PDA

View Full Version : Spent 3 hours with tech support last night...



Howard Passman
2008-06-11, 02:36
....results? I had nothing that worked when we were done.

Started with not being able to connect to SqueezeNetwork and finished up with not even having one out of two receivers working at all. The tech wanted to "sleep on it".

Now, I'm not nagging the tech support guys, except for the fact that just like almost all tier one support folks they want you to blow everything clean and start over. I went from tier 1 to tier 2 and both were friendly and professional and I believe had my best interests at heart. What I am bleeping about..AAAAgain.. is that if these guys can't get my little system working in three hours of trying, what hope does the average...nay...the above average...oh, Hell.. any user have?

After another hour of fooling with it on my own I now can hit SN from both recievers. I have no idea how and for the first time I received a PIN number for SoftSqueeze and it now shows on my controller. Is that normal??? Never had it before and I've been using softsqueeze quite a bit.

So here's the down and dirty of it. Logitech! Whatever it takes, I beleive a big step in making this thing a bit easier to work with would be to make it so you can assign static IP addresses without the whole darn work around and fudging. All in all for some reason when I reassigned new IP addresses to my receivers, they could now be seen by SN, where before, not matter what we did, they weren't.

During my conversation with tech support I asked twice if there was a way that we could not use DHCP and just assign an IP. Twice the question was glossed over and I believe it's because getting the receiver to the point where it asks you to choose between static and DHCP is hit or miss. The only time the choice came up for me was after getting off the phone. It was about 5 minutes later that I got the entire mess working and connected to SN.

For any network with out a domain server I see absolutely no reason to use DHCP unless of course you are out of addresses to use if you static assign. DHCP has it's uses, but can be a pain in the butt so why make it the only way to go.

I see a lot of suggestions on how to make the SB a better music management device, etc.. I wish I could get to the stage where I could even start thinking about those issues :-) without first having to make the thing work all over again. I bet my listening to fiddling ratio is about 1 to 10 right now. Last night being a good example. I came home, tried to listen to some music, called Logitech, stayed on the phone for 3 hours, spent about another hour getting it working, spent 15 minutes listening to music. At that point I hadn't done any of my chores, the dog crapped himself for lack of a walk, my wife and son left me, the bank foreclosed on my home and the power company shut the power off. All because I've become a full time nanny for a little black box...

Peace

jimzak
2008-06-11, 03:46
As a new user, that has been the theme of my criticism.

My first experience with SqueezeCenter was a problem installing that could only be resolved by completely uninstalling my firewall. I posted here and no one suggested it. I was supposed to call Tech Support. However, I uninstalled the firewall due to apparent incompatibility with ANOTHER app and found coincidentally that now SC would install.

Since then I ran into the loss-of-scanning-new-music bug. Apparently that one is being worked on by Star Fleet Command.

If I didn't have a lot a PC experience, patience, and resourcefulness in finding this forum and trying things, I would have given up on the Duet a while back.

As I said in another post, the Duet is not for folks who lack the ability to configure a network and work through the almost inevitable issues that can ensue.

However, my music-to-fiddle ratio is a bit better than yours at about 3:1.

Howard Passman
2008-06-11, 03:56
What's your music to fiddle ratio?? I think I'll start that one.

More on topic, I wonder if they will ever get the SB so the average person can use it. I wonder if they are trying to? I don't believe the comments about being "open source" as being a valid reason for being so difficult. I don't see why it can't be simple to use and open source at the same time.

Anyone with a clear explanation of why the two are incompatable?

Howard

mherger
2008-06-11, 04:24
> My first experience with SqueezeCenter was a problem installing that
> could only be resolved by completely uninstalling my firewall. I

What firewall are/were you using?

--

Michael

mherger
2008-06-11, 04:30
> More on topic, I wonder if they will ever get the SB so the average
> person can use it.

