PDA

View Full Version : Logitech drops Revue, says early Google TV intro a 'mistake'



Kim.T
2011-11-11, 04:49
I thought that LMS 7.7.0 was aimed to integrate Revue and Squeezebox ?!
http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/11/11/logitech.slams.rushed.google.tv.rush.in.exit/

toby10
2011-11-11, 05:13
Well, so much for the Revue acting as our "savior" for SB and MySB.com. :(

castalla
2011-11-11, 05:17
Very interesting report, if accurate.

Sort of implies that LMS was an utter waste of time and resources ... especially since it fails miserably as a 'media' server compared with other free options.

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 05:26
Funny (well sort of ...) how he blames google ...
He should try to use himself softwares develloped by the company he is in charge of.
And wonder if he really cared about software management, like he should have done.

maggior
2011-11-11, 05:31
Wow. That's not good. That's some pretty harsh criticism.

jcowling
2011-11-11, 05:52
I wonder what the Revue's failure means for the Squeezebox products. Is it
a. A good thing because Logitech realizes that it is more successful making niche products; or
b. A bad thing because Logitech may just give up on media servers of all kinds, including Squeezeboxes; or
c. Not relevant because Squeezebox supports itself and does not need to be updated any time soon.

castalla
2011-11-11, 06:07
I don't thinl Logitech promote their audio solutions sufficiently or well enough.

There really isn't a great deal explaining the plus points of the Touch or the Radio on their websites. A lot of potential users are put off with by the misconception that both 'absolutely' require a local server. Potential purchasers who are used to other internet radio brands still seem to believe that the Radio is a 'geeky' option - they essentially just want to plug it in and get their favourite stations.

I know a lot of Reciva users who struggle on with outdated firmware, unsupported brands, failure to play AAC v2 streams, yet who either consider the Logitech Radio too expensive and/or too technical to get working.

Logitech is missing an opportunity to target a potential source of customers - similarly they could easily compete against the Cocktail Audio x10 and the Brennan by actively promoting the Touch as a media solution.

Thank goodness they've dumped the Revue and can re-focus on audio solutions.

toby10
2011-11-11, 06:19
Funny (well sort of ...) how he blames google ...
He should try to use himself softwares develloped by the company he is in charge of.
And wonder if he really cared about software management, like he should have done.

Well, he blames Google because Logitech STUPIDLY relied almost exclusively on GoogleTV for the Revues success. BIG MISTAKE!

Here is the entire lineup of Apps and services available for the Revue:
http://www.logitech.com/en-us/smartTV/apps
Video calling, Netflix, Napster, Pandora, CNBC, Twitter, and GoogleTV (as it were ;))

That's it and is a complete joke in the streaming box community. For comparison go to the Roku website where you have a choice of four different boxes ($49 to $99) and have TONS of Apps and services, many completely free.

Having one good hardware box is fine, but limiting that one box to such a limited feature set of services is simply laughable, if not sad. :(

toby10
2011-11-11, 06:23
....
Thank goodness they've dumped the Revue and can re-focus on audio solutions.

Assuming they can or will.

toby10
2011-11-11, 06:35
I wonder what the Revue's failure means for the Squeezebox products. Is it
a. A good thing because Logitech realizes that it is more successful making niche products; or
b. A bad thing because Logitech may just give up on media servers of all kinds, including Squeezeboxes; or
c. Not relevant because Squeezebox supports itself and does not need to be updated any time soon.

That's the problem, this ship is adrift so it is anyone's guess. :(
I don't find it particularly comforting with the lack of any statement in the article regarding the "other" streaming products. i.e. "we are committed to our other music streaming devices". Now the article was only about the Revue so maybe such positive comments were made but not included in the Revue article, who knows.

Whoever is in charge of their streaming media products really needs to step up and make a public announcement about that divisions future, products and otherwise. It does not have to detail possible products in development, just at least let present and future SB buyers know that there is a future to the entire platform/concept... hardware, LMS, and MySB.

Of course, that's what they said about the Revue after they dropped the price to $99, so who knows.

cunobelinus
2011-11-11, 06:40
>
> castalla;669190 Wrote:
>> ....
>> Thank goodness they've dumped the Revue and can re-focus on audio
>> solutions.
>
Like the Transporter, you mean?

Logitech Sheevaplug or equivalent, all server software installed, but beefed up so that it is no longer "not exactly beta" in their eyes, no messing about included, sold as a package with iPeng. That might work. But something tells me they'll never get round to it and are more likely to drop the whole idea, including LMS.

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 06:48
Well, he blames Google because Logitech STUPIDLY relied almost exclusively on GoogleTV for the Revues success. BIG MISTAKE!

