PDA

View Full Version : Boom reviewed on Engadget



StuartC
2008-09-22, 05:22
Comes off favourably against Roko: http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/21/squeezebox-boom-review/

funkstar
2008-09-22, 08:56
But they don't really get it do they.

It's a terrible review, not for their opinion on the product, just the fact that it is a very badly put together review. Most of the commentators don't get it either.

Cabe
2008-09-22, 09:12
Its a very woolly review with no real focus. Engadget has been going down hill in quality for some time. Not a good ad for SD/Logi

I prefer www.trustedreviews.com (even if they did only give they mighty transporter 8/10) all comments are reasoned out and their depth of knowledge about (what seems like) every product ever is always pleasing.

blessingx
2008-09-22, 09:30
It is a bit rambling and strangely focused for ... what? ... existing R1000 owners? Still overall it describes many issues with UI I think newcomers are likely to experience, especially as a 'tabletop'/'clock radio'. A review like this probably should exist to set expectations. As we all know if someone approaches Squeezeboxes as a simple plug and play device they likely will become frustrated. It would be nice if they spent a bit more real estate on sound quality though.

zieglerc
2008-09-22, 10:15
Thanks for the feedback, guys. As you may know, our main focus certainly isn't product reviews -- we prefer to do lighter hands-ons that give readers quick product impressions. That was sort of my goal here, while also injecting some interesting background into what has led the table radio market to where it is today.

We're not really looking at this article as a way for folks to find out what the Boom is; as you've all proven, it's many different things to different people, and there are already plenty of great resources (slimdevices.com included) to guide folks on that end. That being said, rest assured that your comments are heard loud and clear and we'll keep this in mind for our features going forward.

Chris
Engadget

lanierb
2008-09-22, 10:31
Thanks for the feedback, guys. As you may know, our main focus certainly isn't product reviews -- we prefer to do lighter hands-ons that give readers quick product impressions. That was sort of my goal here, while also injecting some interesting background into what has led the table radio market to where it is today.

We're not really looking at this article as a way for folks to find out what the Boom is; as you've all proven, it's many different things to different people, and there are already plenty of great resources (slimdevices.com included) to guide folks on that end. That being said, rest assured that your comments are heard loud and clear and we'll keep this in mind for our features going forward.

Chris
Engadget

I think you fell short of your goals. Regardless of whether you like the Boom as a product, the review fails to get across some pretty major points about the product class: never have to look for a CD again, tune to pretty much any radio station you want from anywhere in the world, Pandora, Rhapsody (never have to buy a CD again?), etc. This class of products is potentially lifestyle changing for many people. We're seeing into the future here, and an unfamiliar user could look at your review and have no clue about that.

Paul Webster
2008-09-22, 11:44
My first thought on reading it was that the reviewer already had experience with previous Squeeze products so concentrated on what was new - and someone new to the technology area might not have grasped what could be done because the basics were missing.
I think that quite a few of the comments that were posted were from people who simply didn't get it.

autopilot
2008-09-22, 12:17
Very poor review from Engadget, missed so many important issues and core features that make it what it is. I would be very confused reading that if i have no experience already with Slim Devices/logitech streaming products. It failed to succeed as either a 'hands on' or full review and certainly does not give "readers quick product impressions" - or any real impression at all for that matter. Just Wishy washy engadget as usual - one to forget, i would not bother putting it up in the news section - it would just baffle potential customers, and its already a baffling enough area.

JJZolx
2008-09-22, 16:32
It is a bit rambling and strangely focused for ... what? ... existing R1000 owners? Still overall it describes many issues with UI I think newcomers are likely to experience, especially as a 'tabletop'/'clock radio'.

That was my impression almost exactly. Not at all well-written, but there wasn't a single point made that I haven't seen expressed by users in these forums, including many of the beta testers and some very experienced SB users.

And I think you're right - the general perception appears to be that Boom is primarily a clock/radio, so questions about how it functions as an alarm clock will be critical for new customers.

maggior
2008-09-22, 19:31
That's pretty bad if the general perception is that it is an alarm clock! First, it's a real expensive alarm clock. Second, it is SOOOO much more than that.

I can see how the review fostered that perception since the point of the review seemed to be to compare it to the Roku.