We surely hope so. And we're working hard on it. I'm right now improving the installer which then should recognize common issues like firewalls blocking network access, other applications conflicting with the same resources we'd like to use etc.

> I wonder if they are trying to? I don't believe
> the comments about being "open source" as being a valid reason for
> being so difficult.

No, the main reason is it's a networking product. There are too many variables in every networking environment. Some competitor worked around this issue by simply ignoring any standards and using their very own proprietary networking protocols, closing down any access for third parties. And even some networking equipment manufacturers don't implement the standards they print on their boxes. That's not the way we want to go.

--

Michael

Howard Passman
2008-06-11, 05:28
Thanks for the reply. I really don't think home networks are the biggest issue. Tons of folks do manage to get them set up with no help or the help of a friend. Of course wireless makes it worse, but...

I'm not using any firewall since I don't use the browser. My feeling are most security issues are caused (A) by browsing and (B)email or IM type use.

What seemed to make everything start working was changing the IP addresses when I finally got to the point where the receivers would allow me to assign static addresses. I'm surmising it was a DHCP issue even though the receivers were getting ip's. If that's the case, it's just those good old cheap Linksys routers. That's the reason I'm saying Logitech should make an GUI to assign ip addresses from SC to the reciever. I really think it would help immensely.

While I have you, is there a sure fire way to get the receiver to give you the choice of using static addressing?

Also, looking back now, I realize the first issue that pointed towards a problem was when Flickr quit working as a screen saver. I didn't realize it was related until I got everything working again last night and my Flickr screen saver started working again.

Thanks,

Howard

pfarrell
2008-06-11, 07:58
Howard Passman wrote:
> I really don't think home networks are the biggest issue.
>[snip]
> What seemed to make everything start working was changing the IP
> addresses when I finally got to the point where the receivers would
> allow me to assign static addresses. I'm surmising it was a DHCP issue
> even though the receivers were getting ip's.

You say its not networking, but what works is all about networking.

Home networking in general, and WiFi in particular is not ready for mass
markets yet. Its the networking.

I run my network with control over DNS and DHCP, and it just works. When
I got my Receiver, I plugged it in and it has worked perfectly since
with zero fiddling.

I run DNS and DHCP servers on my music server.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

Sike
2008-06-11, 08:19
I'm not using any firewall since I don't use the browser.

He means the router (or ASDL router). If you can't access Squeezenetwork the problem must be within your network.

If you are not using a router/firewall/nat-device then you might not be getting an IP address from you provider because they are all used up. Cablecom here only hands out 4 Ip addresses per cable-modem..

iPhone
2008-06-11, 09:12
....results? I had nothing that worked when we were done.

Peace

For both Howard and Jimzak, let me guess that both of you are using Windows? Between Windows and the fact that the Squeezebox IS a Network Media Player (the keyword being Network) a bunch of things can already be wrong before one starts out to setup a Duet. As Pat said, I had mine up and running in 10 minutes and I was sitting on the couch taking my time. I have had no real problems with it whatsoever. When I set Duets up for friends the average time after installing SC to get it up and running is about 6 minutes. Most of these friends know next to nothing about PCs much less Networks. I do not get phone calls from them about having problems. Maybe it is because they do not fiddle around with their PCs or have extra apps runnning all the time.

Main issues that I run into are Windows, Active Anti-virus (waste of time and PC CPU resourses), and Firewalls. If one is having major problems my suggestion is build a server for SC or drag an old PC out and only use it for SC. Is a stand alone server required? No it is not. Would most people be better off running it on a server? I think they would.

Is the Squeezebox of everybody, not yet as long as the world keeps being contaminated by MicroSoft and folks don't have a home network.

jaffacake
2008-06-11, 09:33
As Pat said, I had mine up and running in 10 minutes and I was sitting on the couch taking my time. I have had no real problems with it whatsoever. When I set Duets up for friends the average time after installing SC to get it up and running is about 6 minutes.

I'm trying to avoid Howard's threads but please keep it real.

