but I don't think that the switching power supplies (wall
warts) that the SqueezeBoxen use save much power if the load is removed.
The power brick does its thing anyway. To really save any watts, and
the SqBx don't use much, I think you'd have to power down the wall wart.
You can't do that from the SqueezeBox, no 120 or 240 v AC is present.

And while dimming the display may save a little life, most ICs
are far more harmed by cycling them, cold to hot to cold again, then
they are by just running them and letting the stabilize.

If you really want to do the power control, you could get a remote
controlled power strip/UPS, they are used in serious data centers.
Or you could control it via a X10 or other home automation device.
Schedule it to start warming up about when you leave work, so it will
be all warmed up when you get home.

I don't believe that the power saving, cost in watts, or carbon
emissions is worth the wear and tear of the electronics or even on the
contacts of a power switch. YMMV, etc.

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

ezkcdude
2006-12-10, 22:32
Um, for you. But anyway, there's still "plug in the Squeezebox, join
your network, activate SqueezeNetwork, and listen to Pandora" :)

In all honesty, if you want to listen to digital music on your stereo
without turning on a computer, why are you buying a Squeezebox? Buy a
dock for your portable MP3 player, it's a lot cheaper.


Holy read the entire thread batman! I've repeated numerous times that I was only suggesting an additional feature that would be convenient and nice to have. See the title of the thread. I use SlimServer every freakin' day! I've even built my own DAC for it. It's so frickin' annoying when people take posts out of context. Please, if you're going to flame, read all the posts of the person you're flaming.

stinkingpig
2006-12-11, 08:50
On 12/10/06, ezkcdude
<ezkcdude.2imz8b1165815301 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:...
>
> Holy read the entire thread batman! I've repeated numerous times that I
> was only suggesting an *additional* feature that would be convenient and
> nice to have. See the title of the thread. I use SlimServer every
> freakin' day! I've even built my own DAC for it. It's so frickin'
> annoying when people take posts out of context. Please, if you're going
> to flame, read *all* the posts of the person you're flaming.
> ...

I have read all of the posts, yours included. I know that you own
Squeezeboxes and a Slimserver and that you think this feature would
add value to that system. I am still disagreeing with you over the
utility of the feature that you're requesting. It happens. In fact, I
sense that you're disagreeing with my opinion right now :) In my
personal lexicon, "flaming" starts with the ad hominem attacks, and I
don't think I've gone there, but if you'd rather not read dissenting
opinions, I can drop it here.
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

ezkcdude
2006-12-11, 09:09
In all honesty, if you want to listen to digital music on your stereo
without turning on a computer, why are you buying a Squeezebox? Buy a
dock for your portable MP3 player, it's a lot cheaper.

Well, maybe we can get closer to the truth, and it is contained in your previous post. Do you know of a (standalone) dock for an mp3 player that has an SPDIF output? Please tell me about it. Also, if the dock is so cheap, why can't this functionality be added to the SqueezeBox? If I could plug my mp3 player into the SqueezeBox through a USB port, this would be a great solution.

stinkingpig
2006-12-11, 09:21
On 12/11/06, ezkcdude
<ezkcdude.2insmn1165853401 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> Jack Coates;161380 Wrote:
> >
> > In all honesty, if you want to listen to digital music on your stereo
> > without turning on a computer, why are you buying a Squeezebox? Buy a
> > dock for your portable MP3 player, it's a lot cheaper.
>
> Well, maybe we can get closer to the truth, and it is contained in your
> previous post. Do you know of a (standalone) dock for an mp3 player that
> has an SPDIF output? Please tell me about it. Also, if the dock is so
> cheap, why can't this functionality be added to the SqueezeBox? If I
> could plug my mp3 player into the SqueezeBox through a USB port, this
> would be a great solution.

Nope, I don't research products I don't need. A google search seemed
to have plenty of hits, and I can tell you that my iRiver IHP-120 has
SPDIF out right next to the headphone jack.

As for the "add it because it's cheap" argument, this is pretty cheap
too... why not add it?
http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/cubegoodies/854a/
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

ezkcdude
2006-12-11, 09:47
As for the "add it because it's cheap" argument, this is pretty cheap
too... why not add it?
http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/cubegoodies/854a/


Did I say "add it because it's cheap"? No, I didn't. I don't need a lot of the features of the SqueezeBox, like the fancy display, nice styling, RCA output, but they don't bother me. It seems to really annoy you that someone would suggest adding a convenience feature that others (not you obviously) might like. Why does that irritate you so much? When people go on and on about upgrading the display and remote, things that I don't care about it, it doesn't bother me. It makes me wonder why this particular "feature" that I suggest has caused such an emotional response from you and some of the others. The thread is about suggestions for a SB4, not bashing other people's suggestions. Methinks thou doth protest too much.

your momo
2006-12-11, 10:11
...Do you know of a (standalone) dock for an mp3 player that has an SPDIF output? Please tell me about it. Also, if the dock is so cheap, why can't this functionality be added to the SqueezeBox? If I could plug my mp3 player into the SqueezeBox through a USB port, this would be a great solution.

You can add me, I would also be really interested on a docking station that is able to play FLAC music files in standalone and also having a decent analog out + SPDIF coax and optical (in case of audio improvement need).
I t would be cool if this docking also have a good display, maybe VFD ...should I continue or do you see what I mean ?

For me it's clear that current SB3 is close to be the ideal product, but he only miss the ability to do what a simple audio player is able to do, I mean browsing an external memory.
I agree that this can be hard to accept form a philosophical point of view, but it 's never to late to change one's mind ...especially when discussing about SB4 which doesn't exist yet.

ezkcdude
2006-12-11, 10:45
I agree that this can be hard to accept form a philosophical point of view, but it 's never to late to change one's mind ...especially when discussing about SB4 which doesn't exist yet.

Thanks. I was beginning to think that maybe I am the only one who would like this.

Robin Bowes
2006-12-11, 10:50
ezkcdude wrote:
> Jack Coates;161492 Wrote:
>>
>> As for the "add it because it's cheap" argument, this is pretty cheap
>> too... why not add it?
>> http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/cubegoodies/854a/
>>
>
> Did I say "add it because it's cheap"? No, I didn't. I don't need a lot
> of the features of the SqueezeBox, like the fancy display, nice styling,
> RCA output, but they don't bother me. It seems to really annoy you that
> someone would suggest adding a convenience feature that others (not you
> obviously) might like. Why does that irritate you so much? When people
> go on and on about upgrading the display and remote, things that I
> don't care about it, it doesn't bother me. It makes me wonder why this
> particular "feature" that I suggest has caused such an emotional
> response from you and some of the others. The thread is about
> suggestions for a SB4, not bashing other people's suggestions.
> *Methinks thou doth protest too much.*

It's not an emotional response, it's a practical one.

