PDA

View Full Version : Future of SB3 ?



bluegroper
2008-11-11, 13:28
My supplier has informed me that SqueezeBox Classic SB3 is now an "End Of Life" product, that they'll no longer be stocking.
Is this correct, or should I change my supplier ?
Seriously, is Logitech/SlimDevices continuing the SB3 ?

JJZolx
2008-11-11, 13:35
Seriously, is Logitech/SlimDevices continuing the SB3 ?

You mean _dis_continuing the SB3? Probably.

SqueezeCenter 7.3 seems to be getting the bum's rush out the door in time for Christmas. Frankly, 7.3 feels very shaky to me, so there must be a reason. Traditionally with Slim Devices, it means a new product introduction.

upstatemike
2008-11-11, 13:53
Maybe the new standard for a player with a large display is supposed to be an Eee Top running SqueezePlay?

mvalera
2008-11-11, 14:17
The SB3 is not EOL.

As for when it will be, we do not comment on future plans for our products.

Mike

pablolie
2008-11-12, 01:23
I do hope something like the SB3 stays a mainstay in the SD roadmap. It remains my favorite product for more than nostalgic reasons...

raven22
2008-11-12, 02:20
SB3 prices keep on dropping here in Holland, less than a year ago still 299 euro, now available for 155 euro.
Draw your own conclusions, it might not be EOL yet, but.......

peter
2008-11-12, 03:12
raven22 wrote:
> SB3 prices keep on dropping here in Holland, less than a year ago still
> 299 euro, now available for 155 euro.
>

Link?

> Draw your own conclusions, it might not be EOL yet, but.......
>

Could just be Logitech economies of scale in action.

Regards,
Peter

raven22
2008-11-12, 03:25
raven22 wrote:
> SB3 prices keep on dropping here in Holland, less than a year ago still
> 299 euro, now available for 155 euro.
>

Link?

> Draw your own conclusions, it might not be EOL yet, but.......
>

Could just be Logitech economies of scale in action.

Regards,
Peter

http://azerty.nl/producten/product_detail/485/65842/logitech-squeezebox.html

peter
2008-11-12, 04:05
raven22 wrote:
> peter;359154 Wrote:
>
>> raven22 wrote:
>>
>>> SB3 prices keep on dropping here in Holland, less than a year ago
>>>
>> still
>>
>>> 299 euro, now available for 155 euro.
>>>
>>>
>> Link?
>>
>>
>>> Draw your own conclusions, it might not be EOL yet, but.......
>>>
>>>
>> Could just be Logitech economies of scale in action.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Peter
>>
>
> http://azerty.nl/producten/product_detail/485/65842/logitech-squeezebox.html
>

Not bad, I paid a lot more for my foursome.
The page mentions a black/silver model though, they've been out of
production for quite a while.

Regards,
Peter

raven22
2008-11-12, 04:53
raven22 wrote:[color=blue]
The page mentions a black/silver model though, they've been out of
production for quite a while.

Regards,
Peter

I guess they did not update the product info very well, but the price is real, there are more suppliers with the same prices.

egd
2008-11-12, 05:45
I'll take a SB3 anyday over a Receiver.

metalwarrior
2008-11-12, 06:13
Hi,

This price at 155 euros is very interesting ! However, azerty.nl only ships to Belgium and Netherlands.

Does anyone know a supplier offering the same price shipping to France ?

In France, current best price is 217 euros.

Thx,
Cheers,
Yann

bpa
2008-11-12, 07:37
komplett.com has SB3 for about euro 179 but komplett.fr seems to have closed down.

maggior
2008-11-12, 09:11
I cannot imagine the SB3 being discontinued without an evolutionary replacement in the pipeline to follow it up. IMO, there is still a market for a player with a display. If I could only have either a Duet or an SB3, I would choose an SB3. The usefulness of the display for weather and time is a significant feature for me. It's also quite stable.

The Duet is great but IMHO bugs are still being shaken out of it. I just ran into a scenario myself where I have 2 servers and can switch the SB3s between them but not the Duet. More major features are being added (playback through the controller) which will certainly need time to stabilize too.

The SB3 must be a cash cow at this point since the guts of it were designed back when the SB2 was introduced. The thing I think they would be worried about is parts obsolescence. The Duet was introduced about a year ago and was a radical change with the introduction of the controller. Certainly they are still recouping development costs on it.

snarlydwarf
2008-11-12, 09:22
I cannot imagine the SB3 being discontinued without an evolutionary replacement in the pipeline to follow it up. IMO, there is still a market for a player with a display. If I could only have either a Duet or an SB3, I would choose an SB3. The usefulness of the display for weather and time is a significant feature for me. It's also quite stable.