Quoting the time it takes to get it up and running AFTER you've setup SqueezeCenter is a little pointless, no? For many beginners, setting up the SC server is the hardest part by far. You already had a server setup in your home, so your 10mins is irrelevant. For the other owners, you discount the setup time.

In my case, just indexing the music took almost 2hours. That doesn't include the time I spent downloading the installer, getting SqueezeCenter to start etc.

10 minutes isn't just unrealistic for a new owner, it's impossible.

ds2021
2008-06-11, 09:37
Thanks for the reply. I really don't think home networks are the biggest issue.

I have to agree with Pfarrell on this one. Any difficulties that I have ever had have boiled down to networking issues, and in this case yours did as well.

What router are you using? If the router was not assigning your SB device an IP address, then it would not be surprising (expected in fact) that the device would not respond properly. DHCP should have taken care of this in the simplest, fastest manner possible, but you were forced to work around it. This definitely points to a networking problem.

Phil Leigh
2008-06-11, 09:42
I'm trying to avoid Howard's threads but please keep it real.

Quoting the time it takes to get it up and running AFTER you've setup SqueezeCenter is a little pointless, no? For many beginners, setting up the SC server is the hardest part by far. You already had a server setup in your home, so your 10mins is irrelevant. For the other owners, you discount the setup time.

In my case, just indexing the music took almost 2hours. That doesn't include the time I spent downloading the installer, getting SqueezeCenter to start etc.

10 minutes isn't just unrealistic for a new owner, it's impossible.

No it isn't!
I just downloaded 7.01, installed it onto a laptop (that did not have SC installed before but did have a working wi-fi with static IP) and had my new black SB3 responding in 4 minutes and a few seconds. OK so it has started but not finished the scan...but I can browse my music folder OK and access Internet Radio OK.

Nonreality
2008-06-11, 10:49
I had mine up and playing music in 20 minutes. Half that time was because I had messed up my WPA password. I don't run static ip's and I don't see how you think having average and below average users switch their networks to static will help make setup easier.

Howard Passman
2008-06-11, 11:03
For both Howard and Jimzak, let me guess that both of you are using Windows? Between Windows and the fact that the Squeezebox IS a Network Media Player (the keyword being Network) a bunch of things can already be wrong before one starts out to setup a Duet. As Pat said, I had mine up and running in 10 minutes and I was sitting on the couch taking my time. I have had no real problems with it whatsoever. When I set Duets up for friends the average time after installing SC to get it up and running is about 6 minutes. Most of these friends know next to nothing about PCs much less Networks. I do not get phone calls from them about having problems. Maybe it is because they do not fiddle around with their PCs or have extra apps runnning all the time.

Main issues that I run into are Windows, Active Anti-virus (waste of time and PC CPU resourses), and Firewalls. If one is having major problems my suggestion is build a server for SC or drag an old PC out and only use it for SC. Is a stand alone server required? No it is not. Would most people be better off running it on a server? I think they would.

Is the Squeezebox of everybody, not yet as long as the world keeps being contaminated by MicroSoft and folks don't have a home network.

Thanks for your response. Here are a couple of items. I do use windows, but no virus protection and no fire wall. It is a specific use PC. There is nothing else running on it so I think it's as clean as I can make it. SC seems to run pretty well and scans very quickly so no complaints there. I'm not sure what happened to SN in the past few days. Nothing has changed on my server (losely used) and nothing changed on the routers. As I mentioned, I spent 3 hours on the phone with tech support, which is what I was brow beaten about for not doing before whan I complained. They did not have a solution, although they may when they call back tonight.

Note: to those who are avoiding my posts or think I'm trying to make a bad case for the DUET here:

I'm sorry to hear I am offending folks by showing my frustration a little. I don't think I have instigated any attacks and I try to inject a little humor, but I do seem to get some fairly snide remarks by trying to just get some dialog on the product going. To me there's not much sense in discussing anything if it's *all* going to be sugar coated. If even one person has an issue, he should be able to bring it up without being chastised. Don't like him or his views, don't read it. To say you're avoiding that person just seems mean and unnecessary to me. But then again, I seem to be mistaken on alot of things lately.

