PDA

View Full Version : SqueezePlay Graphical interface



rksingla
2008-12-21, 12:30
I read in the 7.3 roadmap that SqueezePlay was being developing into a full screen graphical interface to SC. I have been looking forward to that (and hoped it would give my wife a more attractive way to control our system). But when I downloaded SqueezePlay from the 7.3.1 nightlies onto our Mac, the only intereface I saw emulated the Squeeze Controller.

Did I misunderstand the goal for SqueezePlay? Is it still in the works? Have I just not figure out how to make the graphical interface work?

MeSue
2008-12-21, 12:53
There is a desktop skin that makes everything bigger and can be maximized to your screen, but other than that it is still pretty much like the Controller last time I looked. I believe much of it is still in the works.

peter
2008-12-22, 06:29
rksingla wrote:
> I read in the 7.3 roadmap that SqueezePlay was being developing into a
> full screen graphical interface to SC. I have been looking forward to
> that (and hoped it would give my wife a more attractive way to control
> our system). But when I downloaded SqueezePlay from the 7.3.1
> nightlies onto our Mac, the only intereface I saw emulated the Squeeze
> Controller.
>
> Did I misunderstand the goal for SqueezePlay? Is it still in the
> works? Have I just not figure out how to make the graphical interface
> work?

It's an interface and it's graphical isn't it?

Regards,
Peter

PS: I'm not too enthusiastic about it either.

kesey
2008-12-22, 07:22
It's an interface and it's graphical isn't it?

Regards,
Peter

PS: I'm not too enthusiastic about it either.

From an attractiveness point of view, I think the Softsqueeze interface is much more pleasant and interesting looking than the Squeezeplay interface. It is certainly nice to see the artwork of an album, but that can be seen in Squeezecenter.

I wonder what is the point of Squeezeplay. Softsqueeze has the benefit of mirroring the Transporter/Squeezebox look and feel and can therefore be used as an excellent means of introducing newcomers to both. I can not see how Squeezeplay as it stands today could be used to attract any new user to the Squeezecenter marketplace. The fact that I have not managed to get Squeezeplay to play any one album in its entirety does not help.

I have both the Squeezebox 3 and the Duet, and enjoy listening to music with the use of each. The controller is handy in that it allows use of any Squeezebox/Receiver/Transporter in the network, but I prefer the way the Squeezebox 3 system works. Being able to pick the first letter of an album or artist, as in the Squeezebox 3 remote, is tidier and faster than the somewhat stuttering spinning wheel of the Controller.


Can someone please enlighten me as to where I've failed to appreciate the benefits of Squeezeplay over Softsqueeze?

A very Happy Christmas to all,

kesey

bonze
2008-12-22, 07:36
Depends who the customer is.
If it's a Duet customer then SqueezePlay is more relevant as it mimics the Controller.
If it's a Boom/Classic customer then maybe SoftSqueeze as that would look like the interface they are used to.

One thing top remember is that SoftSqueeze is no longer developed (AFAIK) whereas SqueezePlay is maintained alongside the Controller.

Maybe RetroBrowser could be built into SqueezePlay and somehow set to default??

Mnyb
2008-12-22, 07:55
Hopefully they develop it from here, it is basically the same lua app that is running on the controller ? probably with a bunch of relevant changes to make work on a desktop.

The Desktop skin an full screen skin is a beginning thats probably as far as you get for "free" from the controller development ?

It shall be very interesting to see if the desktop skin gets anywhere ? probably all the way to a standalone app of the kind many have wished for.

As it stand now I use it as info on whats going on my other players, and as a remote for them you can use it as a controller for the other players, with the exception that SN is not working yet.

I also listen right here on the PC no problems with that.
But the SqueezePlay has far more potential than being an extra controller on your desktop

tcutting
2008-12-22, 10:24
I'm not overly enthusiastic about the GUI portion of SqueezePlay either. What I am hoping for, however, is it to be a better PC player. I currently use Squeezeslave on my pc, but it has some limitations that I believe the Squeezeplay player is addressing. I use either Moose (since I'm on windows pc) or the Squeezecenter web UI. My hope is that there will be a GUI-less version of the Squeezeplay player which could be run as a background player (as I currently use Squeezeslave now).

bonze
2008-12-22, 11:33
I think the word "free" is quite important.