As I've said before, it *would* be possible for Slim Devices to make
their products operate without an external server, just like it would be
possible for Harley Davidson to make cars.

R.

radish
2006-12-11, 10:56
It's not philosophical, it's practical. From a philosophical point of view I'm sure everyone here would love you to have this feature, but from a practical point of view we're pointing out (a) it's unlikely to happen and (b) we'd be unhappy about the sacrafices which would have to be made to implement it. While you're complaining about not being listened to you're doing the exact same thing - you (and I'm being general here - not directed at any specific person) keep insisting this is an easy/simple/cheap thing to add despite many people who know otherwise telling you it isn't so. The first step to being heard is to start listening.

Aragorn
2006-12-11, 11:01
I know that a lot of people will disagree, however here are my two desire:

First: SB4 should come out in two versions:
- Just audio streaming, like today SB3 some more bell and wristles which I don't care about, bigger display, whatever you like
- Full version with embedded silent PC. Form-Factor like the transporter. You should be able to manage it just using a web interface, including copying files from whatever place they are into the SB4. In addition basic tag editing functions (supporting the tags used by slimserver)should be included.
The software should be resident (let's say in a memory card) and a slot should allow a removable standard PC Hard Disk extension. In short you should be able to buy a box which can be administered by any people without requiring a PHD in computer science. I could then recommend SBx (which I personally like) also to friends.

Second:
SB4 should appear to iTunes as an output device just like "Apple AirPort Express" does. i.e you connect SB4 in the netword and iTunes show it like an AirPort Express

ezkcdude
2006-12-11, 11:39
despite many people who know otherwise telling you it isn't so. The first step to being heard is to start listening.

So, you know this to be fact? As a previous poster alluded to, if a tiny little iPod nano can do it, why couldn't the SB do it? Haven't we all seen over the last few years (since March 2003, to be exact) what happens when a few people know something to be true? What you and the others have demonstrated well is the idea of truthiness, and that is not the same thing as fact. My suggestion stands as is.

thing-fish
2006-12-11, 11:47
Perhaps a version a/b/c with different price points for with different options and audio quality.

That's the one I'm looking for. Let's see a $75 (or even $50!) squeezebox that only has RCA outs and, while still having a display, doesn't have the gorgeous high-end vacuum fluorescent display. Then loads of people can afford to buy multiple squeezeboxen.

peter
2006-12-11, 12:46
ezkcdude wrote:
> your momo;161502 Wrote:
>
>> I agree that this can be hard to accept form a philosophical point of
>> view, but it 's never to late to change one's mind ...especially when
>> discussing about SB4 which doesn't exist yet.
>>
>
> Thanks. I was beginning to think that maybe I *am* the only one who
> would like this.
>
I don't entirely agree with want you want, but IMHO it's obvious that
the lack of a standalone mode (outside SqueezeNetwork) is a big deal in
the eyes of many *potential* SD customers. The participants of this
mailing list are hardly typical music lovers. For many people having to
leave your PC on *is* a big deal.

For me it isn't, I've had a full time Linux server running since 1994.
If I were SD (or LogiTech), I would be thinking very seriously about a
way to target the rest of the world, cause that's where the real volume
is, not in folks like us.

I'm expecting something along those lines, but I won't be buying it. I'm
perfectly happy with the current client-server architecture.

Regards,
Peter

ezkcdude
2006-12-11, 12:58
Peter, thanks for not attacking me as the others have. I just want to point out again, I am suggesting the addition of a feature, not taking away the server/client architecture. It must be possible to add a standalone mode. It's just a matter of cost. If the cost is too high, then it's not going to happen. I understand that completely. Where I disagree with the others is that I am not assuming a priori that the cost will be so high.

I also would like to add that leaving the computer on is not a problem per se. Sometimes, actually, especially when the weather is hot, my PC gets very loud, and that does disrupt my music listening experience. In fact the noise from my computer is orders of magnitude greater than the noise issues that are commonly discussed here with power supplies, DAC's, etc. Since I live in a small apartments, I don't have the ability to place the computer in another room. So, in more than one way, when I want to turn my computer off, being able to use the SB3 as a dock for my iPod would be a fantastic feature.

thing-fish
2006-12-11, 14:08
and maybe a TV/VGA out for album artwork/lyrics/visualisation (not as something required, just optional, and still streaming from a server). Having an optional TV/VGA out keeps the basic screen available for browsing etc (and complete operation WITHOUT a TV, very important), but the TV out DOES open a world of possibilities for visualisation and general prettiness not currently available...

...we've just added a streaming video player and while it's not without bugs it too is a major step forward. It ties into everything - basically, all our media comes from various sources (video cam, downloads, online stores, etc) - it's centralised and processed/cleaned up.

I want to second what you're saying about the TV out. I would love to have visualizations. As cheesy as they are to many, we've found for parties and such that plugging our media center PC into the TV with the Winamp or WMP visualizations, or doing the folder of digital photos + music slideshow, is a huge hit. Would be neat to do that from the Squeezebox. But you're right: also very important to NOT need an auxiliary display for regular functionality!

Reading through this thread, I don't think the idea of a fat client is necessarily bad. I like the idea of having a component in my home theater that has plays local storage and ports for additional /temporary storage, can access shared drives on other PCs, will play audio and video, and ALSO act as a server to thin clients throughout the house in the form of current or stripped down/cheaper squeezeboxen. I think that sounds pretty fine! And more mass marketable than the current config.

It'd be like the DLink medialounge except extendable!

stinkingpig
2006-12-11, 14:12
On 12/11/06, ezkcdude
<ezkcdude.2io39z1165867201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> Peter, thanks for not attacking me as the others have. I just want to
> point out again, I am suggesting the *addition* of a feature, not
> taking away the server/client architecture. It must be possible to add
> a standalone mode. It's just a matter of cost. If the cost is too high,
> then it's not going to happen. I understand that completely. Where I
> disagree with the others is that I am not assuming -a priori- that the
> cost will be so high.
>

I'm sorry that you feel attacked, that's not my intention. I don't
like your idea because I doubt its utility and practicality, but I'm
sure you're a fine person.
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

morberg
2006-12-11, 14:35
It's putting the processor, software, and RAM in the SB that would make it a server.
I haven't opened up the SB to check inside it, but I did use to work for a company that makes network connected devices (including a never marketed prototype of a SB like music receiver back in '99) and I'd be surprised if the current processor and RAM of the SB wasn't enough to support playing music from a docked iPod.

It already has both a wired and wireless network protocol stack which is far more complicated than what we're talking about now.

Just add a USB port, some software and you have made the decision to buy a SB a lot easier for many people. Just the power costs for a server using 200W (I'm guessing about the power consumption) turned on 24/7 is about $250 per year where I live. Or a new SB every year.

kdf
2006-12-11, 15:02
Quoting morberg <morberg.2io7wn1165873201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

> It already has both a wired and wireless network protocol stack which
> is far more complicated than what we're talking about now.