Howard

amcluesent
2008-06-11, 12:02
LOL. Kudos for Slimdevices for still trying. So they've blown through any margin and then some of the product.

I'd have given it 30 minutes and then refunded you to limit my loses.

Howard Passman
2008-06-11, 14:52
Excellent point.

They did call back tonight and asked if it would be o.k. to call back at the end of the week to (A) see if everything is still working and (B) ask more questions about how I got it working. The support tech was also very curious about how I got the screen on my controller that gave me the choice of "Wireless", Static or Fixed IP". It's not th eone for the controller. The one for the controller doesn't give you three choices and also doesn't ask for a DNS setting.

Anyone know how to get to that screen? It definitely does not come up everytime you do a reset on the receiver.

Howard

mvalera
2008-06-11, 16:16
I just talked to QA... the only way you see the "Wireless", Static or Fixed IP" screen is when, during setup, Squeezebox Controller cannot find a DHCP server at all.

What exactly are you using for a DHCP server? Our QA team would really like to know what you are using.

*My* 2 second diagnosis, is that your router has basically given up the ghost.

The other extreme possibility is that your DHCP server may be out of DHCP lease slots, but that would not explain why your receiver just stopped working... again I personally think you have a bad router.

Mike

JJZolx
2008-06-11, 16:51
I had an issue the other day, which was typical of how these things have always worked themselves out for me...

My office SB2, which has been rock solid for several years (wirelessly connected about 3 feet from my wireless access point with 100% signal strength) decided to disconnect itself and forget its WPA password.

So I went back through the wireless setup and re-entered the password. I no longer use a random 63 character WPA key, for moments just like this. I now use a simple to enter phrase about 20 characters long.

Would not connect to the wireless network.

Power cycled the wireless access point.

Would not connect.

Power cycled the Squeezebox.

Would not connect.

Did a factory reset of the Squeezebox and re-entered the wireless network config.

Would not connect.

At that point I was out of ideas, so I left and had dinner.

When I came back the SB2 was connected.

!!

Howard Passman
2008-06-12, 02:27
I just talked to QA... the only way you see the "Wireless", Static or Fixed IP" screen is when, during setup, the controller cannot find a DHCP server at all.

What exactly are you using for a DHCP server? Our QA team would really like to know what you are using.

*My* 2 second diagnosis, is that your router has basically given up the ghost.

The other extreme possibility is that your DHCP server may be out of DHCP lease slots, but that would not explain why your receiver just stopped working... again I personally think you have a bad router.

Mike

Hi Mike,

When forced to, I let the Linksys router hand out DHCP. As I mentioned, I don't really like to use DHCP for ease of use reasons. We have 22 devices on our home network and it's just easier to hand out (static) IP's. At some point I did turn DHCP on because I could not get the choice of putting in an address. When I did, I "reserved" ip addresses for the three MAC address of the SB devices. Some of the Linksys routers allow you to associate MAC addresses with IP addresses. Thinking back I may have turned it off again after I got off the phone with tech support and that may be why I finally got the option to statically address the receivers.

When I bought the DUET I wasn't sure how to get the PIN number. Almost the first thing tech support has you do is use DHCP to address the controller. Then, when I received the second receiver and wanted to use the receivers as access points, I called to try and get help on that. Again, the support guy insisted I turn DHCP on. Now that I know that if no DHCP service is available that it will ask for a staic address, then that should make things easier.

Looking back the entire DHCP mess started with the fact that you can't statically address the controller, which is not what the instructions say and the way I wanted to do it. On my first call to support I was told that that was a mistake and that I could not assign an address to the controller. Hence DHCP got involved.

I hope this helps.

