PDA

View Full Version : Doesn't make sense to me...



sawdin
2010-01-30, 20:47
I will be purchasing a Duet or Touch this summer, after I relocate. But the Touch seems 'out of touch'. I just read an early review that sums up my feelings:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10332579-1.html
"Sounds like this $300 model could be the one-room Sonos killer we've long been longing for--except for the fact that the touch screen is built into the base unit. That means you're stuck with either getting up and walking over to it whenever you want to change a tune or pick a new stream, or opting for the little wireless remote (which provides far less detailed control than the touch screen). Why Logitech went this route instead of opting for a touch screen remote that you could hold in your hand is anyone's guess."

Why in heck didn't they just upgrade the DAC in the Duet and offer it with a Touch controller? Do you know if Logitech might be going in that direction?

JJZolx
2010-01-30, 21:13
Why in heck didn't they just upgrade the DAC in the Duet and offer it with a Touch controller? Do you know if Logitech might be going in that direction?

Sounds like a reasonable next step for the Duet. With the move to SqueezeOS and SqueezePlay, though, I don't expect any new ip3k based players to be released. It would require a total redesign of the Receiver, as it would need to have the new CPU and new operating system, so wouldn't be as simple as just upgrading the DAC. I'd expect it might be a bit more expensive, as well. But given all the connectivity and stability problems with the Duet, I'm not sure if we'll see a new version.

The Touch is the replacement in the product line for the Squeezebox Classic. Consider the touch screen capabilities to be an 'extra'. You still have an IR remote, which can be your primary (or only) means of input. And it remains the same price as the Classic.

aubuti
2010-01-30, 21:20
Right. And the part in the review that says the IR remote "provides far less detailed control than the touch screen" is completely incorrect. The menus for the IR remote and the touchscreen are exactly the same, except the fonts are bigger for the IR remote. So the level of "control detail" is exactly the same. And if you want a touch screen you can hold in your hand, get an iPhone or iPod Touch + iPeng app.

Likewise, calling it the "one-room Sonos killer" is off the mark, because it's every bit as much multi-room as the rest of the SB line.

Mnyb
2010-01-30, 22:26
And you can buy a controller to use with the Touch to (it controls all squeezebox players ).
Or get an iPhone or Andriod app. or use you computer.

andynormancx
2010-01-31, 00:40
Also, that isn't a review at all. The "reviewer" hasn't used the unit, they are just commenting on the news that Logitech was planning to release the Touch, so they have no idea how well it will work when controller by the remote.

toby10
2010-01-31, 05:54
What would be awesome is a two piece Touch:
1. base unit (all audio connections, acts as a charging cradle)
2. Touch screen (removable from base unit)

And, of course, with an MSRP of $199. :)

JohnSwenson
2010-01-31, 15:21
Of course both the player and the Touch remote then need a processor, memory etc. The "remote Touch screen" IS the whole Touch minus one DAC chip and a couple crystals.

For some reason there seems to be the feeling that you can just take the screen off the Touch and put it in a separate box and it would cost $50.

If you did the removable screen player concept it would cost $500 - $600.

The way it is now the people that will be using the Touch in a way where they will be interacting directly with it get to do so without the added expense and the people that want a fancy hand held touch remote have several options at various price points.

John S.

Mr_Sukebe
2010-02-02, 04:41
Can't you control the Touch using either the duet handset or via say an iPhone, making this a bit of a moot question?

Danione
2010-02-02, 04:45
Yes, from what I gather, it is controllable either via the IR handset, the Duet Controller, or with apps like iPeng on the iPhone/iTouch.

JohnSwenson
2010-02-02, 11:17
Yes, the Touch player can be controlled via any of the squeezebox control methods. This is why I don't see the current configuration as a problem. Those that want to control the Touch directly can do so without paying for a remote controller, and those that want a sophisticated remote control can purchase one of the numerous options.

John S.

nicklouse
2010-02-02, 17:24
Like wise does not really makes sense to me.

would have been a better price without the touch screen ability.

but i like the full colour screen.

georgeh
2010-02-03, 08:00
I thnk Logitech's approach makes pefect sense - and it's a step or two better than Sonos.