If this perception continues, I think Logitech will regret putting that snooze bar on top.

BTW - I went to Roku's website and you have to wonder if they are giving up on the network music player and concentrating on the Netflix device. They don't have any new M1000s for sale and haven't for almost a month is seems. There is a thread in their forum talking about this and speculating that it is going to be discontinued. The radio is the only new device available right now. Roku is providing no comment on the subject. Logitech (actually slim devices) is mentioned a lot and many just jump to a squeezebox once their Roku breaks down or they just give up on the device. Software updates for Roku have become MUCH less frequent as well. The perception is that Roku is giving up and hasn't done anything new for a while, but Logitech is marching forward with constant SW updates and new products (Duet and Boom).

I always kept an eye on the Roku products in case they came up to par (i.e. gapless playback) and would be useful as a less expensive secondary device along with my squeezebox. It just never happened and now it never will given the reasonable prices of squeezeboxes now.

The past couple of years have lead to some interesting developments.

Dogberry2
2008-09-23, 11:40
So many of the comments following that review said things about how stupid it would be to spend that much money on an alarm clock, or along the lines of "Why would I buy one of these when I already have an iPod?" that it's obvious the reviewer missed the boat. The review wandered, never really found its footing, and completely failed to emphasize the actual nature, purpose, and sound quality of the Boom. A truly terrible, amateur job of reviewing a product.

ModelCitizen
2008-09-23, 12:30
That was my impression almost exactly. Not at all well-written, but there wasn't a single point made that I haven't seen expressed by users in these forums, including many of the beta testers and some very experienced SB users.
When I read the review it seemed obvious that he had already trawled this forum for easy material.


And I think you're right - the general perception appears to be that Boom is primarily a clock/radio, so questions about how it functions as an alarm clock will be critical for new customers.
I agree too... and this makes it important for Logitech to sort out some of the most annoying alarm clock/bedside radio/HiFi related bugs asap (headphone usage being my particular bug bear).

MC

JJZolx
2008-09-23, 12:41
So many of the comments following that review said things about how stupid it would be to spend that much money on an alarm clock, or along the lines of "Why would I buy one of these when I already have an iPod?" that it's obvious the reviewer missed the boat. The review wandered, never really found its footing, and completely failed to emphasize the actual nature, purpose, and sound quality of the Boom. A truly terrible, amateur job of reviewing a product.

I think expecting a review of any of Logitech's streaming players to advocate the platform and the approach itself is a bit much to expect. If the reader doesn't already understand how these players are used, then it reads like some kind of kindergarten lesson in networked music players. And we've already read it 100 times. ("The nice thing about having all my music..." blah blah blah.)

And, yes, with the iPod phenomenon there's a significant portion of the public that will never understand the purpose of these players. If that changes then it will only happen when Apple pushes their own networked player.

pablolie
2008-09-24, 10:40
... review fails to get across some pretty major points about the product class: never have to look for a CD again, tune to pretty much any radio station you want from anywhere in the world, Pandora, Rhapsody (never have to buy a CD again?), etc. This class of products is potentially lifestyle changing for many people. ...

Would you really start the arduous process of ripping your entire CD collection if the only Logitech device you had was the Boom? I think many of us, because of our history with SlimDevices products, have a slanted view of the Sboom. And it woud be sad if the product only gets adopted by current SB, Duet and Transporter customers to extend the reach of a solution they already have in place. But fr those new users, the Sboom has to stand on its very own merits, without the users thinking about ripping their entire CD collection... Just my opinion.

dwilliams01
2008-09-24, 13:40
I did.

I'm now able to listen to stuff that I hadn't listened to in years...

It all started from a Rhapsody add and noticing that my reciever was picking up a few sample files from Windows Media Center...

I got an mp3 player later.

Of course, in a lot of ways the amazon marketplace is the big winner... :)
Logitech should get a cut of sales from them or something.

Mark Lanctot
2008-09-25, 07:08
It was disappointing to read the "WTF, I can get a clock radio for $15 at Wal-Mart LMAO!" comments. People really don't get it. At least there are no "it doesn't do video!" comments yet.