Howard

Howard Passman
2008-06-12, 03:10
Howard Passman wrote:[color=blue]

I run my network with control over DNS and DHCP, and it just works. When
I got my Receiver, I plugged it in and it has worked perfectly since
with zero fiddling.

I run DNS and DHCP servers on my music server.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

Hi Pat. Question? Do you run an application server or email server on your network? If not, what advantage do you get from runnng DNS and DHCP?

Thanks,

Howard

jaffacake
2008-06-12, 06:07
Howard,

Very few people require an internal DNS server, but it's a common misconception that DHCP is hassle...it actually makes like significantly easier.

Without DHCP, one has to manually supply IP address, subnet mask, default gateway and DNS server IP addresses manually on each device. In your case I gather this is some 22 devices? Into each you manually entered all this data.

If, in the future, you want to change any of these details, you have to go to all 22 devices and change it.

With DHCP, you buy a new device and turn it on and it will generally just work. Nearly all devices will come out of the box with DHCP enabled. Indeed, DHCP is part of the UPNP specification meaning that UPNP compliant devices must support DHCP by default. Otherwise it's not plug & play, it's plug, configure and pray.

DHCP offers all of this convenience with almost no disadvantage whatsoever. If you want your device to have a reserved address that never changes, DHCP can do it. If you want to change the DNS on all network devices, DHCP can do it. Automatically. Without re-configuring the host machines.

Generally on a network, only 2 types of devices need a static, hard coded IP address that isn't issued from a DHCP scope. The first are the DHCP servers themselves. The second are the routers or firewalls, usually this kind of hardware needs a static assignment.

All other devices, workstations, server, printers etc. can be fully configured (and reconfigured) by DHCP. A fixed IP reservation can be used if you want this dynamically assigned address not to change, but assigning a hard coded address on the device itself is usually not best practice.

The only time not using DHCP is advantageous is if your DHCP infrastructure is broken and refuses to issue address to new devices. In this case, the problem is that specific DHCP deployment, not the protocol itself.

peter
2008-06-12, 06:16
Pat Farrell wrote:
> Howard Passman wrote:
>
>> I really don't think home networks are the biggest issue.
>>
> >[snip]
>
>> What seemed to make everything start working was changing the IP
>> addresses when I finally got to the point where the receivers would
>> allow me to assign static addresses. I'm surmising it was a DHCP issue
>> even though the receivers were getting ip's.
>>
>
> You say its not networking, but what works is all about networking.
>
> Home networking in general, and WiFi in particular is not ready for mass
> markets yet. Its the networking.
>
> I run my network with control over DNS and DHCP, and it just works. When
> I got my Receiver, I plugged it in and it has worked perfectly since
> with zero fiddling.
>
> I run DNS and DHCP servers on my music server.
>

I used to, but then I got tired of having my whole home network going
down whenever I did some maintenance on my server.

I now use a mix of fixed and dynamic ip addresses provided by my router.
(which, unfortunately, supports only a limited number of fixed addresses)

Regards,
Peter

pfarrell
2008-06-12, 07:19
Howard Passman wrote:
> pfarrell;310807 Wrote:
>> I run DNS and DHCP servers on my music server.

> Hi Pat. Question? Do you run an application server or email server on
> your network? If not, what advantage do you get from runnng DNS and
> DHCP?

DNS is mainly about caching, no need to clank to the ISP's upstream DNS.
Plus I can assign DNS names for all the computers, laptops, squeezebox,
receivers, controlllers, and transporters in the house.

I run DHCP because I want control. I assign fixed IP addresses by MAC
address, thus every part always has the same IP address. It makes it
easy for the Controller to know where the SqueezeCenter is. And since
the IP addresses are fixed, its trivial to have the DNS respond with
proper DNS names for everything.

Since my SqueezeCenter runs on a mostly dedicated Linux box, it was easy.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

pfarrell
2008-06-12, 07:22
jaffacake wrote:
> Very few people require an internal DNS server, but it's a common
> misconception that DHCP is hassle...it actually makes like
> significantly easier.