Neither unit comes with a comprehensive LCD remote. If you want one, you can either buy one from the company, or you get an iTouch/iPhone.

But, the advantage goes to the Touch because it doesn't need an expensive remote - use can use the unit provided, or use the screen. It's up to you.

aubuti
2010-02-03, 08:21
would have been a better price without the touch screen ability.
True, perhaps, but that's not the way it usually seems to work, especially with consumer electronics. Logitech, and Slim Devices before them, have decided that the price point for SBs is $US300. The SliMP3 debuted at $250, but then the SB1, SB2, SB3, and Boom each entered the market at $300. Then the question becomes what components and features you can put in that $300 box to make people want to buy it and still turn a reasonable profit.

Yes, there are exceptions, most notably the Transporter and the SB Radio, which are aimed up-market and down-market from the main SB line. Also the SB Receiver cut costs relative to the SB3 by taking out the display, which is the most expensive component of an SB3.

Which does beg an interesting question: will Logitech follow up the SB Touch with:
a) a Touch that has an LCD but not a touchscreen
b) a Touch that has no display at all (ie, SBR2)
c) both (a) and (b)
d) neither (a) nor (b)

One big difference is that the Touch's LCD is nowhere near as big a share of the product cost as the earlier VFD's were. But I have no idea what the cost implications are for a touchscreen vs non-touchscreen.

snarlydwarf
2010-02-03, 08:31
One big difference is that the Touch's LCD is nowhere near as big a share of the product cost as the earlier VFD's were. But I have no idea what the cost implications are for a touchscreen vs non-touchscreen.

It may even be cheaper to use a touchscreen. The screen size looks suspiciously like the same size on a cell phone.

Economy of scale does wonders to prices.

JohnSwenson
2010-02-03, 13:56
One big difference is that the Touch's LCD is nowhere near as big a share of the product cost as the earlier VFD's were. But I have no idea what the cost implications are for a touchscreen vs non-touchscreen.

The screen size used in the Touch is a very popular size, they are available from a number of manufacturers at quite low prices. The difference between the LCD by itself and with the touch screen is not very much.

Traditionally the biggest expense in adding a touch screen to a fairly small size screen has not been the screen itself but the controller it talks to. But for the Touch the touchscreen controller is built into the processor so no extra electronics are necessary.

It would actually cost far more money to make one without the touch part due to having two units to keep track of, inventory etc.

John S.

tcutting
2010-02-03, 14:16
One advantage of the touch screen is that you CAN control the unit directly without the remote. I don't see it as the preferred method most of the time, but could likely come in handy quite often, and they can add the capability without having to provide the "hard" buttons.

jamesg
2010-02-03, 14:29
The 4.3" touchscreen is the same size as used in the volume GPS's in North America.

I expect to buy an IPod Touch to use as my remote control if the Touch's touch screen and its location is too cumbersome.

James

crazyj
2010-02-05, 09:40
If I do indeed follow through with purchasing a Touch, I will eventually dual zone it, and I'm waffling whether or not I would buy another Touch, since it has a display, or would want a screenless Touch, and work out my own displays.

Actually, what would be fantastic is if Logitech would release a receiver with a display that could be read from further away, that I could run off my Touch. Maybe a vacuum-fluorescent display. Oh wait...

svtdoug
2010-02-16, 15:05
First off, Logitech has discontinued the SB Receiver and will be discontinuing the Duet soon - see http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75201&page=2 - where they discuss the fate of the Duet. It becomes clear that Logitech is planning to replace the Duet with the Touch - which makes no sense to me.

In the Duet we have a full function wireless network remote with a high resolution screen that allows you to control virtually all functions of the Squeezebox, from where YOU are, not where the music system is. And you have a non controllable receiver that does what it needs to do to get the music into the system. A very elegant solution.

In the Touch, they have turned the whole process upside down - they have put the control and visual control system at the music system and have given you a non-visual infrared remote to control something which you must read from across the room! What are they thinking! I know, you can use your phone to control the Touch, but many people are not going to want to mess with a phone app.