USB driver isn't all that would be required. Slimserver handles
everything that the client does. IR processing, text display,
playback controls. Firmware codespace is already at a premium doing
just what the players can do now (basic setup menu, codecs, signal
processing, visualisers, comms via SlimProto). For local file
playback, you would need to add a large amount of functionality to
replicate what is done by slimserver. SlimServer is not simply a
music browser/selector.

Feel free to go wild with the wishlist, but try to refrain from being
so insulting as to suggest that any of it is "not that hard" until
you really do make yourself familiar with what exists today. If it
was 'not that hard' everyone would be doing it....patches are always
welcome.

-kdf

ezkcdude
2006-12-11, 15:17
For local file
playback, you would need to add a large amount of functionality to
replicate what is done by slimserver. SlimServer is not simply a
music browser/selector.

-kdf

It wouldn't need to replicate everything. Just basic CD functionality (e.g. Play, Skip, Stop, etc.).

kdf
2006-12-11, 15:26
Quoting ezkcdude <ezkcdude.2io9rb1165875601 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

> It wouldn't need to replicate everything. Just basic CD functionality
> (e.g. Play, Skip, Stop, etc.).

you'd be happy with no display?

Ben Sandee
2006-12-11, 15:28
On 12/11/06, kdf <slim-mail (AT) deane-freeman (DOT) com> wrote:
>
> Quoting morberg <morberg.2io7wn1165873201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:
>
> > It already has both a wired and wireless network protocol stack which
> > is far more complicated than what we're talking about now.
>
> USB driver isn't all that would be required. Slimserver handles
> everything that the client does. IR processing, text display,
> playback controls. Firmware codespace is already at a premium doing
> just what the players can do now (basic setup menu, codecs, signal
> processing, visualisers, comms via SlimProto). For local file
> playback, you would need to add a large amount of functionality to
> replicate what is done by slimserver. SlimServer is not simply a
> music browser/selector.


Seems like SN would be a great companion to this functionality.

Ben

ezkcdude
2006-12-11, 15:37
Quoting ezkcdude <ezkcdude.2io9rb1165875601 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

> It wouldn't need to replicate everything. Just basic CD functionality
> (e.g. Play, Skip, Stop, etc.).

you'd be happy with no display?

The display would obviously be important, and I'm sure SD wouldn't add this feature unless the display could be used. Look, it's a matter of cost. I'm an engineer, so that's how I look at it. This can be done, it just depends on the cost, not just the cost of the device, but also development costs. I understand that. If it costs too much, it will never happen.

ezkcdude
2006-12-11, 17:00
You guys may want to see the thread I'm going to start in the Audiophile section. Apparently, at least, one company doesn't think I'm crazy.

Robin Bowes
2006-12-11, 17:26
ezkcdude wrote:
> You guys may want to see the thread I'm going to start in the Audiophile
> section. Apparently, at least, one company doesn't think I'm crazy.


<sigh>

Whatever makes you happy.

R.

ezkcdude
2006-12-11, 17:35
Whatever makes you happy.

R.

Yeah, that's pretty much what it's about.

MelonMonkey
2006-12-11, 18:42
Did I see someone mention B&O in the same post (no sentence!) as "audiophile?"

Wow! B&O is crap. Plain old bottom of the barrel crap. Sometimes (only sometimes) decent aesthetics, but as far as SQ goes, toss it out the window baby, because it's all about pretty plastic and that's it. You might as well be buying Bose which is also over-priced garbage and probably the same or better quality than B&O.

If you like Slimdevices and you like what they produce and want to see more of the same and bigger and better, then Logitech is one of the better suitors. Some people might have thought Apple would make a good parent, but the Slim stuff would then be polished to a level that would otherwise be unrecognisable from what it is now.

I just don't understand why some people have to be so negative about new ideas, some of which are pretty decent and "on the money" as far as the audio market goes.

I think I may just be done with this thread, for some people like to be expressive, which is great, while others come in just looking for someone to turf. Oh well.

We'll all get to see what Logitech has up its sleeves sooner rather than later anyway. Posting in here is not likely to make much difference to products that likely are reaching the end of their design/concept phases now anyway.

EDIT (Tuesday): You know what, I 've changed my mind. Logitech can keep every aspect of the Slim line exactly the same if only they'd switch forum software here. vBulletin is terrible terrible software that I would not wish upon anyone. Upgrading to better forum software would make the forum so much more useful as something as simple as "search" would actually work (vB has an odd concept of what "search" is).

morberg
2006-12-12, 10:46
Feel free to go wild with the wishlist, but try to refrain from being
so insulting as to suggest that any of it is "not that hard" until
you really do make yourself familiar with what exists today. If it
was 'not that hard' everyone would be doing it....patches are always
welcome.
In my experience it would not be that hard to add the capability to play MP3s from a locally connected drive to a system such as the SB. I checked out the specs and it has a 250MHz processor, 16M of flash and 64M of RAM. That's actually a quite capable embedded system. Apparently you have a different opinion based on your own experience with embedded systems. I respect that. I'm not trying to insult anyone, just stating my opinion on the matter based on my background.

As for your comment on patches it's just silly, but I'll bite: where's the source code for the SB firmware and the hardware schematics that I need in order to send in patches? (And no, even if they were available I wouldn't send in a patch - it would be too much like work.)

snarlydwarf
2006-12-12, 11:03
I checked out the specs and it has a 250MHz processor, 16M of flash and 64M of RAM. That's actually a quite capable embedded system.

Be careful of comparing MHz and RAM across platforms.

Except on "real" RISC chips (do any actually exist any more?), a clock cycle isn't the same as an instruction cycle, so raw clock speed doesn't compare across CPU models (even within the same "family" such as x86 this can be misleading).

radish
2006-12-12, 11:34
So, you know this to be fact?

Yes, I know for a fact that it wouldn't be an easy thing to implement. As you correctly point out, anything is possible (and I never said otherwise) but it's a matter of cost/time. Balancing my knowledge of the likely cost involved with the likely utility of such a feature (and my understanding of the SD philosohpy) led me to state that I think it's unlikely to happen any time soon. That's an opinion, but I stand by it.



As a previous poster alluded to, if a tiny little iPod nano can do it, why couldn't the SB do it?

What on earth has physical size got to do with it? The reason the nano can do it is it has a chipset and firmware designed specifically to do that and nothing else. The SB3 chipset and firmware however, is designed specifically to do something quite different. Combining both feature sets in one would take quite some engineering effort. As kdf mentioned, you'll need to add screen drivers, remote control logic, USB logic (and hardware), file system drivers, playback & buffer management, etc. And that's ignoring the increased support costs (device support quirks, additional user confusion, "why doesn't my ipod work" calls, etc). Sure it's not impossible, just hard.