Very true.

Perhaps falling prices in Europe have something to do with the state of the dollar and Logitech getting their distribution for Europe into gear.

robroe
2008-11-12, 09:22
I cannot imagine the SB3 being discontinued without an evolutionary replacement in the pipeline to follow it up.

My thoughts exactly, although I'd be quite surprised if there was a new version of it coming out other than minor cosmetic changes or maybe N wireless.

If I were about to purchase a new Squeezebox I would probably still pick the Classic over a SBR even with the (ever smaller) price difference.

aubuti
2008-11-12, 11:55
Perhaps falling prices in Europe have something to do with the state of the dollar ....
Huh? The USD has been gaining on the Euro since July. After being around $1.50 - 1.60 to the Euro for the first half of 2008 now it's down below $1.30. http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/EUR/hist2008.html

snarlydwarf
2008-11-12, 18:56
Huh? The USD has been gaining on the Euro since July. After being around $1.50 - 1.60 to the Euro for the first half of 2008 now it's down below $1.30. http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/EUR/hist2008.html

And all economic factors are instant? Or do large multinational corporations set their prices based on long term trends, especially when the costs go down. (Ie, gas goes up the day a barrel of oil goes up, but takes weeks to go down when the costs goes down.)

Remember 6 months ago, people were complaining: "The dollar dropped today, and there was no movement in prices for SBs!"

aubuti
2008-11-12, 21:16
And all economic factors are instant? Or do large multinational corporations set their prices based on long term trends, especially when the costs go down. (Ie, gas goes up the day a barrel of oil goes up, but takes weeks to go down when the costs goes down.)

Remember 6 months ago, people were complaining: "The dollar dropped today, and there was no movement in prices for SBs!"
Fully agreed that adjustment isn't instantaneous, so then just what "state of the dollar" were you referring to as a possible explanation for falling prices in Europe? What kind of lagged adjustment process are you suggesting?

TiredLegs
2008-11-13, 11:31
I do hope something like the SB3 stays a mainstay in the SD roadmap. It remains my favorite product for more than nostalgic reasons...
I agree. I own three SB3s, and might buy another one. I tried a Duet, and I really did not like it. When a remote control requires more software and networking complexity than the device its controlling, that is not a recipe for ease-of-use. The SB3 is much simpler, and it just plain works.

mdconnelly
2008-11-13, 14:41
I agree. I own three SB3s, and might buy another one. I tried a Duet, and I really did not like it. When a remote control requires more software and networking complexity than the device its controlling, that is not a recipe for ease-of-use. The SB3 is much simpler, and it just plain works.

My experience is a bit different... I have 2 SB3s and was about to pick up a 3rd but decided to give the Duet a shot. I love the Controller and have had no real problems with it at all. It works and gives me far better control over the music than just an SB3 remote. And, since the Controller also controls my SB3s, I may just pop for a 2nd Controller next.

But what I really want to see is a 24/96 receiver (i.e. something significantly less expensive than the Transporter).

peter
2008-11-13, 23:42
TiredLegs wrote:
> I agree. I own three SB3s, and might buy another one. I tried a Duet,
> and I really did not like it. When a remote control requires more
> software and networking complexity than the device its controlling,
> that is not a recipe for ease-of-use. The SB3 is much simpler, and it
> just plain works.
>

Ease of use has nothing to do with the complexity of the underlying
technology.

X.

pfarrell
2008-11-13, 23:49
Peter wrote:
> Ease of use has nothing to do with the complexity of the underlying
> technology.

"Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."
-- Albert Einstein

I think that really good ease of use requires tons of hard work. The
complexity is there, just hidden by good design. So for things more
complicated than a hammer -- which is not easy to use well -- there is
tons of complexity.

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

JJZolx
2008-11-14, 03:00
Ease of use has nothing to do with the complexity of the underlying technology.

You might be surprised. I've seen many bog-simple requests, from a user viewpoint, that have been put off or dismissed due to the complexity or the poor design of the underlying framework. That's hardly unique to this project, but it points up the fact that a complex system often makes simple modifications very difficult.

funkstar
2008-11-14, 03:09
You might be surprised. I've seen many bog-simple requests, from a user viewpoint, that have been put off or dismissed due to the complexity or the poor design of the underlying framework. That's hardly unique to this project, but it points up the fact that a complex system often makes simple modifications very difficult.
Just to counter this a little, there are some modifications that appear to be simple on the surface to users, but really aren't in reality. Regardless of the underlying framework.