It would not be so bad if they were not discontinuing the Duet, but now that will leave a real gap in their product line.

Logitech, please do not discontinue the Duet and please bring back the Receiver!

dave77
2010-02-17, 02:56
First off, Logitech has discontinued the SB Receiver and will be discontinuing the Duet soon - see http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75201&page=2 - where they discuss the fate of the Duet. It becomes clear that Logitech is planning to replace the Duet with the Touch - which makes no sense to me.

Are they discontinuing the Controller too?

yerma
2010-02-17, 09:06
It would not be so bad if they were not discontinuing the Duet, but now that will leave a real gap in their product line.

That is, unless they're planning a Duet2, something like a Touch (including USB-drive support and TinySC), but without a display, plus the Controller.

That would be some helluva device, as it would give beginners an easy entry into the world of Squeezebox, and not being useless for users with an existing SB infrastructure...

aubuti
2010-02-17, 10:18
That is, unless they're planning a Duet2, something like a Touch (including USB-drive support and TinySC), but without a display, plus the Controller.

That would be some helluva device, as it would give beginners an easy entry into the world of Squeezebox, and not being useless for users with an existing SB infrastructure...
I don't see how a Touch is "useless for users with an existing SB infrastructure". It fits in just fine with my other SBs. The SBR is better in some rooms, and the Touch is better in some other rooms.

You should also note that a Touch without a display would cost almost as much as the Touch with the display. The SBR cost a lot less than the Classic because the VFD was the most expensive single component in the Classic. The Touch's LCD screen is a very small fraction of cost of a Touch. I'm guessing the Duet2 you describe would probably list for US$500.

yerma
2010-02-18, 01:27
I don't see how a Touch is "useless for users with an existing SB infrastructure".
No, that's not what I meant. I was referring to the "Duet2", that a new receiver with TinySC would still be as useful as the current receiver for people like me who put their Squeezebox deep inside their Hifi rack where it would be too far away to recognize anything on its screen (or can't be seen at all), let alone being able to use its front panel controls.

When I bought my Duet, if I had the choice between a Touch and a receiver-like screenless Touch, I would have taken the latter, regardless of the extra cost for a Controller, because it would have been more fitting for my intended use...


Edit: Typo

DaveWr
2010-02-18, 02:04
You should also note that a Touch without a display would cost almost as much as the Touch with the display. The SBR cost a lot less than the Classic because the VFD was the most expensive single component in the Classic. The Touch's LCD screen is a very small fraction of cost of a Touch. I'm guessing the Duet2 you describe would probably list for US$500.

The implication from these comments is that the Touch (and associated architectural changes) are adding significantly to the new Squeeze playback devices. The SB3 revamped with LCD would have been significantly less expensive product direction.

Dave

andynormancx
2010-02-18, 02:56
The implication from these comments is that the Touch (and associated architectural changes) are adding significantly to the new Squeeze playback devices. The SB3 revamped with LCD would have been significantly less expensive product direction.

Maybe, but only because of the initial investment in the new product line. When the SB3 launched it was a very similar price to what the Touch will be at launch, it has come down in price over time.

Besides, "revamp" kind of underplays the amount of effort/cost that would be involved in moving the SB3 to LCD:

- some of the components in the SB3 may well not be available any more
- other will be coming to the end of their production lifetime
- circuit redesign and layout will be needed to account for these missing components
- there are far more people around who can write Linux C or learn LUA than there are who can program the exotic CPU in the SB3

DaveWr
2010-02-18, 03:44
Maybe, but only because of the initial investment in the new product line. When the SB3 launched it was a very similar price to what the Touch will be at launch, it has come down in price over time.

Besides, "revamp" kind of underplays the amount of effort/cost that would be involved in moving the SB3 to LCD:

- some of the components in the SB3 may well not be available any more
- other will be coming to the end of their production lifetime
- circuit redesign and layout will be needed to account for these missing components
- there are far more people around who can write Linux C or learn LUA than there are who can program the exotic CPU in the SB3



Redesign is a fact of electronic life due to obsolescence. The fact remains that the replacement of a very expensive component, the VFD with LCD should reduce BOM costs significantly.

