PDA

View Full Version : to wait for the touch or install a plug



keif
2010-01-21, 10:25
I have a Radio and Receiver and have no local digital music storage, using only Internet radio and Napster.

I'm therefore using mysqueezebox and have not been impressed with the 'performance' over the last wee while.
In addition I'd like to improve my access to the BBC streams.

To this end I've decided that I'm going to have to run a local server - I'd been hoping not to have to do this.
I'm going to get a Touch, but the delay is starting to hurt.

When it does appear, will I be able to serve from it the better quality BBC data and listen again content to the Radio and Receiver?

If this is not the case, then think I'm just going to take the plunge and install a sheevaplug.

DaveWr
2010-01-21, 10:50
As I understand it the BBC iPlayer Plugin will not work in the Touch TinySC environment. Maybe Triode is working on an Applet version.

Also I would check with the Third Party Forum, whether the Sheevaplug will support BBC iPlayer Plugin.

Dave

drbob49
2010-01-21, 13:12
Hi,

No problem running BBC iPlayer and iPlayer extras on a sheevaplug-installed SBS.

Bob

mortslim
2010-01-21, 13:19
This thread raises bigger issues. I too only use my squeezeboxes to access internet radio (rhapsody, etc.). I also don't have a local server. However the implication of this thread is that there may be reasons to have a local server other than just serving local music files. Is that correct?

If so, could someone please describe the reasons why a local server may be advantageous even if the customer is not interested in serving local music files.

Also, this thread raises an issue by implication as to what I have seen the attitude of Logitech is towards those of use who don't use a local server. My impression is that we are treated as second-class compared to those using a local server. The development of software seems to be focused first and foremost on the local server and very very belatedly almost as an afterthought on the squeezenetwork (now mysqueezebox.com).

I am sure the statistics are that the vast majority of new users of squeezeboxes are only tied to the internet and not to a local server. Yes, I understand that the origins of Slim Devices is local server based but new users don't have the technical skills to set this up or do have the skills but don't want to bother with the hassle. It is the same reason e.g. that Apple is now transitioning from the download music business to the streaming business with its purchase of Lala. Most people realize that having say 100,000 tracks on your own computer is not as good as having access to over 5 million tracks in the cloud (even though it is not "owned"). Most people look at music now as a rental just like you "rent" tv through your cable company).

Anyway, back to my original question - is a local server a good idea to enhance the listening experience even if I am not interested in serving local content?

DaveWr
2010-01-21, 13:35
I think you are a little unfair to Logitech. They have done a lot more than most to provide a central services delivery model, through SN originally now mySB.com. Mot of the competition is not yet close to this capability.

The problem is when you need special facilities, like the BBC stuff. If you want the iPlayer stuff, the BBC has to by their terms of license, restrict the geographical use. That means you cannot easily have a global centralised services approach. This only applies in certain limited cases.

However, many forum member old school, including myself, like local high quality replacement, for our CD collections. This is not a cloud computing solution today - too much bandwidth required, don't want to pay 000s for music I already own a copy of. Now this generation of early adopter, traditional music collection users is unlikely to be the new user generation. I expect we will see more advances in centralised services from Logitech.

Dave

bluegaspode
2010-01-21, 15:38
However the implication of this thread is that there may be reasons to have a local server other than just serving local music files. Is that correct?

1) reliability
If your alarm plays way too often the fallback alarm, a local server will help

2) performance
If your menu is too slow, a local server will help.

3) feature set.
A local server will open the big world of third party applets and plugins (http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/SqueezeCenter_Repositories)

4) more control
Run the version you like. Try out new ones, but revert if you don't like them or make problems

Of course running your own 24/7 server needs more skill and time.

keif
2010-01-22, 03:47
Thanks for the feedback on all of this.
I don't have a PC and if I did I really would not like to have one running all the time.
The Sheevaplug looks like a great wee solution, and something I'd be happy to have running next to my router.
I'd held off going down that route in the hope that the iPlayer would work on the Touch. This looks like a possible, but given the lengthening delivery schedule, I might not wait to find out.
I definitely like the ease of use for me and my family of 'rental' music in the cloud via Napster (or other delivery system).
I don't really mind that it is not of the greatest quality as I still buy physical music and listen to that on the stereo in the other room - on those rare occasions that I have to time to lock myself away...

keif
2010-01-22, 04:09
Sorry, meant to add that another reason for running a local server is synchronisation.
My understanding is that without a local server, if I am listening to the same track in three rooms from mysqueezebox, then there will be three separate streams coming into my house.
If I run a local server there will be one stream into the house from the Internet, and then that will be served out across my local network to the three clients.
Think that's right?
I'm definitely seeing synchronisation issues at times with two clients, and see how this would help.

Muele
2010-01-22, 04:36
I don't have a PC and if I did I really would not like to have one running all the time.