Here is the entire lineup of Apps and services available for the Revue:
http://www.logitech.com/en-us/smartTV/apps
Video calling, Netflix, Napster, Pandora, CNBC, Twitter, and GoogleTV (as it were ;))

That's it and is a complete joke in the streaming box community. For comparison go to the Roku website where you have a choice of four different boxes ($49 to $99) and have TONS of Apps and services, many completely free.

Having one good hardware box is fine, but limiting that one box to such a limited feature set of services is simply laughable, if not sad. :(

I still think the main problem is the software.
Some people often say most problems comes from what is sitting between the chair and the keyboard.
They are completely right, but not in the way they think about it.
Most problems come from what is sitting between the chair and the keyboard.
It is the developper who cannot understand than such a device MUST WORK FLUENTLY for non tech nor geek people.
I already knew some hifi shops who choose Sonos over Squeezebox.
I recently spoke with another one I know well (I bought a lot of my hifi stuff in his shop, and haven't noticed he sells Sonos as well).

He confirmed he sells Sonos because
- it is easy to setup for non tech people
- he can support customers easily for most basic problems (he is not a computer guy)
- If needed, Sonos support is good, fast, and really fix most problems

There is no way he can achieve this and make money selling squeezeboxes.
He would have too many problems with all those "stupid customers" sitting between the chair and the keyboard ...

One thing Logitech CEO got right about the software is
"not complete and not tuned to what the consumers want at the living room"

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 06:58
Funny (well sort of ...) how he blames google ...
He should try to use himself softwares develloped by the company he is in charge of.
And wonder if he really cared about software management, like he should have done.

Well, reading the full transcript

http://seekingalpha.com/article/306966-logitech-ceo-hosts-analyst-amp-investor-day-conference-call-transcript

What he says is not so stupid, and the original link is not very faithfull regarding what he actually said.

pippin
2011-11-11, 07:02
Both are equally to blame. Google for messing up the product and Logitech for blindly following Google without having the faintest understanding what the product is about.

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 07:08
Both are equally to blame. Google for messing up the product and Logitech for blindly following Google without having the faintest understanding what the product is about.

Not sure about that.
When a customer tries a revue, he first goes trough LMS.
This cannot work for normal people, no matter the quality of Google side.
As far as I know, Google was not involved whatsoever in LMS development.

Mnyb
2011-11-11, 07:23
LMS was not there fo the initail revue , it was there for 2 weeks :) so it had noting to do with it.

They managed on thier own,

the streaming video markets is it own can of worms, it really lacks basic support by the content providers *they* are cluless too, neither revue or apple TV is a big hit where I live, content providers can't aggre on such simple things as getting people in different countries to see the same TV show released at the same time. they cling on to some old modell where things are syndicated and sold of in a time staggerd pattern to some other party that hold rigths for certain times and regions ugh :-/

Example HBO I channel I can't get have done some good series in thier days, now they just aired " game of thrones " .

This serie is not avaible in any form where I live no channel has it no dvd box , it is however avaible using some well known p2p tech ;)

So when a local network finally gets it and purchase the rigths for it , nobody will ever watch it on thier channel, everyone had it on thier harddrive since 8 months back ?

pippin
2011-11-11, 07:26
Revue originally had absolutely nothing to do with LMS, LMS was just a late addition to help the product when the Google TV service didn't come by.

The Google TV (not Revue, Sony has the same issues) is not Logitech's poor product but Google's poor service and especially poor contracting. Google managed to overthrow itself with a lot of content providers and that was that for Google TV.

What Logitech should have done would be to have an own understanding of the product and integrate it with things like the Squeezebox from the start. It was pretty obvious that a product like Google TV would not conquer the world in a day.
I've seen this with other companies that are not strong enough in product management: they lean on a strong partner and hope that some contract will them big business.
But it's not strong partners who bring you big business, it's good products. And to make a good product you have to understand what the product is about, you have to understand the customer and then it's all about the details. All the integration, the nitpicking small stuff, the design, the accessibility, in short: all that what Apple does so well.
But you can't outsource that to whatever good partner, you need to have an own understanding or you will fail, just as has happened with Revue.
Amen.

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 07:32
LMS was not there fo the initail revue , it was there for 2 weeks :) so it had noting to do with it.


I called it LMS since it is the current version.
Previous version for initial revue was Logitech software as well, I guess.
LMS is hopefully probably better.
But having used Squeezeboxes softwares for several years now, I know that it is not tailored for wide non tech audience.

The lack of content of Google TV is obviously a problem.
But I guess a lot of people hardly know there is a lack of content.
Even with their own material, they must struggle with the software, and can't get it right.
In this situation, normal people just drop the system.

castalla
2011-11-11, 07:36
LMS was not there fo the initail revue , it was there for 2 weeks :) so it had noting to do with it.

They managed on thier own,



Not what most were led to believe ... LMS was a shoe-in to provide a service for the Revue. As a consequence, we all got a shiny new squeezeboox server with features that 99% of current users will never need. Anyone with a large video collection is already likely to have another more efficient way of accessing this.