Circuit redesign is obviously something Logitech are very capable of. The architectural changes, move to LUA nd TinySC etc. seem less successful in terms of cost benefit analysis. Slim devices should be cheaper than medium / fat devices.

Exotic? embedded CPUs are a way of life for many domestic products. Embedded controllers are very cost effective. Don't want a full Linux suite in my CD player....

Dave

jimbo45
2010-02-18, 04:00
That is, unless they're planning a Duet2, something like a Touch (including USB-drive support and TinySC), but without a display, plus the Controller.

That would be some helluva device, as it would give beginners an easy entry into the world of Squeezebox, and not being useless for users with an existing SB infrastructure...

Hi there
apparently if you follow the latest news the DUET is NOT being discontinued at the moment so receivers will still be available fort the foreseeable future.

I agree with you in that the receiver is nicely hidden away in a rack -- If I were to buy the touch it would be for a different application completely.

I am probably in any case in a minority of ONE here but I don't actually LIKE touch screens and in any case when listening to the receiver on high end gear it's easier to use with the remote controller rather than fiddle around with a touch screen.

Cheers
jimbo

aubuti
2010-02-18, 07:24
The implication from these comments is that the Touch (and associated architectural changes) are adding significantly to the new Squeeze playback devices. The SB3 revamped with LCD would have been significantly less expensive product direction.
That's true, although even Logitech wouldn't have been dumb enough to slap an LCD on the ageing IP3K platform, so a 'revamping' of the SB3 would not be trivial. But the product direction is clearly away from slim clients and toward 'fat' clients. That does involve higher costs for the clients, but also opens the possibility of lower total costs, eg, for all those users who have been saying "I want to play my music but I don't want to have to turn on my PC." This is presumably intended to appeal more to new buyers than to those of us who already have a music server running.

aubuti
2010-02-18, 07:29
No, that's not what I meant. I was referring to the "Duet2", <snip>
Okay, I see what you mean, and that makes sense to me. Until the "Duet2" appears, you could always get a Touch, remove the leg that holds it upright, and lay it face down on top of your audio rack. The cable angle wouldn't be great, but it's an idea ;o)

Keymaster
2010-02-18, 08:51
First off, Logitech has discontinued the SB Receiver and will be discontinuing the Duet soon - see http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75201&page=2 - where they discuss the fate of the Duet. It becomes clear that Logitech is planning to replace the Duet with the Touch - which makes no sense to me.

This was an error and was noted as such later in the thread....no worries!! :)


Sorry for the delay in responding to this thread. I wanted to find out exactly what was going on first. It also didn't help that I took a family vacation for a few days. :-)

I wanted to set the record straight on the plan for selling Duets, and individual Receivers and Controllers. There is no plan to discontinue selling Duets or individual Receivers and Controllers at this time. They are currently available from the many country-specific versions of the Logitech.com website.

So ... what happened? Unfortunately, there's been some confusion internally within Logitech. As a result, United States Customer Support erroneously heard these items were no longer for sale, and then they were removed from the US Logitech.com web site.

We're in the process of straightening out this confusion. You can go to the United States Logitech.com web site today and purchase these items. All of these items are in-stock and available today.

Customer Support should also have the corrected information, but please post back here if you find that word hasn't gotten to everyone yet.

Thank you to the OP for bringing up this issue.

Mickey

DaveWr
2010-02-18, 08:54
That's true, although even Logitech wouldn't have been dumb enough to slap an LCD on the ageing IP3K platform, so a 'revamping' of the SB3 would not be trivial. But the product direction is clearly away from slim clients and toward 'fat' clients. That does involve higher costs for the clients, but also opens the possibility of lower total costs, eg, for all those users who have been saying "I want to play my music but I don't want to have to turn on my PC." This is presumably intended to appeal more to new buyers than to those of us who already have a music server running.