>[snip

>
> The only time not using DHCP is advantageous is if your DHCP
> infrastructure is broken and refuses to issue address to new devices.
> In this case, the problem is that specific DHCP deployment, not the
> protocol itself.

DHCP was designed to solve the many evil problems of static IP
addresses. It works great. It fails when the infrastructure is broken,
and for me, that's usually routers/modems/etc not segmenting the subnets
properly.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

pfarrell
2008-06-12, 07:24
Peter wrote:
> Pat Farrell wrote:
>> I run DNS and DHCP servers on my music server.
>
> I used to, but then I got tired of having my whole home network going
> down whenever I did some maintenance on my server.

Yes, to make it work, you need redundant server.
I've got about 20 PCs in my house, so redundancy is fairly easy.

I have my music server be the spare, and my main www.pfarrell.com be the
primary.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

Nonreality
2008-06-12, 08:08
Peter wrote:
> Pat Farrell wrote:
>> I run DNS and DHCP servers on my music server.
>
> I used to, but then I got tired of having my whole home network going
> down whenever I did some maintenance on my server.

Yes, to make it work, you need redundant server.
I've got about 20 PCs in my house, so redundancy is fairly easy.

I have my music server be the spare, and my main www.pfarrell.com be the
primary.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/Wow, if you don't mind me asking, what do you use so many computers for. I have a desktop and laptop and a couple of old P1's that I've considered restarting but 20 would drive my wife crazy let alone trying to figure out where to put them. :) I would like it though myself.

maggior
2008-06-12, 09:42
Howard,


The only time not using DHCP is advantageous is if your DHCP infrastructure is broken and refuses to issue address to new devices. In this case, the problem is that specific DHCP deployment, not the protocol itself.

My linksys router acts as my DHCP server. My network consists of 2 wireless squeezeboxes, 4 PCs, and 2 laptops. Only my laptops are set to use DHCP. My PCs are static because I have some port forwarding configured and the addresses need to remain static. Perhaps there is a way to set that up and still use DHCP, but this was easy for me to set up. My laptops are used elsewhere, so DHCP is perfect for them.

I went to using static addresses on my squeezeboxes to speed up the network connection process. Often enough I move one of my squeezeboxes around to different rooms and I'd rather not have to wait for an IP address to be assigned while it initializes on power up. Perhaps running a DHCP server elsewhere would help that, but it's just easier for me with this set up.

jaffacake
2008-06-12, 09:52
My linksys router acts as my DHCP server. My network consists of 2 wireless squeezeboxes, 4 PCs, and 2 laptops. Only my laptops are set to use DHCP. My PCs are static because I have some port forwarding configured and the addresses need to remain static. Perhaps there is a way to set that up and still use DHCP, but this was easy for me to set up. My laptops are used elsewhere, so DHCP is perfect for them.


I'd be very surprised if your router doesn't allow you to make an IP address 'fixed' 'reserved' 'static' or whatever terminology they chose. It's designed for port forwarding scenarios.



I went to using static addresses on my squeezeboxes to speed up the network connection process. Often enough I move one of my squeezeboxes around to different rooms and I'd rather not have to wait for an IP address to be assigned while it initializes on power up. Perhaps running a DHCP server elsewhere would help that, but it's just easier for me with this set up.

There should be no "wait" for an IP address, I'd expect a DHCP response within a fraction of a second.

Open a command prompt on a windows DHCP configured PC and type:

IPCONFIG /release

then type:

IPCONFIG /renew

You'll see how long it takes to issue an IP address, it's truly negligible.

Howard Passman
2008-06-12, 10:25
I use static at work because as part of my job (small part) I have to take care of three subnets at 4 locations over MPLS. I static address because it eliminates some steps if someone can't connect to the network 9Actually never happens with static addressing). Also makes Desktop Remote (yes, Windows :-))a bit easier for me. For some reason I can remember IP addresses better than names. Probably from working with German Auto Manufacturer part numbers. It also makes it very easy to set up my content filter in the manner I want to use it.