Personally, I hate this move to merge everything into one device. For me, a radio is a radio, a tv is a tv, and a phone is a phone (definitely not a radio/tv/gambling machine, etc.) - but then, call me old-fashioned.

pippin
2011-11-11, 07:37
You could not use any of the previous SBS versions with Revue

toby10
2011-11-11, 07:54
I still think the main problem is the software.....


If you mean LMS that is completely unrelated to the failure of the Revue. Revue has been out for over a year, only now is LMS a part of the defunct Revue.

I'd bet the vast majority of Revue and Roku type buyers never even use the "server" aspects of these boxes. Maybe a slightly higher number of users might try playing some of their mp3's on them, but the pics & video section are largely not utilized in regards to ones own collection. Of the four Roku players currently available only one (the $99 unit) even has a USB port. People mostly buy these for the content, server aspects go widely unused.

In this consumer hardware category, content is everything, and the Revue had next to no content. Even if GoogleTV actually worked as expected it would still relegate the Revue into the "why buy a Revue when a Roku box at half the price has 100 times more content" category. ;)

I'd assume they were planning to add more content, guess we'll never know. But they made no effort to add much (any?) content while they were waiting for GoogleTV to get their act together.

widman
2011-11-11, 08:00
If you read through the original transcript, it seems like Logitech is still interested in the Squeezebox line:


"We also have the Squeezebox product line we have actually seen a significant growth in Europe especially to our partnership and service providers but it is also growing worldwide"

"Internet radio, cloud services I will talk about that in a second is also going to have a very significant impact. The chart is actually a very interesting chart. This is our Squeezebox users and the role that every device plays – what users use during the day and which devices are used at different points of the day. And the black kind of represents how people use the Squeezebox during the day and how they listen – how much time they are using the Squeezebox for at that point of the day. And one of the primary use cases – as you see it is pretty dominant and one of the primary use cases is listening to cloud music"


They are still seeing growth in the Squeezebox market and the fact that they mention this seems to bode well for continued development of the Squeezebox line.

There is also a mention of shifting focus from audio to music which seems to indicate they want to be more involved in the software/storage side of things as opposed to strictly hardware. I'm not sure if this is good or bad in the long run, but hopefully it means squeezebox.com will be around for a while.

pete

vrette
2011-11-11, 08:07
Since the Revue is going away (and I unfortunately have one), maybe Logitech could drop the whole LMS thing, and move back to an audio only server solution? No point in serving up video and pictures to the Squeezebox line, and there are already a lot of DLNA servers out there. Also, no need to spend time and resources on a video and picture LMS that almost no one will use.

Mnyb
2011-11-11, 08:14
Since the Revue is going away (and I unfortunately have one), maybe Logitech could drop the whole LMS thing, and move back to an audio only server solution? No point in serving up video and pictures to the Squeezebox line, and there are already a lot of DLNA servers out there. Also, no need to spend time and resources on a video and picture LMS that almost no one will use.

+1

I think it is easy to remove, as it can be turned off very easilly at startup, it runs on the Touch but without video/picture capacity .

keep the multiple folder capacity then something was gained by this exercise .

dlna can be turned off too.

You can do all this with todays LMS too.

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 08:14
If you mean LMS that is completely unrelated to the failure of the Revue. Revue has been out for over a year, only now is LMS a part of the defunct Revue.


As far as I understood, the revue disaster was a software disaster, before an "available content" disaster (even if available content is a problem).
The CEO confirmed the software was not what customers expected.

This was true for the original revue software (not LMS).

The new LMS may be better, but it wouldn't have saved the revue anyway.
SBS, LMS, is not reliable enough for the target audience.
Most people having tried to make a living selling Squeeboxes (not tech fans always saying that most problems are customers fault) will probably confirm.
This is good for geeks or tech fans, not for others.

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 08:28
If you read through the original transcript, it seems like Logitech is still interested in the Squeezebox line:


"We also have the Squeezebox product line we have actually seen a significant growth in Europe especially to our partnership and service providers but it is also growing worldwide"

"Internet radio, cloud services I will talk about that in a second is also going to have a very significant impact. The chart is actually a very interesting chart. This is our Squeezebox users and the role that every device plays – what users use during the day and which devices are used at different points of the day. And the black kind of represents how people use the Squeezebox during the day and how they listen – how much time they are using the Squeezebox for at that point of the day. And one of the primary use cases – as you see it is pretty dominant and one of the primary use cases is listening to cloud music"


They are still seeing growth in the Squeezebox market and the fact that they mention this seems to bode well for continued development of the Squeezebox line.

There is also a mention of shifting focus from audio to music which seems to indicate they want to be more involved in the software/storage side of things as opposed to strictly hardware. I'm not sure if this is good or bad in the long run, but hopefully it means squeezebox.com will be around for a while.

pete

Actually CEO seems to get things right, that is good news.
He also speaks about people looking for higher audio quality.
We can hope they really focus on user friendly systems.
But if they focus only on cloud music, what will happen for user friendly access for our own flac libraries ?