I think with the limitations TinySC has, then total system cost reduction will only apply for a few. Anybody wanting multi-room capability is repeatably paying for a simplified server capability. IMHO it would have made more sense to minimize player cost (it is only a user interface, audio out, display and touch interface) and OEM a server like Sheevaplug. We could have continued with current plug ins etc.

Anyway, I am sure that the Touch will find it's own market niche, and the good news is that the Duet continues.

Dave

funkstar
2010-02-18, 09:03
I think with the limitations TinySC has, then total system cost reduction will only apply for a few. Anybody wanting multi-room capability is repeatably paying for a simplified server capability. IMHO it would have made more sense to minimize player cost (it is only a user interface, audio out, display and touch interface) and OEM a server like Sheevaplug. We could have continued with current plug ins etc.

Anyway, I am sure that the Touch will find it's own market niche, and the good news is that the Duet continues.

Dave
Touch is the base platform for a new generation of players, just like the SB3 was the base platform for that generation of players. It was stripped down for the Receiver, it had speakers added for the boom and it had a spec bump, a second screen and a lot more engineering for the Transporter.

There is a lot more that can be done with the SqueezeOS platform once they get the initial product out the door. A cut down version could drop the screen, USB, SD card, slower processor less RAM (just like the board inside the Radio) for a Duet2. A Boom2 could be a Touch with speakers, making it a complete self contained system. A Controller2 could be a touch without the connectors and processor/memory from the Radio making it more battery friendly. A Touch+ could be a version with a 7" or 10" screen as a photo frame as well as a player.

I'm not saying these variations would be trivial, but once heavy development is done with the Touch, things get a lot easier.

aubuti
2010-02-18, 09:37
Anybody wanting multi-room capability is repeatably paying for a simplified server capability.
Why? Someone can buy one Touch and put slim players (SB3s, SBRs, Booms, or Radios) in other rooms. They can all run off TinySBS. I think your idea of continuing in the slim client direction with an OEM Sheevaplug-like server has a lot of merit, but I also suspect that 'smart clients' like Touch would have wider market appeal, which I assume is Logitech's main objective.

DaveWr
2010-02-18, 09:57
Why? Someone can buy one Touch and put slim players (SB3s, SBRs, Booms, or Radios) in other rooms. They can all run off TinySBS. I think your idea of continuing in the slim client direction with an OEM Sheevaplug-like server has a lot of merit, but I also suspect that 'smart clients' like Touch would have wider market appeal, which I assume is Logitech's main objective.

Because TinySC can't handle the transcoding issues for playback of non native streams, so major limitations on radio stations etc. I think however, the Touch in a new world, no old players, will find significant favour in new startup users, and if plug-ins migrate to applets (too early to tell) then Touch should suit expanded larger systems.

On the flip side for Logitech the choice of a Linux playback environment, and the licensing will also mean several astute users looking for new hosts for Squeezeplay, trying to substitute Logitech hardware. This has always been a concern of mine.

Dave

funkstar
2010-02-18, 14:29
Because TinySC can't handle the transcoding issues for playback of non native streams, so major limitations on radio stations etc. I think however, the Touch in a new world, no old players, will find significant favour in new startup users, and if plug-ins migrate to applets (too early to tell) then Touch should suit expanded larger systems.
But if someone already has legacy hardware and needs functions Touch can't provide (like transcoding of ALAC for non-SqueezeOS players) they will already have server hardware that can do this. It's new customers that won't have the hardware this really makes sense for.