For routing, it's one less thing to keep in mind. I don't have to maintain internal DNS service and don't have to consider what ranges to set up on a DHCP service in order to route differnt parts of a subnet to different application servers or connections.

Different strokes for different folks. I don't think I'd add DHCP to my environment unless I was running low on addresses. I guess it's all what you get used to and what works for you with the most ease.

Thanks for all the input and have a great day.

Howard

cparker
2008-06-13, 03:08
Like it, this thread has turned into an IP masterclass ;)

Why not just set address reservations in your DHCP setup, most new routers support this, just add the MAC address of the network card and each time it asks for an IP address the router will return the same IP address linked to the MAC. Therefore you cover both static and dynamic allocation requirements!

Also set your reservation lease times to weeks and it will pretty much have the same affect.

On another note, a dedicated server is always the way to go, behind a router with a hardware firewall built in, then you dont need a software firewall or antivirus crippling the machine into the floor. Most viri come via email or from web browsing therefore if you have a dedicated server its highly unlikely it will ever get affected.

Cheerio

Letten
2008-06-13, 14:40
Why not just set address reservations in your DHCP setup


In my setup this was not enough because the DHCP-client on my Vista Laptop (running SC) still produced systematic errors causing connection dropouts. So I had to assign a true static IP in Vista to disable/omit Vistas DHCP-client.

Cheers
Letten

jimzak
2008-06-14, 12:31
I got a more energy-efficient (Vista) machine to use only as my music server.

So having gone through one install that didn't work due to Comodo firewall (had to be uninstalled) and one successful install on an XP machine, I decided to do Vista with SC 7.01.

The install went flawlessly.

The music scan of almost 19,000 FLAC files on a 750 GB USB drive went fine, taking about 15 mins.

The re-construction of the Duet connection took about 5 minutes because I tried to connect to the new music source first without resetting the music player (Duet) first. After I did that the new music source (Vista machine and USB drive) fell into place.

All in all, the install took about 40 mins.

Another bit of added time was getting the new machine to network and to allow me to add music to the server via the network. Vista's permissions are new to me and took some time.

I still contend the whole thing is pretty techy.

I shudder to think what might happen to my sister if she tried to set one up.

All in all, I'm a big fan of the Duet.

YMMV.

Millwood
2008-06-14, 18:32
If I was setting up a music server only I'd sure run linux unless there was some real reason not to. (I run my server and other stuff on Debian).

Why did you choose windows?

jimzak
2008-06-15, 08:48
I chose Vista because I got a sweet deal on a used, relatively "Green" HP Slimline computer.

I know I could have built something for less, and it could have run Linux.

However, I don't have the time to build anything, and I have no knowledge of Linux; therefore the learning curve would be long and my time is limited.

As I said, even Vista seems to run SC pretty well.

I have no complaints. I'm not going to be using that machine for anything else.

I use XP for everything else.

ianstuart
2008-06-21, 08:58
I think that some of the posts are missing the point. Yes, a lot of the problems that people are experiencing are due to conflicts between the router, or in my case the Netgear range extender, and the Squeezeboxes (I note that the SB3's seem to be much more robust) but that doesn't excuse Logitech. If you expect to sell a product to the general public then it has to be compatible with at least the major network setups, Linksys and Netgear. In my case Support has basically said that the problem is due to Netgear's Range Extender, which I was forced to use because the Receivers can't connect from more than about 15 feet away, so they aren't going to do anything about it. So I can use my Squeezeboxes within a 15 foot radius of the router, so much for Wifi.

egd
2008-06-21, 17:43
LOL. Kudos for Slimdevices for still trying. So they've blown through any margin and then some of the product.

I'd have given it 30 minutes and then refunded you to limit my loses.