Haven't we all seen over the last few years (since March 2003, to be exact) what happens when a few people know something to be true?

Huh? You lost me here.



What you and the others have demonstrated well is the idea of truthiness, and that is not the same thing as fact.

This isn't the Daily Show. If you dispute what I (or anyone else) has said please provide some evidence (or at least logical argument) to back up your view, rather than just comparing the size of various products or proclaiming "it must be easy". The people here (and I'm excluding myself from this group) know an awful lot about these products and understand in very great detail how they work. I, personally, find it more valuable to listen and learn than put my hands over my ears and keep talking.

ezkcdude
2006-12-12, 11:41
This isn't the Daily Show.

Colbert Report, to give proper credit.


If you dispute what I (or anyone else) has said please provide some evidence (or at least logical argument) to back up your view,

Like I said a few posts back, go to the thread I started in the Audiophile forum, and check out the new NeoDigits Helios X5000 DVD/media server device. It has pretty much what everyone here has asked for at some point, and costs $579. It's fine for you to claim it is very difficult to implement new features, but eventually, others will do it, and that may come sooner than you realize. At some point, it becomes too late to play catch up. SD won't be the only player in this arena for long. In a way, I'm glad Logitech made the acquisition, because I think they will have the business sense to stay a step ahead of the competition.

snarlydwarf
2006-12-12, 11:51
Like I said a few posts back, go to the thread I started in the Audiophile forum, and check out the new NeoDigits Helios X5000 DVD/media server device. It has pretty much what everyone here has asked for at some point, and costs $579.

It is missing at least the two most important features for me: Wireless and Display.

I can hear annoying highpitched squeals from most CRTs, so, no, turning on a TV set to change songs is not an option. And the last thing I want to do is crawl in my very scary attic to run ethernet across the house.

Of course, these features are a substantial part of the cost of a Squeezebox.... But taking those features out invalidates it for my use, and likely the use of others here.

ezkcdude
2006-12-12, 12:12
It is missing at least the two most important features for me: Wireless and Display.

It is wireless.

It doesn't have a nice display, but as many in this thread have pointed out, they would actually like the ability to use an external display, which this can, and the SB can't.


I can hear annoying highpitched squeals from most CRTs, so, no, turning on a TV set to change songs is not an option.

The NeoServer software runs on a PC.


And the last thing I want to do is crawl in my very scary attic to run ethernet across the house.

You don't have to.

snarlydwarf
2006-12-12, 12:20
It doesn't have a nice display, but as many in this thread have pointed out, they would actually like the ability to use an external display, which this can, and the SB can't.

And I said, I don't... Thank you for ignoring that other people have different values than you.... Note that I said "for me"... If you want the box, go buy it. But it sure is not a panacea or the greatest thing ever, since it leaves out things that other people happen to like about Squeezeboxes.



The NeoServer software runs on a PC.

No, it runs on Windows. Which is yet another point to exclude it. (And, yes, I could set up a UPnP server on Linux, but UPnP is not as versatile as SlimServer.)



You don't have to.

Indeed, I don't: since I won't buy such a thing.

morberg
2006-12-12, 12:29
Be careful of comparing MHz and RAM across platforms.
What you're saying is of course true, but in practice most of today's embedded CPU:s are relatively similar and comparing clock speed should give you a ballpark figure. DSP:s are another matter, but the SB hardware spec had that listed separately.


Except on "real" RISC chips (do any actually exist any more?), a clock cycle isn't the same as an instruction cycle, so raw clock speed doesn't compare across CPU models (even within the same "family" such as x86 this can be misleading).
AFAIK a real RISC core is the architecture that comes closest to one instruction per clock cycle (unless you're going superscalar). I'd better quit now to keep the thread from imploding under the OT in here (some of which I take full responsibility for).

ezkcdude
2006-12-12, 12:44
And I said, I don't... Thank you for ignoring that other people have different values than you.... Note that I said "for me"... If you want the box, go buy it. But it sure is not a panacea or the greatest thing ever, since it leaves out things that other people happen to like about Squeezeboxes.


Stick your head in the sand, if you want. I don't think Logitech will be so stubborn. I'm not saying anyone should go out and buy that box as a replacement for the SqueezeBox. What I am saying is that SD/Logitech should be aware of what other players are doing in the market. You will never be able to market a consumer entertainment device (and make no mistake, that's what the SB is) to the masses by proclaiming it's open-source and cross-platform. Consumers want features. Eventually, you have to give the consumer what they want. And maybe more importantly, what they expect. I think it should be clear that many of the features of this new Helios player, which are absent on the SB3/Transporter, will increasingly be expected. One of them, and the most important to me for now, is the feature of pluggable media.

snarlydwarf
2006-12-12, 12:59
Stick your head in the sand, if you want.

What is your problem? Are you always this rude?

It has nothing to do with being a luddite as you imply. It has everything to do with "the feature set listed offers nothing I want and removes features I do want".

Can you not understand that just because something happens to offer a feature that you want, that doesn't mean it is desirable for everyone else?


Consumers want features.

Yes, and I listed what features matter to me and what requirements "turn on a TV to change the song" are an absolute "no way". But you seem to rank your personal-want-list as the be-all-end-all and discount the view of others.


I think it should be clear that many of the features of this new Helios player, which are absent on the SB3/Transporter, will increasingly be expected. One of them, and the most important to me for now, is the feature of pluggable media.

TO YOU.

It has ZIP relevance to me. My only interest in removable media is for my camera and my backups.]

I will say it again: Your Personal Want List Is Not Necessarily What Everyone Else Wants.

Really.

I explained why the device you seem to think has everything you want provides -less- functionality for my application. You dismiss this. Why do you neglect my wants? Why do you assume that your own personal wish list is far more important than anyone elses?

You are not God. You are not the Universal Consumer and appeasing you will guarantee success. I know it is hard to accept that others may not see the world as you do, but respect the viewpoints of others.

I really don't give a rat's fuzzy behind if you think that box is the greatest thing since toast: I just ask that you stop insisting it provides features at a pricepoint that would satisfy everyone. It doesn't.

It costs more than a Squeezebox and has less features That I Need.

I like the wonderful but random use of bold text.