On the flip side for Logitech the choice of a Linux playback environment, and the licensing will also mean several astute users looking for new hosts for Squeezeplay, trying to substitute Logitech hardware. This has always been a concern of mine.
It's a GPL OS but a Logitech License for SqueezeOS and SqueezePlay. I think the basics are that you cannot distribute a compiled binary of either, so if you came up with compatible hardware you would have to distribute the source and have your users compile and install the results themselves.

sawdin
2010-02-28, 21:36
I'm the newbie who started this thread, and have enjoyed reading the posts. I just wanted to mention that the Logitech site still does not list any accessories: http://www.logitechsqueezebox.com/products/squeezebox-touch.html
(I get linked to a site (secureslimdevices) that has a security error and when I try access it and links me back to where I started). Okay, same problem I had earlier, you need to start off at the logitech.com site, not logitechsqueezebox.com)

My intitial thought was that the controller that comes w/ the Duet looks like it would be very nice to use as a controller from across the room. Definitely much easier than having to walk over to the Touch screen, and it looks like it would provide more information, or at least more visual information, than the controller that comes w/ the Touch. It is my understanding that one could, if they wanted to, purchase the controller that comes with the Duet to use w/ the Touch. Is that correct? If yes, the potential problem is cost if the Duet controller is going to cost $299. That puts the cost of a Touch + Duet controller at $600, which is probably more than most people would be willing to pay. Well, more than I would be willing to pay. However, if the Duet controller was an optional upgrade so that one could purchase the Touch and Duet Controller at the same time (and not include the controller that normally comes bundeled w/ the Touch) for $400, I would think many people would 'upgrade' the controller. Of course, I have no what the profit margin would need to be...

Again, interesting reading....this forum is one of my favorites...no bickering, thoughtful replies...

aubuti
2010-02-28, 22:12
www.logitechsqueezebox.com is effectively a dead site, and the online store there is definitely closed and moved over to the main Logitech site at www.logitech.com. I don't recall if you said where you are located, but the SB Touch accessories page on the Logitech US site is here: http://buy.logitech.com/store/logib2c/en_US/DisplayCategoryProductListPage/categoryid.28136200?WT.ac=sc|downloads||dd

Yes, you can control the SBT with an SBC. The visual information displayed is about the same, although of course it's larger on the SBT than it is on the SBC. An SBT + SBC package for $US400?? It's a great idea for buyers, but you may have to look long and hard to find that kind of price, which is the same as the MSRP for the Duet package (SBC + SB Receiver), esp considering how much better (and costly) the SBT is than the SB Receiver.

And, as noted earlier, it's not necessary to walk over to the SBT -- the included IR remote works fine. For my eyes it's more of an 8-9 foot interface than the "10-foot" interface they use as a shorthand for the large font layout. Visibility depends a lot on individual eyesight, ambient lighting, and brightness settings on the LCD.

iwannatouch
2010-03-01, 10:26
...My intitial thought was that the controller that comes w/ the Duet looks like it would be very nice to use as a controller from across the room. ...If yes, the potential problem is cost if the Duet controller is going to cost $299...

I also contemplated getting a Duet remote for the Touch, but I think there are better, less expensive, alternatives out there.
I'll probably have a droid cell phone by the time I get my Squeezebox Touch, and I plan to use it as a remote with the help of a droid remote app.
Failing that, I might buy a reconditioned iPod Touch ($150 or less) that's smaller than the Duet remote and has a touch screen that's considerably larger.

sawdin
2010-03-01, 11:21
Thanks. I'm due for a new phone soon and will probably get a droid. However, I will not be purchasing the SB until after I relocate later this summer. If you happen to get the droid and use it for a remote, please post how it works.

Thanks.

funkstar
2010-03-01, 14:27
That puts the cost of a Touch + Duet controller at $600, which is probably more than most people would be willing to pay. Well, more than I would be willing to pay. However, if the Duet controller was an optional upgrade so that one could purchase the Touch and Duet Controller at the same time (and not include the controller that normally comes bundeled w/ the Touch) for $400, I would think many people would 'upgrade' the controller. Of course, I have no what the profit margin would need to be...
So you think they should drop the cost of a Touch plus a Controller by $200 on the back of removing a $2 part? Things just don't work like that.

sawdin
2010-03-01, 14:47
I did not know the cost of the associated pieces, profit-margins, marketing price-points, etc. However, I still believe the thought of bundling the two w/ some type of discount makes sense for buyers who are just entering the field, especially those who want a turn-key system w/ visual controllers. (Turn-key as in not having to deal w/ phones and apps.)