PDA

View Full Version : Squeezebox Touch reviewed at The Register



cbemoore
2010-05-17, 07:33
"Verdict - The Touch is a useful addition to the Squeezebox range and has no real faults beyond being priced a little too closely to the Squeezebox Duet that, at only 30 more, represents better value for money and is more versatile as the heart of a multi-room music system."

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2010/05/17/reviews_logitech_squeezebox_touch/

bluegaspode
2010-05-17, 07:48
While this review is better than the one from PC-Mag they still don't get the point, that you don't need to install a server anymore ?

cbemoore
2010-05-17, 07:51
While this review is better than the one from PC-Mag they still don't get the point, that you don't need to install a server anymore ?

To be fair, they do say:

"Sign up for a MySqueezebox account and you can use the Touch to listen to Internet radio stations when your PC is switched off, as well as to access services such as MP3tunes and Last.fm."

ralphpnj
2010-05-17, 14:49
To be fair, they do say:

"Sign up for a MySqueezebox account and you can use the Touch to listen to Internet radio stations when your PC is switched off, as well as to access services such as MP3tunes and Last.fm."

I believe that you have missed the point. What PCMag describes in the above quote is and has been possible to do with any previous SqueezeBox device. What the Touch can do that no previous SqueezeBox device was able to do is enable one to listen to one's own music files without the need for a PC running SqueezeBox server. Fill an 8 or even 16 GB USB flash drive with flac or mp3 files, plug it into the USB port on the back of the Touch and the Touch with play the files and the Touch can also stream the music to another SqueezeBox device, all without having to run a PC.

And the reviewer for PCMag completely missed this very important "new to the Touch" feature.

timearp
2010-05-17, 14:57
I read the Reg review this morning. I found it to have missed a number of major functions, mainly that there isn't the need to install the server software. I wouldn't purchase on the basis of that review, mainly as there are much cheaper options available. A shame that the person reviewing it didn't read the spec and comment on it, maybe then it would appear more appealing. Having said that they didn't comment much on the quality of the sound that can be produced either, surely a major point!

cbemoore
2010-05-17, 17:52
I believe that you have missed the point. What PCMag describes in the above quote is and has been possible to do with any previous SqueezeBox device. What the Touch can do that no previous SqueezeBox device was able to do is enable one to listen to one's own music files without the need for a PC running SqueezeBox server. Fill an 8 or even 16 GB USB flash drive with flac or mp3 files, plug it into the USB port on the back of the Touch and the Touch with play the files and the Touch can also stream the music to another SqueezeBox device, all without having to run a PC.

And the reviewer for PCMag completely missed this very important "new to the Touch" feature.

*facepalm*

You're right - I had missed the point....

m1abrams
2010-05-17, 18:24
I think most of the reviewers miss the point that SB products have always had. Syncing, and centralized server. Yes I am one of the few weird people that sees having a central server as a benefit not a burden.

The central server with dumb clients aspect is why iPeng will work with a Slimp3 and the latest Touch without any special work on the developer. Why you can use a Touch to control another Touch or Slimp3, etc.

Syncing, well if you have more than one SB you understand why this is great.