Without a pc I don't really think you have any chance of maintaining the sheevaplug. I.E. update the SBS version etc.
On the other hand a small self-contained Linux-box as the sheevaplug requires much less maintenance than any windows-box would.

Also note that once you do get a local server running, be it Touch or something else, you will get a taste for locally served files in high quality, so you might as well think it in from the beginning. For that a touch in the listening room will be able to serve for both server and player. IF the BBC-stuff works ofcourse.

aubuti
2010-01-22, 07:47
I don't have a PC and if I did I really would not like to have one running all the time.
The Sheevaplug looks like a great wee solution, and something I'd be happy to have running next to my router.
This intrigues me. It is probably a sign that I have moved into "old fart" age, but I don't think I know anyone who has a router and a broadband internet connection (presumably along with monthly fees) but doesn't have any pc. Are you using an iPhone or similar device for email and web browsing, or do you use the internet exclusively for internet radio and Napster? Just curious.

Edit: Re Muele's comment about not being able to maintain a Sheevaplug without a pc, it certainly wouldn't be convenient, but you probably could do it if you had a device that has a terminal window and a ssh client, like a Nokia internet tablet (N770, N800, N810). Does the iPhone have an app for ssh?

andynormancx
2010-01-22, 07:53
Does the iPhone have an app for ssh?
There are several, though it is only really bearable for occasional use.

keif
2010-01-22, 08:24
This intrigues me. It is probably a sign that I have moved into "old fart" age, but I don't think I know anyone who has a router and a broadband internet connection (presumably along with monthly fees) but doesn't have any pc. Are you using an iPhone or similar device for email and web browsing, or do you use the internet exclusively for internet radio and Napster? Just curious.

Sorry, I was obviously being too specific.

I have a couple of laptops, but nothing that stays in the house and would be able to be on all the time to server the squeeze devices.
I was hoping not to have to invest in new hardware for this, but I'm thinking the Sheevaplug looks like a nice alternative to a 'big' device.
And yes I do have/used ssh on my iPhone, but only in case of emergencies - don't think I'd like to spend long using this method!

aubuti
2010-01-22, 08:26
If so, could someone please describe the reasons why a local server may be advantageous even if the customer is not interested in serving local music files.

Also, this thread raises an issue by implication as to what I have seen the attitude of Logitech is towards those of use who don't use a local server. My impression is that we are treated as second-class compared to those using a local server. The development of software seems to be focused first and foremost on the local server and very very belatedly almost as an afterthought on the squeezenetwork (now mysqueezebox.com).

I am sure the statistics are that the vast majority of new users of squeezeboxes are only tied to the internet and not to a local server. Yes, I understand that the origins of Slim Devices is local server based but new users don't have the technical skills to set this up or do have the skills but don't want to bother with the hassle.

I'd say that stability and access to plugins are the main reason for using a local server instead of mysb.com to access internet content. Synchronizing multiple players is another thing that works reliably with a local server, but only works with some services via mysb, or the number of players is limited (eg, I think Rhapsody is limited to 3 players at a time).

I'd disagree with the statement that mysb-only customers are being treated as second class. Is it second class for them to be running your server for you? Logitech has been directing a lot attention to mysb and to establishing new partnerships with providers. Yes, they still have a ways to go, especially with dependability of the European servers. But I think they are moving in the direction of more support for non-local music, not less, for the same reasons you mention about listener patterns.

That said, as for claims about the "vast majority of new users" or "most people" I could claim the opposite and all we'd do is prove the old saying that 78.7% of statistics are made up. Do you have any source to back that up? I agree that the trend is toward music rental, but I strongly suspect that we're still a long way from that being the "vast majority", even of new users.

mortslim
2010-01-22, 11:50
we are treated as second-class compared to those using a local server.

I may have been misinterpreted in my choice of words. I was only comparing those of us using no local server to those using one, both using Logitech squeezeboxes. I was not comparing Logitech customers to those using non-Logitech alternatives to access music.

I am a big Logitech fan (I have 6 devices - 3 squeezeboxes and 3 booms). I agree that Logitech is great for the service it does provide. I was only venting that I perceive that development priorities seems to be focused on the server software first on the local level and then second on the mysqueezebox.com development.

kesey
2010-01-22, 12:12
I was only venting that I perceive that development priorities seems to be focused on the server software first on the local level and then second on the mysqueezebox.com development.

The local level is precisely where I like development to be focussed. 100% of the users in my home are Squeezeboxserver users for 94.5% of the time. We often like to listen to Internet Radio, but for the very most part choose the stations via SBS, and find it a most satisfying experience. I use a Sheevaplug with USB hard-disk as server when at home. and a laptop when away from home. Chacon à son goût

aubuti
2010-01-22, 12:30
I may have been misinterpreted in my choice of words. I was only comparing those of us using no local server to those using one, both using Logitech squeezeboxes. I was not comparing Logitech customers to those using non-Logitech alternatives to access music.

