PDA

View Full Version : Popcorn hour C-200



Gibbo
2009-08-03, 07:54
Hello one and all,

I'm intrigued, what are the chances of SC being able to run on the C-200 (http://www.popcornhour.com/onlinestore/index.php?pluginoption=productspec&item_id=12)? It'd make my year if it were possible.

st2000
2009-08-03, 08:13
It has been talked about before here:
> http://www.networkedmediatank.com/showthread.php?tid=7180

Nut shell: I believe you would first need to port mySQL, PERL and what
ever else was necessary to run SqueezeCenter to the PopcornHour (aka
MediaTank) platform (which uses a SigmaDesign chip/processor). Recall,
SqueezeCenter is written in PERL and is highly dependent on software
packages that are just as or much more complex than its self. It's not
impossible - I just don't know if anyone has done it yet (last I checked
months ago it had not been done).

Of course, unless PopcornHour boxes are sold differently now, you would
also have to add a mass storage device like a hard drive to store all
this software and your media files.

Gibbo wrote:
> Hello one and all,
>
> I'm intrigued, what are the chances of SC being able to run on the
> 'C-200'
> (http://www.popcornhour.com/onlinestore/index.php?pluginoption=productspec&item_id=12)?
> It'd make my year if it were possible.
>
>

arztde
2009-08-03, 08:19
Hello one and all,

I'm intrigued, what are the chances of SC being able to run on the C-200 (http://www.popcornhour.com/onlinestore/index.php?pluginoption=productspec&item_id=12)? It'd make my year if it were possible.

To get SC running on a C200 will be possible. Just from hardware aspect. I did follow this idea some time but if you include it all in all its a very expensive solution. Additional Sigma the producer of the chip have problems with GPL licensed stuff. I saw it with the MPD. Someone who have the libaries of the Sigma chip, did compile MPD but didn't give back the tools to compile it again and make changes. So in fact, after it was shure that it was a GPL violation Moderators still support in their forums to find the Violation file. I think its better not to start at this point.
Anyways to compile player or or to write a application is not the best with this background.
Additional if you see it all in all its a very expensive solution for a chip with arround 600 MHZ. In Germany including harddisc you are very fast more than 500.- Euro.

I have a A110 and the Audio still sucks. I am not the only one who did bought 2 SB Classic and a Duet for this reason.

Gibbo
2009-08-03, 09:06
Thanks for the responses.

ST2000, I already own an A-110 and am well aware of it's lack of capability in this matter. that thread is in reference to the A series, a totally different kettle of fish to the C-200, the model I posted a link to. It seems to be powerful enough to do the job, and may have the ability to do it.

You wouldn't need a battery of external drives to do the job, you can install 2 2.5'' drives and 1 3.5'' drive, but I do also have a 3TB soon to be 4.5TB DAS which the C-200 would have access to.

Just think, rather than buying a 300+ NAS, you could buy a 240 media and blu ray player, and you could have the best of all worlds...

I'm not thinking about using the C-200 to play music, but as a server for my 2 SB's

arztde
2009-08-03, 09:35
Thanks for the responses.

ST2000, I already own an A-110 and am well aware of it's lack of capability in this matter.

You wouldn't need a battery of external drives to do the job, you can install 2 2.5'' drives and 1 3.5'' drive, but I do also have a 3TB soon to be 4.5TB DAS which the C-200 would have access to.

Just think, rather than buying a 300+ NAS, you could buy a 240 media and blu ray player, and you could have the best of all worlds...

I'm not thinking about using the C-200 to play music, but as a server for my 2 SB's

As its so think that SC needs a lot of power of the main processor. Maybee its better to wait for the next generation of Multimediaplayers, when they have arround 1.2 - 1.6 GHZ. You can read in different threads when People change SC from their NAS to a mini PC like EEE-BOX. Its not noisy, take only arround 8.- Euro/Year of Energy if its runs 7/24. I did placed mine in the kitchen and have an additional Squeezeplayer.
In fact with a little monitor and cheap boxes like xtreamer you have realy a multimedia solution, what fits your needs. 500 GB harddisk in each and integrate in the network let you things like a NAS forget.
In the main room than a solution like transporter and you are in a high definition quality and do not need to make a lots of compromise with quality and navigation of a A110 or a C200. For me i did decide no more to make any compromise just to have all in all in one solution. Special for BluRay you need regular updates. And in fact there is only a licence for 1.5 years include. I do not beleave in their Announcement to make updates for 5 years. I saw what are the promisses are worth to make a reasonable Audioplayer. Why to put energy in such a machine with this livetime? See the livetime of a Squeezebox 2/3 or a transporter.

dc11ab
2009-08-03, 10:40
Well, since you haven't tried the C-200 I find it intriguing you already deem it not good enough platform to use the SC on. I've got SqueezeCenter running on my old NAS with less resources available (apart from storage) than the C-200. It's not good performance at all, but it runs. We might look into using the old 6.5.4 with sqlite or so too, anything to get the extra performance - if needed - to make it run.