Don't get me wrong Jim, I'm not arguing, just puting another point in :)

peter
2008-11-14, 05:59
JJZolx wrote:
> peter;359816 Wrote:
>
>> Ease of use has nothing to do with the complexity of the underlying
>> technology.
>>
>
> You might be surprised. I've seen many bog-simple requests, from a
> user viewpoint, that have been put off or dismissed due to the
> complexity or the poor design of the underlying framework. That's
> hardly unique to this project, but it points up the fact that a complex
> system often makes simple modifications very difficult.
>

That's ease of change.
Not ease of use.

It's also not necessarily true, but usually a sign of bad design decisions.

The SC plugin interface is a good example of a bad design. The API
constantly changes and plugins fail regularly after a minor SC update.
Very annoying. API's should be stable.

Regards,
Peter

TiredLegs
2008-11-14, 06:36
Ease of use has nothing to do with the complexity of the underlying technology.
Perhaps, but the complex system has many more potential glitches in its operation. And when one of those glitches kicks in with a complex system, the user might not have any clue about why something isn't working.

Is anyone claiming that the Controller is a more reliable way to issue a command than the IR remote?

autopilot
2008-11-14, 09:17
It's been around while too. With price/stock issues, no new forum like the Duet got and talk of the SB3 hitting limits in what can be done with its firmware make me think the end could be near.

What i hope is they bring an enhanced version out, with the same great design and screen.

Pale Blue Ego
2008-11-14, 09:36
What i hope is they bring an enhanced version out, with the same great design and screen.

SB4 could use the same form factor and display, but upgrade the CPU, memory, and DAC. 24/96!

gharris999
2008-11-14, 09:40
...and a rtc, like the boom and receiver have.

mdconnelly
2008-11-14, 09:44
Is anyone claiming that the Controller is a more reliable way to issue a command than the IR remote?

More reliable? No (unless you count sitting in the listening seat 12' away from the SB3 trying to change the music ;-). The Controller simply offers a far better way of controlling the music from wherever you are. Before I got the controller, I would accomplish the same thing via my laptop computer and SqueezeCenter.

With the winter months ahead, I will admit that the Controller does not keep me nearly as warm as my laptop does, but the Controller still wins on convenience.

epoch1970
2008-11-14, 10:07
...and a rtc, like the boom and receiver have.

I'll second that

Nonreality
2008-11-14, 10:17
SB4 could use the same form factor and display, but upgrade the CPU, memory, and DAC. 24/96!
Yes that would be nice. I really hope they keep the same form factor and display. I have no problem with it. I don't mind the web interface but it's too slow when I just want to pop something on and know what I want with no need to browse.

slimkid
2008-11-14, 10:46
...
With the winter months ahead, I will admit that the Controller does not keep me nearly as warm as my laptop does, but the Controller still wins on convenience.

I was going to ask that. Can one cozy up with the controller as it's possible to do with the lap top )

K

funkstar
2008-11-14, 10:56
SB4 could use the same form factor and display, but upgrade the CPU, memory, and DAC. 24/96!
I really hope this would be the case. Development could be fairly quick for this as well as it is a spec bump as opposed to a new product.

The SB3 is a testament to well designed hardware. Three and a half years so far with a redesign and then a few tweeks to the case is pretty exceptional for consumer electronics these days.

autopilot
2008-11-14, 11:57
But would it be an SB4, or Classic 2? :P

funkstar
2008-11-14, 12:37
But would it be an SB4, or Classic 2? :P
Marketing would probably go for Classic 2, but it will be SB4 on here :)

pablolie
2008-11-16, 00:15
SB4 could use the same form factor and display, but upgrade the CPU, memory, and DAC. 24/96!

Big screen, touch display with album art... a very basic packaged-in remote, and the optional high end very graphical Logitech universal remote. Given the Logitech product line, the more ambitious presentation layer should reside on the universal remote. To me, the GUI-for-Duet-only is too limited a scope and is not the future. Just my 2c.

autopilot
2008-11-16, 05:04
Big screen, touch display with album art... a very basic packaged-in remote, and the optional high end very graphical Logitech universal remote. Given the Logitech product line, the more ambitious presentation layer should reside on the universal remote. To me, the GUI-for-Duet-only is too limited a scope and is not the future. Just my 2c.