They (Logitech) are providing an extra way of enjoying your Duet/SB/Boom experience with an app that sits discreetly in the corner of your screen and is easy to use as the Controller.

If you don't want to see the small box then minimise it.

If you need something better then by all means fire up your browser and go into the SC7 interface, or Moose, or Slimfx.

I really don't understand what the problem is.

peter
2008-12-22, 11:37
bonze wrote:
> I think the word "free" is quite important.

So, your point seems to be "If it's free, you can't criticize it".
Thankfully, not many people feel that way or the Open Source community
would be in a very sad state indeed.

X.

bonze
2008-12-22, 12:55
bonze wrote:
> I think the word "free" is quite important.

So, your point seems to be "If it's free, you can't criticize it".
Thankfully, not many people feel that way or the Open Source community
would be in a very sad state indeed.

X.err. No - Please don't try and put words in my mouth
I'm not criticising the application and/or the Open Source community

Back on topic:
My point is that it's being provided for "free" as a bi-product of other work they are doing.
I'd rather they spent time concentrating on SqueezeCenter and the Controller than prettifying a desktop music player.

kesey
2008-12-22, 17:05
I think the word "free" is quite important.

They (Logitech) are providing an extra way of enjoying your Duet/SB/Boom experience with an app that sits discreetly in the corner of your screen and is easy to use as the Controller.

If you don't want to see the small box then minimise it.

If you need something better then by all means fire up your browser and go into the SC7 interface, or Moose, or Slimfx.

I really don't understand what the problem is.

bonze, your point is perfectly fair. The problem is that, for me and apparently for some others on the forum who have mentioned it (bug submitted), Squeezeplay does not work. It will only play max 7 tracks (generally 5) of an album before ceasing to give out audio. The final track then just keeps running, silently.

With regard to your statement that "I'd rather they spent time concentrating on SqueezeCenter and the Controller than prettifying a desktop music player", I would point out that some of us like to listen to music while we use our computers. If we don't have a Slim (Logitech) product to allow us to do that, then we are forced to use some other product. Slim (Logitech)would lose a marketing tool via such an exercise i.e.they would lose a major branding strategy. Punters would lose the opportunity to strengthen their affiliation with Slim (Logitech)by using a product (virtual) they have come to like.

radish
2008-12-22, 18:36
Actually, I think the really important word to remember for SqueezePlay is "Beta". It's not done yet folks - particularly playback functionality!

http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Release_Notes

bonze
2008-12-23, 04:11
With regard to your statement that "I'd rather they spent time concentrating on SqueezeCenter and the Controller than prettifying a desktop music player", I would point out that some of us like to listen to music while we use our computers. If we don't have a Slim (Logitech) product to allow us to do that, then we are forced to use some other product. Slim (Logitech)would lose a marketing tool via such an exercise i.e.they would lose a major branding strategy. Punters would lose the opportunity to strengthen their affiliation with Slim (Logitech)by using a product (virtual) they have come to like.I agree with you there.
There should be something for the desktop and it's best if supplied by Logitech.
I also like to listen to music while sat at my computer, usually 4 or 5 hours a day. I used SoftSqueeze for ages and have now moved on to SqueezePlay.

As for bugs, I have also had occasion when SP just 'stops' - usually when playing radio streams (but not local playlists). But some radio stations can be a bit 'flaky' and I haven't searched through the logs.

But, all this aside, the least 'important' thing is how it looks.
All the niceties can be added in once it's stable and fully functioning.

I still can't see why it should matter at this point??

RalphO
2008-12-23, 17:53
I have an issue with Squeezeplay. I am wondering if anyone else has the same issue. Going into my Music Library I find that Artists are in alphabetial order. But the Album view is not, in fact it seems to in alphabetical order of the artists.

Please advise if I am doing something wrong.

Siduhe
2008-12-23, 17:59
Have a look at Settings/Advanced/Album Sort Order - sounds like you may have it set to Artists/Album, whereas I think you want Album alone from the sounds of your post.

RalphO
2008-12-23, 18:12
Have a look at Settings/Advanced/Album Sort Order - sounds like you may have it set to Artists/Album, whereas I think you want Album alone from the sounds of your post.