Mark Miksis
2011-11-11, 08:44
This is all very interesting. I also saw the 10-Q on Monday which said there will be no Revue successor. IMO, the weakest part of the the Revue is the Media Player, which I assume was done by Logitech.

This whole thing does make me wonder why they chose to invest in adding LMS features to SBS.

toby10
2011-11-11, 09:00
As far as I understood, the revue disaster was a software disaster, before an "available content" disaster (even if available content is a problem).......

Lack of content is a HUGE problem. If GoogleTV had succeeded we likely wouldn't even be having this discussion because the Revue would have it's promised (albeit limited) content. The Revue's software issues may have further hampered adding other content, I dunno. Again, I can only point you back, yet again, to the Revue's main competitor of the Roku and their very large and growing content offerings.

You can have the very best hardware with the very best software, but without content you have no footing in this market.

Take away the "content" of SB players (Pandora, Rhapsody, Mog, whatever) and you have a very good but very limited music player. Content is what has largely driven SB hardware sales. The single biggest selling SB player is the Radio and I assure you most are buying those for the online content. ;)

toby10
2011-11-11, 09:05
If you read through the original transcript, it seems like Logitech is still interested in the Squeezebox line:....

Very good news indeed. THAT is what I wanted to hear!
Thanks for that portion of the transcript. :)

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 09:20
If GoogleTV had succeeded we likely wouldn't even be having this discussion because the Revue would have it's promised (albeit limited) content. The Revue's software issues may have further hampered adding other content, I dunno.

No, revue would have failed, because almost no customer in this market would accept to use unreliable beta software.
They would have turned to revue competition.

JJZolx
2011-11-11, 09:36
Mice and keyboards, man. Should have stuck to mice and keyboards.

MelonMonkey
2011-11-11, 09:38
Lack of content is a HUGE problem.


Yes, but you overestimate the importance of all the online content sources that some competitors like Roku offer. The most important for video in the US are Netflix, Vudu and Amazon, in that order.

For music, online content is a distant second to personal content - just ask Apple about this, they built their whole music business first on Rip, Mix, Burn, then to Rip and Mix and then to buy and download.

GoogleTV in general has failed because it was never clear to anyone, including the consumer, what the device was for and it didn't work well enough to allow anyone to use it for discovering the purpose for themselves.

Google has had a single consumer success story and that's Android. And the reason for its success is its price, close to free for most OEMs. Even with licensing to MS, it's a lot cheaper than developing your own OS.

Logitech would do well to stay far away from any Google software in the future. They'd be better off buying Boxee and spending some time fixing up that platform.

toby10
2011-11-11, 09:49
Yes, but you overestimate the importance of all the online content sources that some competitors like Roku offer. The most important for video in the US are Netflix, Vudu and Amazon, in that order....
.

For which the Revue only offered ONE of those. ;)
Content....... content....... content.....

toby10
2011-11-11, 09:53
.....
For music, online content is a distant second to personal content - just ask Apple about this, they built their whole music business first on Rip, Mix, Burn, then to Rip and Mix and then to buy and download.....

Yes, but unrelated to a Revue box. AppleTV?? People are not buying AppleTV for music. They are buying AppleTV for content.

toby10
2011-11-11, 10:01
No, revue would have failed, because almost no customer in this market would accept to use unreliable beta software.
They would have turned to revue competition.

I agree, but I'd rephrase that to "... Revue would have failed *anyways*... (do to flaky software)"
But absent a decent amount of content it would also have failed even with stable software.

But I do see your point.

Mark Miksis
2011-11-11, 10:47
Mice and keyboards, man. Should have stuck to mice and keyboards.

I really like the Revue's keyboard :)

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 10:49
I agree, but I'd rephrase that to "... Revue would have failed *anyways*... (do to flaky software)"
But absent a decent amount of content it would also have failed even with stable software.

But I do see your point.

Ok, now we agree.

Concerning squeezeboxes, I am sure software can be really improved and be successful if only they change the way it is developped.

1/ Concentrate on ease of use for non tech people, fix those unbelievable and unreliable mandatory scans (probably the main cause of end users problems, and non existing in almost every competitor software).

2/ Forget about those funny geek features or platforms only interesting for a few nerds (at least until point 1/ is achieved ...)

castalla
2011-11-11, 11:25
1/ Concentrate on ease of use for non tech people, fix those unbelievable and unreliable mandatory scans (probably the main cause of end users problems, and non existing in almost every competitor software).



The only mandatory scan is when you first install/update the sbs software - and I've never had a failure, ever.

maggior
2011-11-11, 11:56
I really like the Revue's keyboard :)

Me too. It's a shame because it is nice hardware. I like how it goes inline with the HDMI connection - it simplifies setup and you don't need yet another HDMI port. This came in handy since my main TV is old enough that it only has 1 HDMI port.