No thanks! I dont want to have to keep getting up and going over to the player to interact with, not least because its behind a childproof glass door. And also small lcd screens are only good for having in your hand, not good for reading across a room at.

peter
2008-11-16, 09:09
autopilot wrote:
> pablolie;360408 Wrote:
>
>> Big screen, touch display with album art... a very basic packaged-in
>> remote, and the optional high end very graphical Logitech universal
>> remote. Given the Logitech product line, the more ambitious
>> presentation layer should reside on the universal remote. To me, the
>> GUI-for-Duet-only is too limited a scope and is not the future. Just my
>> 2c.
>>
>
> No thanks! I dont want to have to keep getting up and going over to the
> player to interact with, not least because its behind a childproof glass
> door. And also small lcd screens are only good for having in your hand,
> not good for reading across a room at.
>

1. What part of 'big screen' didn't you understand?
2. Choice is good.

Regards,
Peter

pablolie
2008-11-16, 09:23
No thanks! I dont want to have to keep getting up and going over to the player to interact with, not least because its behind a childproof glass door. And also small lcd screens are only good for having in your hand, not good for reading across a room at.

Thus, big display. :-) And I am all for a remote - a truly capable one that makes easier libraries more accessible. The SBC in my opinion is ok, but not great, when it comes to that. Logitech has some great remotes, like the Harmony 1000
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/remotes/universal_remotes/devices/373&cl=us,en
To me, that offers the ideal interface: larger screen, touch sensitive... I can scroll or use a letter to get to an album...

Themis
2008-11-16, 09:28
Thus, big display. :-) And I am all for a remote - a truly capable one that makes easier libraries more accessible. The SBC in my opinion is ok, but not great, when it comes to that. Logitech has some great remotes, like the Harmony 1000
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/remotes/universal_remotes/devices/373&cl=us,en
To me, that offers the ideal interface: larger screen, touch sensitive... I can scroll or use a letter to get to an album...
That would be nice if we could have a full interface through a Harmony-1000 :)
Please someone do it...

autopilot
2008-11-16, 09:47
autopilot wrote:
> pablolie;360408 Wrote:
>
>> Big screen, touch display with album art... a very basic packaged-in
>> remote, and the optional high end very graphical Logitech universal
>> remote. Given the Logitech product line, the more ambitious
>> presentation layer should reside on the universal remote. To me, the
>> GUI-for-Duet-only is too limited a scope and is not the future. Just my
>> 2c.
>>
>
> No thanks! I dont want to have to keep getting up and going over to the
> player to interact with, not least because its behind a childproof glass
> door. And also small lcd screens are only good for having in your hand,
> not good for reading across a room at.
>

1. What part of 'big screen' didn't you understand?
2. Choice is good.

Regards,
Peter

How arrogant?

My main point is that i dont want to get up and control it, i want to do everything from my chair (or even an other room) thanks. Choice is great, but it would add extra cost and be redundant most of the time for most people. And just how big do you want this device to be? What size screen would as readable from 15 feet etc.

i would quite like a 7" screen as a now playing display in my main room, but it would be better to use a wifi picture frame, maybe on a book shelf (because a screen with a decent screen would not fit well in most peoples home cinema/hifi stack.

pablolie
2008-11-16, 10:58
How arrogant?
... decent screen would not fit well in most peoples home cinema/hifi stack.

That is why choice is essential. Some people have combined systems for cinema and hifi, some prefer a strictly separate system - and I belong to the latter. Sure, the cinema system should be able t play music and be synched to the music system whenever I need it. But the music system is just for music for me. That way someone else can watch TV while I immerse myself in music.

I think we are both right - you do need the near invisible SBR-slike device, and then there is also a genuin need for a next gen SB3, which is what this topic was about. And of course the while area of remotes, where I would contend that something like the Harmony 1000 begs to replace the SBC: it is more flexible, it has a bigger, nicer touch display... it does everything the SBC wants to do, only better and for more devices. For about the same price if one checks the market, too...

pablolie
2008-11-16, 11:25
That would be nice if we could have a full interface through a Harmony-1000 :)
Please someone do it...

I meant that the Harmony provides some of the clues to the future, rather than it having the capability to already act as a SBC. To my knowledge, the Harmony 1000 is not WiFi enabled, nor does it have the capability to receive information at the required high rate - it is good at unidirectional control towards the device. The SBC UI requires it to be bidirectional.