Ben Sandee
2006-12-12, 13:10
On 12/12/06, ezkcdude <
ezkcdude.2ipx8z1165952701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
>
> snarlydwarf;161862 Wrote:
> > And I said, I don't... Thank you for ignoring that other people have
> > different values than you.... Note that I said "for me"... If you
> > want the box, go buy it. But it sure is not a panacea or the greatest
> > thing ever, since it leaves out things that other people happen to like
> > about Squeezeboxes.
> >
>
> Stick your head in the sand, if you want. I don't think Logitech will
> be so stubborn. I'm not saying anyone should go out and buy that box as
> a replacement for the SqueezeBox. What I am saying is that SD/Logitech
> should be aware of what other players are doing in the market. You will
> *never* be able to market a consumer *entertainment* device (and make no
> mistake, that's what the SB is) to the masses by proclaiming it's
> *open-source* and *cross-platform*. Consumers want features.
> Eventually, you have to give the consumer what they want. And maybe
> more importantly, what they *expect*. I think it should be clear that
> many of the features of this new Helios player, which are absent on the
> SB3/Transporter, will increasingly be expected. One of them, and the
> most important to me for now, is the feature of pluggable media.


ezkcdude,

I think you are right and I bet you will be proven right when SD/Logitech
releases the next-gen device. What's funny is that a lot of the people
insinuating you are 'rude' and ignorant to the SD ethos will change their
tune and embrace the wonderful forward-looking SD vision. I think it's time
to drop the thread, focus your energies on more constructive discussions. :)

Ben

Aragorn
2006-12-12, 14:00
ezkcdude,

I also believe you are right (and not rude at all).

Aragorn

mherger
2006-12-12, 15:06
> 16M of flash and 64M of RAM.

After that M there's a b, not a B. Megabits. Not as much as 64M might make
you think.

--

Michael

-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.herger.net/SlimCD - your SlimServer on a CD
http://www.herger.net/slim - AlbumReview, Biography, MusicInfoSCR

ezkcdude
2006-12-12, 15:32
ezkcdude,

I think you are right and I bet you will be proven right when SD/Logitech
releases the next-gen device. What's funny is that a lot of the people
insinuating you are 'rude' and ignorant to the SD ethos will change their
tune and embrace the wonderful forward-looking SD vision. I think it's time
to drop the thread, focus your energies on more constructive discussions. :)

Ben

Thanks, Ben and Aragorn. I wish some of these guys would realize I'm actually trying to provide constructive suggestions for SD/Logitech. I have said repeatedly that I don't want to remove anything, yet somehow that doesn't seem to sink in. Ben, you're suggestion about dropping the thread is a good one. I may come up with more ideas for a SB4, but it won't be in this thread.

Robin Bowes
2006-12-12, 17:28
ezkcdude wrote:
> Ben Sandee;161882 Wrote:
>> ezkcdude,
>>
>> I think you are right and I bet you will be proven right when
>> SD/Logitech
>> releases the next-gen device. What's funny is that a lot of the
>> people
>> insinuating you are 'rude' and ignorant to the SD ethos will change
>> their
>> tune and embrace the wonderful forward-looking SD vision. I think it's
>> time
>> to drop the thread, focus your energies on more constructive
>> discussions. :)
>>
>> Ben
>
> Thanks, Ben and Aragorn. I wish these some of these guys would realize
> I'm actually trying to provide constructive suggestions for
> SD/Logitech. I have said repeatedly that I don't want to remove
> anything, yet somehow that doesn't seem to sink in. Ben, you're
> suggestion about dropping the thread is a good one. I may come up with
> more ideas for a SB4, but it won't be in this thread.

Your points about SB/Logitech needing to keep moving forward to keep up
with the competition are completely valid but, the point which you seem
to be unable to grasp is that these "guys" are not attacking you for
ideas - they're just pointing out why it might not be as easy as you
seem to think, given the current SB architecture. And also, that *your*
priorities might not be the same as other peoples.

Please don't take these exchanges of opinion so personally.

R.

fm2n
2006-12-12, 18:58
WHAT ABOUT THE CHAT FEATURE???

The other evening, I was showing my friend how to configure Squeezenetwork and how it worked. I temporarily added his SB's pin # to my account so he could get a feel for it. It turned out that he liked my favorites so much, but after setting up his own account, I had no way of easily providing him with those links. So I had to copy and paste each URL to the chat screen. What a darn burden.

I kept telling him.. "Man, if only I had you on some sort of Buddy list. I could then just forward these stations to you."

Even without a messenger feature, a buddy list for Push Forwarding of stations would be such a neat concept.

Mark Lanctot
2006-12-12, 19:01
WHAT ABOUT THE CHAT FEATURE???

The other evening, I was showing my friend how to configure Squeezenetwork and how it worked. I temporarily added his SB's pin # to my account so he could get a feel for it. It turned out that he liked my favorites so much, but after setting up his own account, I had no way of easily providing him with those links. So I had to copy and paste each URL to the chat screen. What a darn burden.

I kept telling him.. "Man, if only I had you on some sort of Buddy list. I could then just forward these stations to you."

Even without a messenger feature, a buddy list for Push Forwarding of stations would be such a neat concept.

It's not exactly what you're talking about, but it did make me think of WikiRadio:

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

jonheal
2006-12-12, 19:36
(Related to a recent thread of mine ...) How about built-in authentication?

Scenario: When you install Slimserver, you must create a username and password. Using Softsqueeze? Then one of Softsqueeze's Pref pages would include fields for you to enter your username and password. Perhaps an IP white list feature could also be included to let your SBs at home into the fold automatically.

Then, we really could open our music to the Internet, allowing us to connect from work, vacation, etc., without having to worry about every Tom, Dick and Harry mucking about.

Schindler
2006-12-13, 00:29
I would like to have a wall or ceiling mount. It took me a long time to find a solution to mount it to the ceiling.


Christian

ehjones
2006-12-13, 13:11
My 2 pence:

I wouldn't want to pay any extra for the hardware required to accomodate external storage. It seems like a silly idea to me, but like others have said, that's MY OPINION! (although I am right of course ;-) ) A more flexible option might be for slimserver to monitor external storage on the server machine and make this available from the squeezebox as soon as possible. I would have thought this could be easily implemented with the current squeezebox.

I think slimdevices need to be very careful with adding new features. You may think your own budget is much the same as everyone else's, but for me the squeezebox was right on the limit here in the UK. Very few of my friends would want to spend a similar amount on something like this. For me the squeezebox makes it possible to use great audio hardware and a great interface with my own dirt cheap server hardware in the background. As soon as server type functions get moved into the squeezebox the cost will surely rocket.

Squeezebox 4 should have yet a larger/higher res screen! And definately VFD, nothing else can compare. You can stick your colour screens where the sun don't shine ;-)

Pale Blue Ego
2006-12-13, 15:21
Yes, a larger screen would be the one killer feature that might compel me to buy a SB4. That would mean a larger form factor, but the cost could be kept down by using the current architecture and a wider plastic case.

As for the massive debate about on-device storage, it just makes no sense to me. Why put the computer in the device? I already have a computer. Geez, plug your USB drive into the server and create a link to the music folder. Was that so hard?

spacemarmot
2006-12-13, 15:31
feature requests?