I'm still looking forward to what can be done with it once honeycomb is released for it - hopefully next week.

JJZolx
2011-11-11, 12:15
Anyone want to take a guess as to how long it takes these geniuses to rename the server now that they have no need for a 'media server'?

amcluesent
2011-11-11, 12:31
Logitech could always buy Sonos to pick up the lo-end market and do Transporter II under the Slimdevices brand.

P.S. IIRC everyone on this forum called the Revue a lemon as soon as it was announced!

sebage
2011-11-11, 13:32
"I'm still looking forward to what can be done with it once honeycomb is released for it - hopefully next week."

Do you expect that release will go ahead given this announcement? I expect they will can it altogether as they don't need another potential bunch of issues on a box that is now EOL.

bluegaspode
2011-11-11, 13:57
"I'm still looking forward to what can be done with it once honeycomb is released for it - hopefully next week."

Do you expect that release will go ahead given this announcement? I expect they will can it altogether as they don't need another potential bunch of issues on a box that is now EOL.

Reading the original transcript I don't see them dropping Revue?
The only quote that comes close to it is

"Our strategy has always been once the platform is there we will complement it as we have with many other platforms to the PC et cetera. So that must happen the drain out of Google TV with 2.0 and 3.0 to be successful, I’m optimistic but I’m not betting the company on it. We are willing to engage aggressively in making that platform richer once it’s there, but for now we have done what’s needed to do and we better seek for growth beyond that, we better seek for growth in the areas that we will discuss today."

Which essentially says they will focus again on the other areas, but no word of dropping the Revue. It's just not priority #1 anymore.

autopilot
2011-11-11, 13:57
.

GoogleTV in general has failed because it was never clear to anyone, including the consumer, what the device was for and it didn't work well enough to allow anyone to use it for discovering the purpose for themselves.



Amen.

Even Google never seemed to know, and still don't. Just one big convoluted experiment. wrong wrong wrong on so many levels... but we all knew that from the beginning. At least logi are admitting it and doing the right thing by binning it.

However, I'm actually feeling more positive about Squeezebox's future. But logi need to act now, admit their failings (the like whole stupid 'app' thing), get back to basics, take a cold shower, regroup and push forward. Apple Airplay is not destroying the market as many predicted, at least not yet, it's all still there to play for.

maggior
2011-11-11, 14:11
"I'm still looking forward to what can be done with it once honeycomb is released for it - hopefully next week."

Do you expect that release will go ahead given this announcement? I expect they will can it altogether as they don't need another potential bunch of issues on a box that is now EOL.

It's already being released to Sony devices, so I would imagine the update for the revue is already in flight. It's already done, it just has to be released. I'll be really pissed if they do not release the update since I just bought another revue in anticipation of honeycomb on the revue. Guess I could always look into rooting it and loading it that way, as others have done.

andyg
2011-11-11, 14:28
The Revue update is still coming, that team already put a lot of work into it and it's just in the final testing stages. And yes, the pendulum seems to be swinging back to Logi being interested in Squeezebox again.

JJZolx
2011-11-11, 14:32
The Revue update is still coming, that team already put a lot of work into it and it's just in the final testing stages. And yes, the pendulum seems to be swinging back to Logi being interested in Squeezebox again.

Any chance of picking up resources that the SB project lost previously? Sounds like they plan to shift resources to Harmony in the near future.

geoffp
2011-11-11, 14:45
I think the reason that Logitech is not emphasizing the Revue anymore is because Google bought Sage TV back in August this year. Sage TV is a complete off-air and internet TV capable system with hardware and PC software. I have a system and it works extremely well, but now is in limbo because of the Google sale. It still works, but I don't know for how much longer.

nicolas75
2011-11-11, 14:48
The only mandatory scan is when you first install/update the sbs software - and I've never had a failure, ever.

Yes I know that.

There is one mandatory scan on SBS/LMS the first time you start it, and you are totally unable to play a file on the usb stick your friend brought, unless you copy the file to a specific folder you assigned to LMS.

There is one mandatory scan each time you connect a usb device to the Touch (plus the time for the server to restart, each time the device is replaced or disconnected)

This is complete nonsense no normal user can ever accept ...
The most basic free version of MediaMonkey is years ahead of SBS/LMS regarding files selection and automatic folders scanning.

Concerning scanning failures, I had almost none myself.
But there are so many problems for so many people, that I cannot see how this software could be successful if those issues (far worse in SBS/LMS than in any other music software I am aware of) are not seriously fixed once for all.
We are quite far from that ...
It is really not serious, and killing the product line, to deny that scanning reliability is one of the biggest problems, and probably the worst one, of squeezeboxes softwares, or to say that when it fails, it is the user's fault.