But something like the Harmony, or an iPhone like device (as many ask for) would be a great thing in the future.

autopilot
2008-11-16, 11:25
That is why choice is essential. Some people have combined systems for cinema and hifi, some prefer a strictly separate system - and I belong to the latter. Sure, the cinema system should be able t play music and be synched to the music system whenever I need it. But the music system is just for music for me. That way someone else can watch TV while I immerse myself in music.



eh? I dont think you understood what i said. I meant the size and form factor - i to prefer to keep my audio and video systems separate. But For me it has to fit well with my amp etc. Many people has asked for a device like the transporter with standard hifi dimensions, i dont mind the shape of the sb3 because its not too big. But to incorporate a large enough screen to be readable across a good size room would have to be quite big. Not like the VDF of the sb3 is. I really love the SB3's VFD, i would love to see the SB4 have one.

Im all up for a larger touch screen remote, yeah, i would not personally buy one though. Once it gets to a certain size i think i might as well buy a web tablet.

Btw, when did i say choice is bad? I said no thanks. You said what you would like, am i not allowed to do the same?

pablolie
2008-11-16, 19:08
eh? I dont think you understood what i said. I meant the size and form factor - i to prefer to keep my audio and video systems separate. But For me it has to fit well with my amp etc. Many people has asked for a device like the transporter with standard hifi dimensions, i dont mind the shape of the sb3 because its not too big. But to incorporate a large enough screen to be readable across a good size room would have to be quite big. Not like the VDF of the sb3 is. I really love the SB3's VFD, i would love to see the SB4 have one.

Im all up for a larger touch screen remote, yeah, i would not personally buy one though. Once it gets to a certain size i think i might as well buy a web tablet.

Btw, when did i say choice is bad? I said no thanks. You said what you would like, am i not allowed to do the same?

I can't recall being confrontational in tone at all. To sum it up: I never claimed you said you were against choice, nor did I ever say or imply you didn't have just as much of a right to post or express your opinion just as much as I do. I had basically agreed with a lot of the things you said. But you obviously have to turn it into an immature "since we are not saying the same I am being attacked" kind of argument. My last reply to this topic.

Nonreality
2008-11-17, 00:13
I can't recall being confrontational in tone at all. To sum it up: I never claimed you said you were against choice, nor did I ever say or imply you didn't have just as much of a right to post or express your opinion just as much as I do. I had basically agreed with a lot of the things you said. But you obviously have to turn it into an immature "since we are not saying the same I am being attacked" kind of argument. My last reply to this topic.

I really didn't see anything confrontational from either one of you? Maybe more of misunderstanding than anything else. No need not to comment anymore.

autopilot
2008-11-17, 03:55
Sorry pablolie, my bad if felt that way, i was actually responding to peter's "1. What part of 'big screen' didn't you understand?" which is incredibly rude and ruined the tone for me. No confrontation intended.

You completely misunderstood what i said though :)

I will break it down; You said you would like to see an LCD screen on the hypothetical SB4. Cool, i can kinda see the appeal for some. but you would need to be able to read it from a distance. So it would need to be, IMO at least a 7" screen. That would make the overall device fairly big compared to the SB3. I think that could limit its appeal and i personally think it would actually limit choice. It would certainly limit where it could be situated in your house/room (which is what i meant by hifi stack). What would provide real choice, IMO, would be a separate optional add-on screen.

I really really like the VFD - one of the reasons i first chose an SB3 as my first streamer. Apart from the fact it's very readable from a distance for such a small screen, i think it's really classy and cool. I'm surrounded by LCD's all day (mobile, tv, PC, etc) it's nice to have something very different to feast my eyes on. I really hope they stick with it like they did with the Boom.

jclyle
2008-11-17, 10:31
http://www.slimdevices.com/welcome_bs.html

Black SB3's are on sale for $250 shipped....

autopilot
2008-11-17, 10:45
http://www.slimdevices.com/welcome_bs.html


Black SB3's are on sale for $250 shipped....

er...what?

peter
2008-11-17, 10:56
autopilot wrote:
> Sorry pablolie, my bad, i was actually responding to peter's -"1. What
> part of 'big screen' didn't you understand?"- which is incredibly rude
> and ruined the tone of the thread.
>

So I'm the bad guy, ey?