* use an OLED or OEL
* cost $100 less

bklaas
2006-12-13, 15:38
Must. Have. Knob.

see also:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=81785&postcount=6
see also:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=21736&highlight=knob
see also:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=136233&postcount=21&highlight=knob

port that transporter knob onto a non-crazy-person-priced squeezebox and I'm in. I am so in.

#!/ben

Ben Sandee
2006-12-13, 15:42
On 12/13/06, Pale Blue Ego <
Pale.Blue.Ego.2irzbn1166048701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, a larger screen would be the one killer feature that might compel
> me to buy a SB4. That would mean a larger form factor, but the cost
> could be kept down by using the current architecture and a wider
> plastic case.
>
> As for the massive debate about on-device storage, it just makes no
> sense to me. Why put the computer in the device? I already have a
> computer. Geez, plug your USB drive into the server and create a link
> to the music folder. Was that so hard?


Must... resist... urge... to... comment....

success!

Ben

Mark Lanctot
2006-12-13, 15:46
* use an OLED or OEL

<bangs head against wall>

konut
2006-12-13, 17:20
Maybe I'm out of touch, but I have a whole different set of priorities when thinking about what I'd like to see in a SB4. What I'd like to see is an emphasis on sound quality. Get rid of the display altogether and put it where it belongs, along with its power supply requirements, in the remote. Use the AKM DAC of the Transporter, and only put analog, coaxial and optical outs. Design a discrete analog section and end the debate about opamps altogether.It should go without saying that the expertise brought to bear on the design of the power supply for the Transporter should be replicated in a SB4. Thats all. I'd be willing to pay $1000 for this model as long as the audio quality matches, or exceeds, that of the Transporter. As I'm already burnt to a crisp, there's no need for me to don the Nomex suit.

stinkingpig
2006-12-13, 17:23
On 12/13/06, bklaas
<bklaas.2is00n1166049601 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> Must. Have. Knob.
>

I played with it at their open house last week, didn't like it as much
as I thought I would. The big thing is that I frequently do more than
one thing at once -- so I was talking with Jez and playing with the
knob, and when I'd hit the end of a list it would make this nasty
"YOU'RE GONNA BREAK IT" grind. Keep in mind that some lists are like
two or three items long... To borrow from HHGTG, "Looks like a fish,
moves like a fish, steers like a cow."

So obviously I started being more delicate, but the fact is there's
just not a lot of room in my life for devices that can't take their
fair share of abuse. The knob reminds me of my Macbook -- sexy looking
in the showroom, but kind of annoying to actually use, and way overly
delicate. The Macbook (two months old, broken DVD, scratched case,
flaky wireless, flaky camera) gathers dust most of the time while my
ugly black Thinkpad (one year old, some case scratches where I took
off the badges) gets used all day every day.

Squeezeboxes are not built for being handled like laptops are supposed
to be... that would change with a built-in knob. The whole design
would need to get tougher, in case it gets knocked over. Remember the
guy whose VFD broke when he dropped it?
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

snarlydwarf
2006-12-13, 18:08
I played with it at their open house last week, didn't like it as much
as I thought I would. The big thing is that I frequently do more than
one thing at once -- so I was talking with Jez and playing with the
knob, and when I'd hit the end of a list it would make this nasty
"YOU'RE GONNA BREAK IT" grind. Keep in mind that some lists are like
two or three items long... To borrow from HHGTG, "Looks like a fish,
moves like a fish, steers like a cow."

Well the grind is faked since it's force-feedback. That could change. Knobs dont interest me since it would mean violating one of my basic rules in life: Plant Butt On Couch. Getting up to fiddle with things, regardless of how neat they may be, violates that.

That's why I keep looking at Harmony remotes... and (*cough*) it would be nice if Logitech would make one optimized for SB. Something with roughly the form factor of a Nokia770, but that just controlled the SB. A bit of custom code on the controller and matching code in Slimserver and it could be quite slick.

stinkingpig
2006-12-13, 18:15
On 12/13/06, snarlydwarf
<snarlydwarf.2is6yn1166058601 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> Jack Coates;162235 Wrote:
> >
> > I played with it at their open house last week, didn't like it as much
> > as I thought I would. The big thing is that I frequently do more than
> > one thing at once -- so I was talking with Jez and playing with the
> > knob, and when I'd hit the end of a list it would make this nasty
> > "YOU'RE GONNA BREAK IT" grind. Keep in mind that some lists are like
> > two or three items long... To borrow from HHGTG, "Looks like a fish,
> > moves like a fish, steers like a cow."
>
> Well the grind is faked since it's force-feedback. That could change.
> Knobs dont interest me since it would mean violating one of my basic
> rules in life: Plant Butt On Couch. Getting up to fiddle with things,
> regardless of how neat they may be, violates that.
>
> That's why I keep looking at Harmony remotes... and (*cough*) it would
> be nice if Logitech would make one optimized for SB. Something with
> roughly the form factor of a Nokia770, but that just controlled the SB.
> A bit of custom code on the controller and matching code in Slimserver
> and it could be quite slick.
>

that's an idea I could get behind :) It would be broken quickly in my
house, but I like the idea and it matches up with quite a lot of
demand from the folks in this discussion group :)
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

Tarn
2006-12-13, 19:26
I have to agree with the display in the remote concept.

But I'll do you one better:

Leave the squeezebox pretty much the way it is (except for possibly better DRM support).

Have your current remote (more or less).

Also, have a fancy new remote that includes a display similar to the squeezeboex display.

To make that work, of course, you need the remote to be a wireless-g/b remote talking to SlimServer.

Now suddenly your remote can work without IR, the squeezebox can be in the closet with your audio gear, your remote can easily switch between controlling the many different squeezeboxes within your house and you've got a convenient one-stop shopping audio controller.

The probelm is that nobody will want to stop there -- they'll want to turn the remote into a web browsing camera phone with a color touch screen which runs its batteries down every two hours. Sigh.

But if you can avoid the bloat, you'll be able to sell the fancy remote for less than the cost of the squeezebox, and people will actually buy it.

Ben Sandee
2006-12-13, 20:15
On 12/13/06, Tarn <Tarn.2isanz1166063401 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> But if you can avoid the bloat, you'll be able to sell the fancy remote
> for less than the cost of the squeezebox, and people will actually buy
> it.


Cue the people who need to say that they won't buy it...

stinkingpig
2006-12-13, 21:27
On 12/13/06, Ben Sandee <tbsandee (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
>
>
> On 12/13/06, Tarn
> <Tarn.2isanz1166063401 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> >
> > But if you can avoid the bloat, you'll be able to sell the fancy remote
> > for less than the cost of the squeezebox, and people will actually buy
> > it.
>
> Cue the people who need to say that they won't buy it...
>

Not until it makes cake. Or ponies.