JJZolx
2011-11-11, 14:48
Reading the original transcript I don't see them dropping Revue?

No, it does look like they'll be ceasing production of the Revue:


As our CEO Guerrino De Luca stated earlier this week, Logitech will not manufacture new Logitech Revue units. That said, we do believe that consumers in the U.S. will be able to purchase the product during this holiday season.

http://blog.logitech.com/2011/11/11/the-next-version-of-logitech-revue-with-google-tv-due-before-year-end/

andyg
2011-11-11, 14:53
Any chance of picking up resources that the SB project lost previously? Sounds like they plan to shift resources to Harmony in the near future.

Yes, although unfortunately we have seen a lot of great people decide to leave in the past year too (Ben, Tom, Matt, Steven, Mickey).

Goodsounds
2011-11-11, 15:12
....And yes, the pendulum seems to be swinging back to Logi being interested in Squeezebox again.

That's good news!

vrette
2011-11-11, 17:19
The Revue update is still coming, that team already put a lot of work into it and it's just in the final testing stages. And yes, the pendulum seems to be swinging back to Logi being interested in Squeezebox again.

Thanks for the confirmation.

JJZolx
2011-11-11, 17:19
I just watched this interview:

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=1900787476

What is EMEA?

JJZolx
2011-11-11, 17:23
What is EMEA?
Ah...

Europe, Middle East, and Africa.

Mnyb
2011-11-11, 17:25
I just watched this interview:

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=1900787476

What is EMEA?

some logitech department , probably the Eu division or somesuch ?
Using interbal acronyms externally ?

Install flashnplayer says my iPad , I'll watch it on a proper computer tomorrow...

JJZolx
2011-11-11, 17:31
Install flashnplayer says my iPad , I'll watch it on a proper computer tomorrow...

He doesn't mention Google TV or Revue and nothing about music products. Says (about 20 times) that EMEA sales were disappointing. Then goes on to say they've had record sales in mice and keyboards. :)

Mice and keyboards, Jerry. Mice and keyboards.

pippin
2011-11-11, 17:37
Using interbal acronyms externally ?


A lot of US companies use "EMEA" as an acronym, first stumbled upon it some 20 years ago at IBM, MS has it, too. It's a bit like "Rest of World minus Asia and South America"

pippin
2011-11-11, 17:37
Mice and keyboards, Jerry. Mice and keyboards.

Say "Cheese"

ajkidle
2011-11-11, 17:38
And yes, the pendulum seems to be swinging back to Logi being interested in Squeezebox again.

Best news I've read on this board in a long time. Thanks for posting your perspective on this Andy. Hopefully the SB team will be appropriately staffed again soon.

pippin
2011-11-11, 17:58
And yes, the pendulum seems to be swinging back to Logi being interested in Squeezebox again.

Now the big question is: will they hire people who UNDERSTAND this product? And I'm not talking about developers here.

MrSinatra
2011-11-11, 18:33
http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/desktop/231902887?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_News

vrette
2011-11-11, 22:33
EMEA = Europe, Middle East, Africa

cunobelinus
2011-11-12, 02:45
On 12 Nov 2011, at 00:31, JJZolx wrote:

>>
>
> He doesn't mention Google TV or Revue and nothing about music products.
> Says (about 20 times) that EMEA sales were disappointing. Then goes on
> to say they've had record sales in mice and keyboards. :)
>
> Mice and keyboards, Jerry. Mice and keyboards.
>
Steinbeck?

slate
2011-11-12, 03:01
Now the big question is: will they hire people who UNDERSTAND this product? And I'm not talking about developers here.

They can hire me and I will tell them; but not all of you would like me as productmanager

Atlantic
2011-11-12, 03:15
http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/desktop/231902887?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_News

Useful link, thanks Mr S. Points us to

http://ir.logitech.com/events.cfm?eventid=104245

and, on the right of that page, a link to Aisha's slides

http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/LOGI/1502914136x0x516373/814afe4c-d891-4bb4-99a8-7abf2790a900/AA_-_AID_2011_110911_FINAL_.pdf

where she talks about Music and TV. Well worth looking at, and shows a commitment to SQ and to music streaming.

Her focus, rightly in my view, is on music streaming - from the internet, for now, with SQ Radio - though I think she'll need to move up to a SQ radio device that can dock an iPhone or Android phone. (Tech detail: docking not strictly necessary since device could stream over WiFi or BT, but there will be battery issues for the main user, and a dock could provide power and recharge.) But this focus on music streaming is correct because it is the high-volume future, and where Logitech is likely to do well.

She does show a laptop also streaming to the SQ radio, but she doesn't mention the more substantial stereo use cases. But the Touch is a good product, so - hopefully - she'll activate or re-activate its marketing. One possibility she might think about is upgrading the radio product to also double as the higher-end audio source, a sort of combined radio/touch/Android dock. The commercial reason for this is that Logitech is aware that people 'trade-up' and the CEO said he needs the company to have products that people can move on to; this could be a good fit, I think.