And what does GPL violations and mpd got to do with anything concerning running SqueezeCenter on on the NMT platform? That's totally mixing apples with pears. SC will not interact with any closed/secret/proprietary library on the NMT as we are talking about serving Squeezebox clients, not NMT's, for audio out. Just like running SC in Windows.

And there's no compromise in audio quality whatsoever. The only thing I can think of is the usability with slow navigation of big media libraries.

You are entitled to your opinion about NMT's, but it will not change the minds of those who will have a C-200 and is looking for a way to serve their Squeezeboxes/Transporters/Duets/whatevers from it - as the original post is about.

arztde
2009-08-03, 13:00
Well, since you haven't tried the C-200...

I did try. But i wouldn't like to tell here the circumstance. It was an early firmware on it and not a final release. So i can say only final release should be better.


It's not good performance at all, but it runs. We might look into using the old 6.5.4 with sqlite or so too, anything to get the extra performance - if needed - to make it run.

I did say exact this in my first posting here in this thread.... from technical point...


And what does GPL violations and mpd got to do with anything concerning running SqueezeCenter on on the NMT platform? That's totally mixing apples with pears.

I agree. Because i know also PCH Mods read inside here :-) was just a sidekick to the things what make sence.
To buy a new C200 machine and let SC run to keep it run. Expensive Solution. If you have a C200 and no other possibilities for SC ok, do it.
What can make sense is a player for the SC. But here it can not be Open Source, because of Sigmas restrictions.


And there's no compromise in audio quality whatsoever. The only thing I can think of is the usability with slow navigation of big media libraries.
Sigma Chips are known for not the best Audio Quality. Analog audio output of the A110 is well known. Digital output goes direct through the Sigma chip. I prefer SB3 and Duet Sound Quality


You are entitled to your opinion about NMT's, but it will not change the minds of those who will have a C-200 and is looking for a way to serve their Squeezeboxes/Transporters/Duets/whatevers from it - as the original post is about.

I beleave your promisses it will be made possible... Somehow. When C200 is available i am awaiting your instalation instruction... If it comes.

Ok i must tell others that i personally was never so dissapointet with a product like the A110. I do not own a TV and did bought it because i did beleave of the promises it can play audio via network. But i did beleave in their promisses to make a reasonable audio possible. So i mix to much negative emotions inside this.
The best i was done after this i bought a Squeezebox and here i have to say thanks to the PCH forums to make me attention to it.

dc11ab
2009-08-03, 13:56
While I compliment your honesty, you still seem to mix some things up.

The OP/first post is not asking to use the NMT as a player, like you seem to imply. The OP is asking for the possibility of running a SqueezeCenter installed on a C-200. That has nothing to do with the closed source Sigma libraries, just as there is Realtek libraries on the Xtreamer, or Microsoft kernel on Windows, AIX libs/drivers on some IBM servers etc. The Sigma libs and the issue with mpd is totally unrelated to this thread and I have no idea why you are still there.

In the scenario Gibbo (and I) is arguing for, there will be no audio quality issues at all since the decoding is done on the Squeezebox itself. Our ambition is to get SqueezeCenter running on the C-200 to serve Squeezebox(es), not for playback on the NMT itself.
If it's possible, we really want to try even though there are far better solutions. But we are not discussing the best and most optimal solution: this thread is about the feasibility of running SC on a C-200.

Like Gibbo, I already own a Squeezebox. Happy user since several years enjoying music and radio streams playback. The current generation of NMT's are really far behind in comparison, allthough the "Music Jukebox" and the SqueezeNMT project has some minor potential.

I also use my Squeezebox as a wireless bridge for my NMT, apart from when I need to use CAT6 for really high bitrate movies. Judging from the NMT forum, there seems to be at least a couple of more Squeeezebox users in a similar situation.

Since the Squeezebox does not do video as the NMT does, these two products compliment my A/V environment very well. I will get the C-200 for BD-ROM playback apart from my SD DVD rips - and the better performance to go. Having the two products, I want to try to use them together as much as I can, without the need for extra equipment. I don't want an Asus EeePC or anything like it to run SC. THAT would be a waste in my scenario, but maybe not yours and others.

I have not made any sort of promise anywhere that it will work to setup the SC on the C-200. I have implied that it could work, but that will have to be tested once there is an actual C-200 available to try it on! I don't have one so obviously I'm not entitled to any promising. But I can speculate, given the released specifications.

Most people apart from reviewers at some magazines have no idea how poor or good playback performance is on the C-200 - this product is not yet even released to public and the people that do have seen it in live action should be under NDA. But again, we really don't care since it is the C-200 SqueezeCenter setup we are looking for, not any playback on this product.

If am able to do the setup successfully, once I get my hands on a C-200 and a working toolchain, I'll be very glad to post the instructions for you and anyone interesting to read it.

By now I hope I've made the objective of running SC on the C-200 understood? Sorry for the ranting if that was already clear.