Let's put this into context:

Pablolie: "Big screen, touch display with album art..."
Autopilot's reaction: "And also small lcd screens are only good for
having in your hand,
not good for reading across a room at."

A pretty strange reaction, indeed.

And then you take it out on poor pablolie?

Regards,
Peter

Pale Blue Ego
2008-11-17, 12:13
If you're going to have a "big screen" display for the SB4, then it might as well be a video streamer as well. That would seem to be a different product than a future SB3 (SB4).

If we're keeping the discussion strictly to improvements to the SB3 music streamer, maybe ideas involving video outputs and touch screens should migrate to a new thread about a video Squeezebox.

To get back to the potential SB3 replacement, I would favor either an incremental improvement of the existing form factor, or a full-width component with a wider VFD. In either case (pun intended) I would want a horsepower boost in terms of CPU, on board memory, buffer, and DAC sound quality.

autopilot
2008-11-17, 12:55
autopilot wrote:
> Sorry pablolie, my bad, i was actually responding to peter's -"1. What
> part of 'big screen' didn't you understand?"- which is incredibly rude
> and ruined the tone of the thread.
>

So I'm the bad guy, ey?

Let's put this into context:

Pablolie: "Big screen, touch display with album art..."
Autopilot's reaction: "And also small lcd screens are only good for
having in your hand,
not good for reading across a room at."

A pretty strange reaction, indeed.

And then you take it out on poor pablolie?

Regards,
Peter

I think if you actually bothered to properly read you would realise that you have just actually just taken me completely out of context, although i admit i did not explai myself well and elaborated further later. Even a 4" screen, twice the size of SBc would be 'small'. How big is big then in the context of this device? Do you want a 15" monitor bolted onto it? And even if i had meant exactly that, it did not justify "1. What part of 'big screen' didn't you understand?". Insinuating in a highly sarcastic and patronising way that someone is stupid - that was a pretty strange reaction from you, but judging from of threads, not uncommon.

autopilot
2008-11-17, 13:10
If you're going to have a "big screen" display for the SB4, then it might as well be a video streamer as well. That would seem to be a different product than a future SB3 (SB4).

If we're keeping the discussion strictly to improvements to the SB3 music streamer, maybe ideas involving video outputs and touch screens should migrate to a new thread about a video Squeezebox.

To get back to the potential SB3 replacement, I would favor either an incremental improvement of the existing form factor, or a full-width component with a wider VFD. In either case (pun intended) I would want a horsepower boost in terms of CPU, on board memory, buffer, and DAC sound quality.

Yeah, thats pretty much it for me too, but i would also like to see a connection for optional external wifi aerials for extended wireless reach in future models too.

peter
2008-11-18, 01:31
autopilot wrote:
> peter;360819 Wrote:
>
>> autopilot wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry pablolie, my bad, i was actually responding to peter's -"1.
>>>
>> What
>>
>>> part of 'big screen' didn't you understand?"- which is incredibly
>>>
>> rude
>>
>>> and ruined the tone of the thread.
>>>
>>>
>> So I'm the bad guy, ey?
>>
>> Let's put this into context:
>>
>> Pablolie: "Big screen, touch display with album art..."
>> Autopilot's reaction: "And also small lcd screens are only good for
>> having in your hand,
>> not good for reading across a room at."
>>
>> A pretty strange reaction, indeed.
>>
>> And then you take it out on poor pablolie?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Peter
>>
>
> I think if you actually bothered to properly read you would realise
> that you have just actually just taken me completely out of context.
> Even a 4" screen, twice the size of SBc would be 'small'. How big is
> big then in the context of this device? Do you want a 15" monitor
> bolted onto it?
>

Why bolted on? An SB4 in a 10" screen form factor could do very well.

> And even if i had meant exactly that, it did not justify "1. What part
> of 'big screen' didn't you understand?". That was a pretty strange
> reaction from you, but judging from of threads, not uncommon.

Yeah, it's a drag when people use a forum in ways you don't like. Tell
me about it.

Regards,
Peter.

simbo
2008-11-18, 01:47
To get back to the potential SB3 replacement, I would favor either an incremental improvement of the existing form factor, or a full-width component with a wider VFD. In either case (pun intended) I would want a horsepower boost in terms of CPU, on board memory, buffer, and DAC sound quality.
I would also like to see the programmable DSP from the Boom in the SB4, for those who would like EQ etc - but with a "source direct" option for those who don't. Also the RTC as previously mentioned.