Her slides look positive, and that Andy feels confident enough to voice the thoughts that he has, does suggest that Logitech is aware of the potential of SQ kit in music streaming.

I hope the team succeed.

regards, Atlantic

bluegaspode
2011-11-12, 04:19
Well at least it's easy with Squeezebox to upsell ... if there were more devices.

shaboyi
2011-11-12, 16:36
I often see posts stating that the SB is not for the 'non-tech' crowd
and/or you can't sell and instal them for non-tech consumers. Well, I do
install them for non-tech customers and they have virtually no problems and
love the devices. It's true they get a professional installation with a
dedicated server, but the idea that it cannot be done is simply false. It
works flawlessly for most of our customers and problems are far and few
between (with the notable, recent exception of the 7.6 debacle - yeah that
hurt and cost us). Nor is it all that complicated for our installers if a
few rules are adhered to: a very solid whole home wi-fi network, hard
wired server, hard-wired SBs, a dedicated server (with musicip),
pre-planning for mysqueezebox.com and streaming apps, and, at the end, a
leisurely walk-thru/tutorial with the customer. Done this way, Sonos,
which we also install, does not compare in terms of reliability, quality or
features. We'll install it for customers who demand it, but steer the rest
away.

It's certainly true that we sell to an upscale niche market who have the
money to spend for the setup, server and the service we provide, but done
right you can't beat it for a full featured digital audio solution.

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:14 AM, nicolas75 <
nicolas75.531ngn1321024561 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:

>
> toby10;669229 Wrote:
> > If you mean LMS that is completely unrelated to the failure of the
> > Revue. Revue has been out for over a year, only now is LMS a part of
> > the defunct Revue.
> >
>
> As far as I understood, the revue disaster was a software disaster,
> before an "available content" disaster (even if available content is a
> problem).
> The CEO confirmed the software was not what customers expected.
>
> This was true for the original revue software (not LMS).
>
> The new LMS may be better, but it wouldn't have saved the revue
> anyway.
> SBS, LMS, is not reliable enough for the target audience.
> Most people having tried to make a living selling Squeeboxes (not tech
> fans always saying that most problems are customers fault) will
> probably confirm.
> This is good for geeks or tech fans, not for others.
>
>
> --
> nicolas75
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> nicolas75's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15823
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91532
>
>

Gingernut63
2011-11-12, 17:28
I have to say that LMS or Squeezebox Server in its database roll leaves a lot to be be desired. That is where Logitech can make huge improvements in the Squeezebox brand. It's an audio delivery system and diverting resources to making it a multimedia server has made it a jack of all trades and a master of none.

I like the squeezebox concept but I just don't like the database management and I have no intention of using the interface with iTunes. Hi end audio, you have to be joking.

At present I manage the MonkeySqueeze script which interfaces MediaMonkey with the Squeezebox system. It's not perfect but it's getting close, especially now we can sync playlists between the systems on the latest Alpha release. Why am I pushing the MonkeySqueeze/MediaMonkey angle? It's not for money as MonkeySqueeze is freeware and you can use the freeware version of MediaMonkey with it. It's one way of linking a very good music management tool with a good music delivery system.

MediaMonkey is not perfect either. It doesn't have the useful plugins that are provided with LMS so it's not a direct swap. Both programs have their uses. Just a pity that it's proving difficult to find an all in one solution for audio delivery.

Squeezebox will continue to live on the edge of usefulness until Logitech give it the resources it requires to improve the interface between the user and hardware. Maybe they can form a relationship with MediaMonkey, but whatever they do, now is the time to do something positive for the system.

Food for thought

castalla
2011-11-12, 17:46
As a 'everyday' user I haven't really found LMS to be that drastically bad (compared with 7.6 which was awful).

I suspect that there are two levels of users, those who basically just want a reliable internet radio/services device with added media functions, and those who want it to be a high-end media streaming device.

Overall, I think the current SB implentation manages to serve both constituencies quite well - there are lots of options for those who want to extend functionality.

Try struggling with other internet 'streaming' hardware and you soon appreciate how good Logitech devices actually are!

nicolas75
2011-11-14, 04:18
I often see posts stating that the SB is not for the 'non-tech' crowd
Yes ...



and/or you can't sell and instal them for non-tech consumers.
No, you just DO need an computer guy to install and support it.
(Hifi dealers are not supposed to be computer guys)


Well, I do
install them for non-tech customers and they have virtually no problems and
love the devices. It's true they get a professional installation with a
dedicated server
That's the condition, You got it !



but the idea that it cannot be done is simply false.
I don't remember reading it cannot be done


It works flawlessly for most of our customers and problems are far and few
between (with the notable, recent exception of the 7.6 debacle - yeah that
hurt and cost us). Nor is it all that complicated for our installers if a
few rules are adhered to: a very solid whole home wi-fi network, hard
wired server, hard-wired SBs, a dedicated server (with musicip),
pre-planning for mysqueezebox.com and streaming apps, and, at the end, a
leisurely walk-thru/tutorial with the customer. Done this way, Sonos,
which we also install, does not compare in terms of reliability, quality or
features. We'll install it for customers who demand it, but steer the rest
away.