(Small note for anyone who cares: I am NOT affiliated with Popcorn Hour or Syabas Inc, but I do own a Popcorn Hour A-100 -purchased with my own money- and I am an honorary moderator -not paid or endorsed- at the NetworkedMediaTank.com; an NMT owner's forum sponsored through hosting by Syabas Inc.)

shake-the-disease
2009-08-03, 15:54
As an interesting project? Yes it would be worth a shot. As a practical solution for everyday running of SC? I'd rather listen to death metal for 12 hours a day. The C200 is woefully underpowered to run SC.

peter
2009-08-04, 00:40
Gibbo wrote:
> I'm intrigued, what are the chances of SC being able to run on the
> 'C-200'
> (http://www.popcornhour.com/onlinestore/index.php?pluginoption=productspec&item_id=12)?
>

They have a new model, cool...

> It'd make my year if it were possible.
>

Naah, get squeezeplay to run on it.
That would be so much better!

X.

Gibbo
2009-08-04, 00:54
How would that be better? People have actually created squeezeplay style programs for the A series popcorns. It'd be nice I grant you that...

What we are looking for is full control that means the home PC doesn't need to be turned on to play music. I don't own a NAS and don't see the point in me buying one. I'm confused by people expense arguments here? The C-200 is $299, the QNAP 239 pro for example is over $520...

I understand that the C-200 may not be as powerful as a QNAP 239, but it also does a lot more so much so that I will probably be buying one anyway. This would just be a real big bonus, and essentially a free one.

The cost of a C-200 and a lot of HDD space would cost about the same as a bare QNAP with no drives, plus if it can do the same job as the NAS just with the added feature of being a fully functioning Blu ray player and media player that'll play anything you throw at it then the choice is a no brainer for me, not for everyone, but for me.

I'd never stump up the money for a NAS if I'm honest, I don't see the point, rather than spending $500 i'd rather just wait those 30seconds for my PC to boot up after a WoL, but if teh C-200 can do it, then wooo!

peter
2009-08-04, 01:59
Gibbo wrote:
> How would that be better? People have actually created squeezeplay style
> programs for the A series popcorns. It'd be nice I grant you that...
>
1. It would be better because that way I'd have one less device in my
living room. Since my house is equiped with a 24/7 server I have no use
for SC on an NMT. Where is that squeezeplay-style software on the NMT, I
don't believe there is any. Oh yes, you can show what you're playing on
the TV but I don't want that, I'd want the NMT to play the music
controlled with an SBC. When I play music the TV is off.

> What we are looking for is full control that means the home PC doesn't
> need to be turned on to play music. I don't own a NAS and don't see the
> point in me buying one. I'm confused by people expense arguments here?
> The C-200 is $299, the QNAP 239 pro for example is over $520...
>

Who needs a home PC when they have a home server?
> I understand that the C-200 may not be as powerful as a QNAP 239, but
> it also does a lot more so much so that I will probably be buying one
> anyway. This would just be a real big bonus, and essentially a free one.
>
I believe the problem is that the NMT people prefer to keep the system
closed.

> The cost of a C-200 and a lot of HDD space would cost about the same as
> a bare QNAP with no drives, plus if it can do the same job as the NAS
> just with the added feature of being a fully functioning Blu ray player
> and media player that'll play anything you throw at it then the choice
> is a no brainer for me, not for everyone, but for me.
>
> I'd never stump up the money for a NAS if I'm honest, I don't see the
> point, rather than spending $500 i'd rather just wait those 30seconds
> for my PC to boot up after a WoL, but if teh C-200 can do it, then wooo!
>

Life's to short for waiting ;)

Regards,
Peter

Gibbo
2009-08-04, 02:34
Obviously peter this solution isn't one for everyone.

But if I already own a home PC, 2 SB's and am going to buy a C-200 then this solution would be perfect for me.

I do see your point about squeezeplay, and that would be better for you, and if I had a low power server it would also be a good solution for me, but I don't and I don't want to shell out for one.

Any chance we can keep this on topic and maybe answer the question as to if it's possible rather than argue about what is best?

peter
2009-08-04, 03:01
Gibbo wrote:
> Obviously peter this solution isn't one for everyone.
>
> But if I already own a home PC, 2 SB's and am going to buy a C-200 then
> this solution would be perfect for me.
>
> I do see your point about squeezeplay, and that would be better for
> you, and if I had a low power server it would also be a good solution
> for me, but I don't and I don't want to shell out for one.
>
> Any chance we can keep this on topic and maybe answer the question as
> to if it's possible rather than argue about what is best?
>

I have no problems if you keep on your topic while I embark on mine ;)

If you suddenly want to become restrictive you might like to change the
topic title in something like:

Squeezecenter on the Popcorn hour C-200 (and not squeezeplay).

Just to avoid confusion ;)

You might be interested to know that Logitech staff have declared
everything on topic in this forum. Even politics ;)

Regards,
Peter

Gibbo
2009-08-04, 03:05
;) all very true, I just like to argue...

I don't want to become restrictive, i'd actually quite like an open discussion of all the possibilities of the C-200 combined with the SB, including squeezeplay, so long as people keep an eye on the ball from time to time. =)