/just kidding
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

Konig
2006-12-13, 21:53
Word Clock

Jacob Potter
2006-12-13, 22:05
On 12/13/06, Jack Coates <jack (AT) monkeynoodle (DOT) org> wrote:
> I played with it at their open house last week, didn't like it as much
> as I thought I would. The big thing is that I frequently do more than
> one thing at once -- so I was talking with Jez and playing with the
> knob, and when I'd hit the end of a list it would make this nasty
> "YOU'RE GONNA BREAK IT" grind. Keep in mind that some lists are like
> two or three items long... To borrow from HHGTG, "Looks like a fish,
> moves like a fish, steers like a cow."

If you're at the end of a list, you can push through the resistance to
wrap around to the beginning. It won't break it. It took me a while to
find that out too, since "what happens if I keep pushing?" isn't
exactly top on the list of questions with something in the T's price
range...

- Jacob

fm2n
2006-12-13, 22:09
I want my pony. After all, I am responsible for this civil war.

stoobie-doo
2006-12-13, 23:48
Seems to me that the design principles need to be locked down first before a feature set can be chosen, for me its:
* Designed to work with the stereo and sit in the home theater rack
* Be simple to setup and use
* Work with lots of audio codecs and DRMs
* Find and play music out on the web
* Sound nice

So what would I like to see added:
* Video out for UI - Not everyone will want to take advantage of this one, but it seems to me there are enough times that the option of an easier to use interface would be worth it
* More space for firmware - More space means more Codecs and less work transcoding at the server
* Bigger memory to buffer - Am I the only one who still has a love hate relationship with my wifi network
* Video out - At some point people are going to want to stream their iTune downloads, home movies, and other items
* RF or wifi remote - if I have video out for the UI (or display on the remote); I don't need to see the display and it can sit in the cabinet, or I can be in another room and turn on the music
* Better DACs - 'nuff said
* A small amp and option for headphone out or small speakers - isn't that a better alarm clock solution than docking your iPod?

gvh
2006-12-14, 06:06
I can find hardly anything I'd want adding to a squeezebox. It's the best thing I've ever bought. Therefore I'm down to minor stuff:

I might be wrong but I thought that part of the reason that sync never quite worked was the hardware. Either way: I'd love to see synchronisation actually properly sorted out. I know it's in Bugzilla (with a light coating of dust) and on the long term game plan.
For me, with two boxes, its a core feature of the system that just doesn't work as advertised and it's really the only thing wrong with a perfect product.

On the other stuff, I think video streaming support is a move away from the core point of the product. Video-out for the menu display might be ok but I'd never use it.

Overall the thing I'd most like to have is a a cool remote with a nice display. I think it should be a separate product to keep the prices down. Happily I think it's a near certainty given the parent company.

cheers
Gareth

Marc Sherman
2006-12-14, 07:27
Mark Lanctot wrote:
> spacemarmot;162207 Wrote:
>> * use an OLED or OEL
>
> <bangs head against wall>

One of the huge benefits that Logitech brings to the table is that a
larger company can handle more SKUs than a small one. I'd love to see
some options in the display area -- the VFD is awesome for some
applications, but it's overkill for others, and it's apparently the most
expensive component in the SB3's design.

- Marc

autopilot
2006-12-14, 07:53
How about adding a physical memory slot (SD would be nice, or USB port) for playing music directly off a thumb drive? This way, you could play music directly off the thumb drive without having to turn on the computer.

Would not work, but why would you want to do this anyway? It defies the whole point of the squeezebox, surely?

Ben Sandee
2006-12-14, 08:01
On 12/14/06, autopilot <
autopilot.2it95o1166108102 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
>
> ezkcdude;160775 Wrote:
> > How about adding a physical memory slot (SD would be nice, or USB port)
> > for playing music directly off a thumb drive? This way, you could play
> > music directly off the thumb drive without having to turn on the
> > computer.
>
> Would not work,


Yes, you are right. It would be *impossible* for SD to release a device
called SB4 with support for playing off local USB or flash media.

Ben

aubuti
2006-12-14, 10:45
Yes, you are right. It would be *impossible* for SD to release a device called SB4 with support for playing off local USB or flash media.
Come on now, play by the rules. No one is actually allowed to say that it's impossible -- one is only allowed to say that *others* said it was impossible. ;o)

"It's like deja vu all over again." -Yogi Berra

Ben Sandee
2006-12-14, 11:16
On 12/14/06, aubuti <aubuti.2ith9c1166118602 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> Ben Sandee;162379 Wrote:
> > Yes, you are right. It would be *impossible* for SD to release a device
> > called SB4 with support for playing off local USB or flash media.
> Come on now, play by the rules. No one is actually allowed to say that
> it's impossible -- one is only allowed to say that *others* said it was
> impossible. ;o)


Yep, you're right. I guess maybe it's just unpossible.

Ben

autopilot
2006-12-14, 18:49
[QUOTE=Ben Sandee;162379]On 12/14/06, autopilot <
autopilot.2it95o1166108102 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
>
> ezkcdude;160775 Wrote:
> > How about adding a physical memory slot (SD would be nice, or USB port)
> > for playing music directly off a thumb drive? This way, you could play
> > music directly off the thumb drive without having to turn on the
> > computer.
>
> Would not work,


Yes, you are right. It would be *impossible* for SD to release a device
called SB4 with support for playing off local USB or flash media.

Oh come on guys.

Yes, point well made, but i still can see the attraction.

Mark Lanctot
2006-12-14, 19:36
Word Clock

...you're aware of the Transporter?

slimkid
2006-12-14, 19:43
Oh, those are easy to answer:


Would not work, but why would you want
to do this anyway?
To be able to walk to the SB, stick in the memory card and listen to what's on it.


It defies the whole point of the squeezebox, surely?
And the whole point of the SB is? Oh, yes, listening to the music.

Sorry couldn't resist :).

stinkingpig
2006-12-14, 19:57
Of course, if that's the only point, one could argue that it really
ought to have an ipod dock in it too. And some speakers. In fact, why
not just build a squeezebox into an existing dock?

In all honesty, an ipod dock is much more feasible than a usb reader.

On 12/14/06, slimkid
<slimkid.2iu60z1166150701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> Oh, those are easy to answer:
>
> autopilot;162375 Wrote:
> > Would not work, but why would you want
> > to do this anyway?
> To be able to walk to the SB, stick in the memory card and listen to
> what's on it.
>
> autopilot;162375 Wrote:
> > It defies the whole point of the squeezebox, surely?
> And the whole point of the SB is? Oh, yes, listening to the music.
>
> Sorry couldn't resist :).
>
>
> --
> slimkid
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> slimkid's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8881
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30399
>
>

pfarrell
2006-12-14, 20:12
Jack Coates wrote:
> Of course, if that's the only point, one could argue that it really
> ought to have an ipod dock in it too. And some speakers. In fact, why
> not just build a squeezebox into an existing dock?
>
> In all honesty, an ipod dock is much more feasible than a usb reader.