I am a big Logitech fan (I have 6 devices - 3 squeezeboxes and 3 booms). I agree that Logitech is great for the service it does provide. I was only venting that I perceive that development priorities seems to be focused on the server software first on the local level and then second on the mysqueezebox.com development.
I can't speak for others, but that's exactly how I interpreted your comments.

agillis
2010-01-22, 12:46
1) reliability
If your alarm plays way too often the fallback alarm, a local server will help

2) performance
If your menu is too slow, a local server will help.

3) feature set.
A local server will open the big world of third party applets and plugins (http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/SqueezeCenter_Repositories)

4) more control
Run the version you like. Try out new ones, but revert if you don't like them or make problems

Of course running your own 24/7 server needs more skill and time.

A full features NAS can do all the things above and more. We designed VortexBox to do all of the above plus auto rip CDs. VortexBox also acts as a hardware player.

mortslim
2010-01-22, 17:21
I'd say that stability and access to plugins are the main reason for using a local server instead of mysb.com to access internet content. Synchronizing multiple players is another thing that works reliably with a local server, but only works with some services via mysb, or the number of players is limited (eg, I think Rhapsody is limited to 3 players at a time).

But on another thread in the Touch forum, aubuti stated thusly: "what do you see TinySBS doing that mysb.com wouldn't be doing if there is no local library?"

So now I am confused. Aren't these quotes inconsistent with each other?

If so, why?
If not, why not?

toby10
2010-01-23, 04:47
SC/SBS7 advantages over MySB.com for Internet Radio and Music Services usage:
+ SC can use Music Information Screen (for legacy players like SB3 & Boom, newer LCD based players cannot use this)
+ SC offers immediate access to your local music library
+ SC includes Favorites folders and sub-folders for station favorites, all editable and movable (MySB has no folders)
+ SC has much more player screen configuration customizing
+ SC has a larger and more configurable UI
+ SC has MUCH better Playlist configuration, control, editing, saving, use multiple playlists (MySB Playlist control limited to SB player, no UI interface for Playlist, only one Playlist instance, Playlist lost on disconnect)
+ SC has a better menu layout for Internet Radio
+ SC has logging for stream error diagnosis (MySB has no logging)
+ SC has better player sync (MySB can have lag and drift, and has limited sync options)
+ SC can sync most Music Services to multiple players (MySB can’t use multiple players for some Music Services)
+ SC has Direct tune in URL via web UI (MySB requires this be done by creating and saving as a Favorite before tuning)
+ SC allows for third party plugins (not available on MySB)
+ SC offers much simpler MySB player registration (simple connect new player to SC and it is registered onto MySB)
+ SC can do Proxy streaming (MySB cannot)
+ no FW update conflicts switching between SC and MySB

Obviously MySB’s big advantage over SC/SBS is not needing your computer turned on (or even needing a computer at all).

aubuti
2010-01-23, 17:51
But on another thread in the Touch forum, aubuti stated thusly: "what do you see TinySBS doing that mysb.com wouldn't be doing if there is no local library?"

So now I am confused. Aren't these quotes inconsistent with each other?

If so, why?
If not, why not?
Okay, fair enough. My question "what do you see...." in that other thread was meant as a genuine question, not as a rhetorical "what could TinySBS _possibly_ be doing...." If the response was "running the iPlayer plugin so I can hear the BBC" or "running my favorite weather/stock market/cricket scores plugin" or "sync'ing internet radio streams reliably" then, well, there's my answer. Different users have different SB usage patterns, so I didn't want to assume how that poster was using his SBs.

I can see the reason for the confusion, but I don't see the two posts as inconsistent, and I hope that explains why. If not, I can try again.

sydsfloyd67
2010-01-31, 21:09
Yes, I'd agree the strength of the Squeezebox platform is/will be really in the Internet Radio/Podcast area. Once one needs another CPU, there are many other very capable ways to stream from that, and far less likely to become obsolete as we are seeing with the ongoing BBC stream format changes. (Probably always solvable from a PC-side, if that leads the way.)

I'd think a lot could and should be done just by adding the ability to save configurations (eg. Playlists, Plugins, etc) once obtained from initial or infrequent mysqueezebox.com connection (or even home server) on any future Squeezebox hardware (Touch?). That the SqueeezeServer seems to be remaining and even and becoming more 'centric seems to me likely coming mainly from the ongoing failure to develop mysqueezebox.com as a strong user/media portal, and what's being described here as a severe existing hardware limitation in the early boxes. (The 'S Radio' however may be able to turn things back in what I think is probably the right direction.)

-SF