Siduhe

Thanks for that. You were spot on. I had not found that part of Squeezeplay before. I guess I had better have a deeper look at it.

Thanks again

pablolie
2008-12-23, 20:46
Depends who the customer is.
If it's a Duet customer then SqueezePlay is more relevant as it mimics the Controller.
If it's a Boom/Classic customer then maybe SoftSqueeze as that would look like the interface they are used to.

One thing top remember is that SoftSqueeze is no longer developed (AFAIK) whereas SqueezePlay is maintained alongside the Controller.

Maybe RetroBrowser could be built into SqueezePlay and somehow set to default??

Many Logitech customers have Duets, SB3s and Booms. I am one of them. And I have always regarded the SoftSqueeze and now Squeezeplay feature as a very valuable differentiator. To me it would not make sense to have server software controlling the music, but being unable to reproduce it on the computer - that looks like incomplete functionality, because computers are multimedia capable devices, and thus should be regarded as part of the solution. Especially since Logitech wants to also sell us some very good computer speakers (and they have great ones inhouse, maybe they should package SS/SP with them. :-)

rksingla
2008-12-25, 19:28
What I am looking for is a graphical front end that my wife can use on the macintosh that is easy to use and can control all of our 5 squeeze systems. I bought my first squeeze system in October and have been really impressed and have put systems all over our house. The only problem is that my wife finds the SqueezeController interface hard to figure out. She is used to iTunes. The current SP interface is obviously not really much better than the SqueezeController interface. We are running SC on relatively slow ReadyNAS Duo server, which is fine for streaming music, but the web interface is slow and frustrates her.

I looked at Moose -- and that seemed pretty cloose to what i was looking for except that it was designed for Windows.

Anyone have any ideas or suggestions?

Thanks much in advance.

hazymat
2008-12-27, 09:59
Personally I think SqueezePlay (Beta) is great.

Yes it's a very simple graphical interface, as opposed to to a Windows style application for example, but it does the job for me because I am sick of using SoftSqueeze.

For me SoftSqueeze is clunky and bug-ridden.

I agree, something more akin to an actual application that uses operating system standards for windows, toolbars, etc. would be welcome - but I am a happy chap for now.

pichonCalavera
2008-12-27, 13:16
I think the interface would be great putting it in a touchscreen monitor display, since it keeps things simple.

Altough the perfect thing for a desktop for me would be something like the Songbird interface but for controlling Squeezecenter.

Mnyb
2008-12-27, 14:05
Well the whole thing is also a hint to community developers learn lua, make a nice skin to SP (nudge nudge ) .
Somebody out there must be tempted.

Otherwise what is, is good and fast.

Besides that it is beta in my case this beats softsqueeze by a mile (java yuck !) I'm actually using this app. I started softsqueeze a couple of times as a novelty but soon lost interest.

Btw listening to 24/96 files SC7.3.2 transcodes them to 48kHz before feeding SP
Wonder if it is one size fits all solution, in this case i think the PC running SP should do that if needed ? or is it so that it is the same code as SP on controller , that would explain it.

tcutting
2008-12-27, 16:36
Okay, this is a bit of a cross-post, but...
You indicate conversion of 96k to 48k files to SP. Do the files play for you correctly at 48k on Squeezeplay? I ripped some audio from concert DVDs, and am ending up with FLACs at 48k. They don't seem to play correctly on squeezeplay (they seem to be 48k files playing back at 44.1k, so they are a little slow and low). I am curious if anyone is having success with 48k files on SP?

Mnyb
2008-12-27, 22:22
Okay, this is a bit of a cross-post, but...
You indicate conversion of 96k to 48k files to SP. Do the files play for you correctly at 48k on Squeezeplay? I ripped some audio from concert DVDs, and am ending up with FLACs at 48k. They don't seem to play correctly on squeezeplay (they seem to be 48k files playing back at 44.1k, so they are a little slow and low). I am curious if anyone is having success with 48k files on SP?

Hmm I did not listen critically in any way (pc speakers), or having pitch correct hearing ? cross post from where ,aha found it.
I'll see... answer in the other tread.