I suspect you're confusing fixed and variable cost here. It's probably more a question of customer service as others may be frustrated not being able to speak to support personnel. It only becomes a cost issue if you're having to increase your support compliment as a result or are paying some sort of time-based charge on top of a base cost (however I suspect support has not been outsourced, so it's unlikely).

lanierb
2008-06-23, 09:59
I think that some of the posts are missing the point. Yes, a lot of the problems that people are experiencing are due to conflicts between the router, or in my case the Netgear range extender, and the Squeezeboxes (I note that the SB3's seem to be much more robust) but that doesn't excuse Logitech. If you expect to sell a product to the general public then it has to be compatible with at least the major network setups, Linksys and Netgear. In my case Support has basically said that the problem is due to Netgear's Range Extender, which I was forced to use because the Receivers can't connect from more than about 15 feet away, so they aren't going to do anything about it. So I can use my Squeezeboxes within a 15 foot radius of the router, so much for Wifi.

Might you have a crappy wifi network? I have an SB3 connected wirelessly to a router at least 100' and many walls away, with zero skips ever. What does netstumbler tell you?

lanierb
2008-06-23, 10:05
I'm no techy, but even I know that you can setup DHCP and still use static IPs where you want. Just setup the DHCP range outside the range of the static IPs. IMO this will make your life much easier.



Hi Mike,

When forced to, I let the Linksys router hand out DHCP. As I mentioned, I don't really like to use DHCP for ease of use reasons. We have 22 devices on our home network and it's just easier to hand out (static) IP's. At some point I did turn DHCP on because I could not get the choice of putting in an address. When I did, I "reserved" ip addresses for the three MAC address of the SB devices. Some of the Linksys routers allow you to associate MAC addresses with IP addresses. Thinking back I may have turned it off again after I got off the phone with tech support and that may be why I finally got the option to statically address the receivers.

When I bought the DUET I wasn't sure how to get the PIN number. Almost the first thing tech support has you do is use DHCP to address the controller. Then, when I received the second receiver and wanted to use the receivers as access points, I called to try and get help on that. Again, the support guy insisted I turn DHCP on. Now that I know that if no DHCP service is available that it will ask for a staic address, then that should make things easier.

Looking back the entire DHCP mess started with the fact that you can't statically address the controller, which is not what the instructions say and the way I wanted to do it. On my first call to support I was told that that was a mistake and that I could not assign an address to the controller. Hence DHCP got involved.

I hope this helps.

Howard

Howard Passman
2008-06-23, 11:14
I'm no techy, but even I know that you can setup DHCP and still use static IPs where you want. Just setup the DHCP range outside the range of the static IPs. IMO this will make your life much easier.

The only thing that makes this an issue is the fact that most of these "home" routers are more like toys that real routers. The issues are usually with them.

Using static and DHCP on the same network or router is not an issue as long as you do it correctly.

Bests,

Howard

Nonreality
2008-06-23, 15:18
The only thing that makes this an issue is the fact that most of these "home" routers are more like toys that real routers. The issues are usually with them.

Using static and DHCP on the same network or router is not an issue as long as you do it correctly.

Bests,

HowardIt's a good thing that they're toys, just think of the problems you could have had. :)

Howard Passman
2008-06-24, 09:09
It's a good thing that they're toys, just think of the problems you could have had. :)

Business routers are much more frustrating, but not in the sense that they don't perform as designed. Anyone who works with CISCO IOS would probably agree, you have to have the patience of a saint. Once up and running though, you will probably never touch it again until you want to change your configs for one reason or another.

Over the years I have thrown away quite a few Linksys routers that would either just out and out quit or would drop out at fairly regular intervals and have to be restarted. Always the wireless part.

I guess though to be fair, what you can accomplish with a sub $100 router from Linksys, you would have to pay $1000 or more from CISCO and CISCO owns Linksys. I guess it's worth the hassle.

Have a great day,

Howard