Isn't this really just the SlimBoomBox with the added feature of an iPod
port?

The good part of this idea is that iPod owners have been shown to
be willing to spend insane amounts of money on iPod accessories.

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

gusi
2006-12-14, 21:10
I don't see myself using a usb port or an ipod doc.

It is not that hard to plug a thumb drive in the PC and use browse folders to play it.

I have sandboxes setup for each of the kids to dump their own music in and browse folders gets used a lot.

Perhaps one option would be to be able to use browse folder on the machine's entire directory tree rather than just the music tree. This would make it easier to pick up removable media.

Or for windows there could be a browse removable media option. That would bypass security issues of being able to access the entire tree.


Things I would like to see:

Bigger screen so you can actually use large fonts and see more than 10 characters. This may be obsolete by the 770 or other fancy remotes.

Alternatively a software update may be able to sync two squeezebox screens next to each other. ie One squeezebox plays all the music the other sits next to it just to provide more screen real estate. That is probably more likely to happen than a double width SB4.

Build in Alien BBC support. Though the plug in is much easier to install in 650.

Better tagging. I'd love to be able to search for albums with a particular artist contributing on it.
This is not really a SB issue but a function of the free tagging databases.

Better DAC with external inputs. Available as a transporter.


Gus

peter
2006-12-15, 06:01
Tarn wrote:
> But if you can avoid the bloat, you'll be able to sell the fancy remote
> for less than the cost of the squeezebox, and people will actually buy
> it.
>

I'd probably buy one to control my 5 SB's.
If I like it enough I'd even be inclined to buy more than one.

Regards,
Peter

Jazz1
2007-01-12, 20:25
http://www.nabaztag.com/en/index.html

simonaf
2007-01-22, 09:34
From a quick read-through of the posts so far, I most like the idea of the VGA-out as an eye-candy Option for album covers, lyrics and whatever.
I also like the idea of accessing one's own music without having a PC on permanently. I already have an external 160GB HD and a NSLU2. I know uNSLUng is not for everyone (I'm not sure it's for me yet!), but even new, I think you can get this for around 100 or so.

As for my own ideas..

Fast Forward/Rewind? Don't know how useful this would really be, though.

Multiple Favorites?
I am just showing my eight-year old daughter how to use it and Favourites seemed the easiest way of showing her how to find the "CD's" she likes. It would be nice to do something similar for my 'technophobe' wife.
Simon's Favs, Alex's Favs, Becca's Favs etc, a bit like creating playlists.

I'm a newbie, so forgive me if I've missed something that exists already.

Anyway, when is SB4 to be? 2007? 2008? I think I need a second one already...

joshk
2007-01-22, 15:55
... and (*cough*) it would be nice if Logitech would make one optimized for SB. Something with roughly the form factor of a Nokia770, but that just controlled the SB. A bit of custom code on the controller and matching code in Slimserver and it could be quite slick.

Agreed as well. I think you can eliminate the display in the box and put it in the remote where I can actually see it. That is about the only feature I *really* want to have. The better dacs would be nice, but I am a diy builder deep down and I'll still be building something else trying to better it.

I'd love for the SB4 to be slim in height but normal rack width and depth to whatever is needed.

Kevin O. Lepard
2007-01-22, 16:15
Personally, a Transporter form-factor with dual displays, buttons &
knob with Squeezebox guts (instead of the higher priced stuff) would
be very appealing.

Kevin
--
Kevin O. Lepard

Happiness is being 100% Microsoft free.

NauticusLX
2007-01-22, 16:53
There needs to be a limit on how complcated the SqueezeBox should be because it will only breakdown more and be harder to enjoy. It will become *work*. The SB isn't supposed to be a PC substitute. Keep it simple, please - further enhancements should be strongly avoided.

Robert Zimmerman
2007-01-22, 20:57
I think what's needed is a wireless remote display so that when all
the equipment is behind cabinet doors, you can still use a remote
control and see what you're doing. It should be a stick-on.



At 3:53 PM -0800 1/22/07, NauticusLX wrote:
>There needs to be a limit on how complcated the SqueezeBox should be
>because it will only breakdown more and be harder to enjoy. It will
>become *work*. The SB isn't supposed to be a PC substitute. Keep it
>simple, please - further enhancements should be strongly avoided.
>
>
>--
>NauticusLX
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>NauticusLX's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8981
>View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30399
>
>

steve4586
2007-01-23, 01:31
Just thought I would add my h'pennies worth.

Being new to the SS/SB world, I am still blown away by the concept. The fundamental principals of the system design is excellent. In keeping with the design philosophy I think audio quality should away be kept at the fore. You can buy any number of lofi systems to play music. But to have a hifi solution is brilliant. There are those of us (and mostly in this forum!) who place the quality and pleasure of musical presentation above gimmicks.

However, easy of use needs to be addressed. I would love to see development with the Server web page. Drag and drop editing for playlists for one - I find the current method far too clunky. The other thing is a "stop" key on the remote to compliment the play, pause, ff, rwd keys. Maybe I am doing something wrong, but sometimes I just want to stop the music, which I can do from the web interface, but not the SB.

Cheers

danco
2007-01-23, 01:52
Stop is just done by pressing AND HOLDING the Pause button.

JJZolx
2007-01-23, 01:59
The other thing is a "stop" key on the remote to compliment the play, pause, ff, rwd keys. Maybe I am doing something wrong, but sometimes I just want to stop the music, which I can do from the web interface, but not the SB.

Use the Power button. Since the SB is never really off, the "Power" button just stops the currently playing song. Play with screensavers settings to get the desired behavior when in the (not really) "powered off" state. I always just set the screen saver for "powered off" and "not playing" to the same thing (Date & Time) and the delay to a couple seconds, so there's no visible difference between off and not playing.

squeezeslug
2007-01-23, 04:53
I already read it, but I'll repeat it once more.

I'd like the SB4 to be something you put out of sight and and put the display into the remote. A color touchscreen for displaying the artwork and the buttons would make it complete.

Puggie
2007-01-23, 06:12
I'd like to see the display in a rotate-able section in the end of the Squeezebox, so you can have it in the end like the SB 1/2 or rotate it round the side like the SB3. I know peaople want both, hell make the display a slim removable module that could be extended and remote mounted (or replaced with other types of display).

I'd like clock input/output on the unit, this would make proper impementation of digital easier, as out home theatre systems get more complex I see soon people will be trying to clock all their devices off a master clock. should not be a big issue to implement either.

IMHO the Squeezebox is a good piece of kit for what its does, we need to be careful not to lose it best feature, simplicity, if plays music from a server, we want to make it do this better, sound better, look better and be easier to use, by all means make some device with local storage, card readers and inbuilt amplifiers, do not call it a squeezebox though.