Boom is much more than an alarm clock, but I don't agree with the comments that Boom as a clock radio is an afterthought or that its alarm implementation is sub-standard. You can set as many alarms per day as you like and there can be different alarm schedules for every day of the week if you choose. The alarm sound can be anything under the sun, from something in your local collection to an ambient sound to an Internet radio stream AND if you lose network connection to any of these resources the alarm will STILL go off. Alarms can fade in, alarms can auto-repeat or fire once, the alarms can be turned off globally and re-enabled without affecting each setting.

Yes, to configure all that it requires a few button presses, but how else to do it? But once an alarm is set you don't need to do this anymore. There's also the web interface where you can set these things with a few mouse clicks.

lanierb
2008-09-25, 10:12
Would you really start the arduous process of ripping your entire CD collection if the only Logitech device you had was the Boom?

Maybe? But anyway that focuses in on only one small aspect of the boom/SB. Ripping CDs is just a temporary fix to bridge us over from old technologies.

Play any album you want (via Rhapsody), even one that came out yesterday, or perhaps more impressively, a rare album that came out 50 years ago, without going to the store or downloading or ripping anything. What other boombox can do that? Live in Nebraska but want to wake up to your home town radio station from Australia? Easy.

It's a whole new ballgame and I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people don't get it. (For confirmation, just read the comments section of the review!)

Look how well the Bose wave did, and all that is is an expensive and good looking alarm clock. This really is something different.

Now all they need to do is hire someone from Apple to make the software so user friendly that any idiot can use it.

Apesbrain
2008-09-25, 10:59
Boom is also mentioned (with a photo) in today's "New York Times" article about new devices to stream music around the house:

www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/technology/personaltech/25basics.html

androidtopp
2008-09-25, 11:38
Look how well the Bose wave did, and all that is is an expensive and good looking alarm clock. This really is something different.

Nevermind how truly awful Bose products, especially the Wave, sound. But, you have to admit, everyone is a sucker for a brand name (people still buy Sony too) so people will continue to shell out more money for a vastly inferior product, rather than the Boom.

It may have been said before but that's the perception Logitech/Slim have to overcome: That the Boom is not "premium" hardware. Giffen goods are powerful things.

ModelCitizen
2008-09-25, 12:21
Nevermind how truly awful Bose products, especially the Wave, sound. But, you have to admit, everyone is a sucker for a brand name
I'm definitely not a sucker for brand names (very far from it), and I'm certain that all Bose stuff does not sound bad. I've not heard a WaveStation but the Bose hifi in my Audi TT sounds absolutely superb (really!).

MC

lanierb
2008-09-25, 13:39
Boom is also mentioned (with a photo) in today's "New York Times" article about new devices to stream music around the house:

www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/technology/personaltech/25basics.html

Bizarre comment about requiring a hexadecimal password. Even if it were true, I'm not sure it would rise to a level of importance to make the article. The fact that it's false makes it even stranger.

andyg
2008-09-25, 13:42
On Sep 25, 2008, at 4:39 PM, lanierb wrote:

>
> Apesbrain;344071 Wrote:
>> Boom is also mentioned (with a photo) in today's "New York Times"
>> article about new devices to stream music around the house:
>>
>> www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/technology/personaltech/25basics.html
>
> Bizarre comment about requiring a hexadecimal password. Even if it
> were true, I'm not sure it would rise to a level of importance to make
> the article. The fact that it's false makes it even stranger.

If you're using WEP, the only kind of password you can enter is hex.
The fact that access points generate the hex for you from an ASCII
string input (in non-standard ways) is unfortunate. Regardless, the
reviewer should know better and use WPA.

lanierb
2008-09-26, 10:13
On Sep 25, 2008, at 4:39 PM, lanierb wrote:

>
> Apesbrain;344071 Wrote:
>> Boom is also mentioned (with a photo) in today's "New York Times"
>> article about new devices to stream music around the house:
>>
>> www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/technology/personaltech/25basics.html
>
> Bizarre comment about requiring a hexadecimal password. Even if it
> were true, I'm not sure it would rise to a level of importance to make
> the article. The fact that it's false makes it even stranger.

If you're using WEP, the only kind of password you can enter is hex.
The fact that access points generate the hex for you from an ASCII
string input (in non-standard ways) is unfortunate. Regardless, the
reviewer should know better and use WPA.

OK. I get it now, but it's still a strange comment and it's still basically false.