It's certainly true that we sell to an upscale niche market who have the
money to spend for the setup, server and the service we provide, but done
right you can't beat it for a full featured digital audio solution.

So you confirm that in its current state, this product cannot be suitable for wide audience, without dedicated computer aware staff to install and support the system.
With the price it costs, which may exceed the devices price, does it ?
How much do you charge ? How does it compare to the price of the SB device ?

Otherwise they have to stick to very basic use (streaming internet radios for example), which is most customers do.

socistep
2011-11-14, 06:22
Her focus, rightly in my view, is on music streaming - from the internet, for now, with SQ Radio - though I think she'll need to move up to a SQ radio device that can dock an iPhone or Android phone. (Tech detail: docking not strictly necessary since device could stream over WiFi or BT, but there will be battery issues for the main user, and a dock could provide power and recharge.) But this focus on music streaming is correct because it is the high-volume future, and where Logitech is likely to do well.



Hi Atlantic

This is a very good point, I think this would appeal to the mass market more, if you think about it the Touch has capability (mixed reviews I think) to load music from USB/SD and play, how different in HL theory is that to plugging in an ipod/iphone and loading music? Perhaps a seperate dock as Sonos went for

I guess the challenge would be around software, ability to give the user the option to quickly interact between ipod/iphone (potentially airplay?), 'local' music and internet services whilst still allowing the 3rd party plugins etc.

Thanks
Ian

castalla
2011-11-14, 07:36
[QUOTE]No, you just DO need an computer guy to install and support it.[/UNQUOTE]

That's nonsense - no need to pay for something most users can easily do themselves - if they can read the quick start guide and use a web-browser.

kesey
2011-11-14, 09:24
So you confirm that in its current state, this product cannot be suitable for wide audience, without dedicated computer aware staff to install and support the system.

Otherwise they have to stick to very basic use (streaming internet radios for example), which is most customers do.

Absolutely incorrect. My daughter has a brain which she is happy to use on a regular basis, installed Squeezecenter, attached a USB hard disk with .flac files on board, told Squeezecenter where to find the .flac files, does average day to day stuff like turning on her computer, sticking in an Ethernet cable, ripping CDs and putting the resultant files where she wants them. In short she is happy with her Squeezebox Classic and gets fun out of it. Is she a dedicated computer wonk? Certainly not. Just someone with cop on and initiative.

One of my sons behaves like his capable sister. The other could not be bothered. For him music comes out of a tap.

Do they stick to basic use? No, why would they?

Well done all who sail in the good ship Slim/Squeezecentre/LMS.

nicolas75
2011-11-14, 09:54
Absolutely incorrect. My daughter has a brain which she is happy to use on a regular basis, installed Squeezecenter, attached a USB hard disk with .flac files on board, told Squeezecenter where to find the .flac files, does average day to day stuff like turning on her computer, sticking in an Ethernet cable, ripping CDs and putting the resultant files where she wants them. In short she is happy with her Squeezebox Classic and gets fun out of it. Is she a dedicated computer wonk? Certainly not. Just someone with cop on and initiative.

One of my sons behaves like his capable sister. The other could not be bothered. For him music comes out of a tap.

Do they stick to basic use? No, why would they?

Well done all who sail in the good ship Slim/Squeezecentre/LMS.

Anybody posting messages on this forum, is tech-aware.
You are tech-aware.
I would be surprised if your children are not ...
They are probably more than you are.
What I mean is that you and your children are the computer aware staff.
So in your case, the computer aware staff is needed and is present.

The very problem of people playing with computers is their total incapacity to understand that the vast majority of people do not care at all about that ...
Most of them do not even know which software they should use to rip a CD (and I do think they are right not to be interested in that).
They do not want to check if their artwork won't break the scanner, and let them stuck with unusable library (something I almost never saw happening in any music system but Squeezeboxes ...)

I do think they are right, and that software is still a highly immature industry.
Nothing weird, it is a very young industry.

People like you are just saying that every people having a car must have a garage and spend several hours a week digging in the engine.
More than that, you do spend several hours a week in your car engine, and you do think that everybody actually behaves this way.

This is just plain wrong (not because they would not be able to do it, but because they DO NOT want to do it whatsoever ...)

shaboyi
2011-11-14, 10:45
My point was that if setup properly it does not require support. We
install and then have almost no follow up support calls or issues with our
overwhelming non-tech customers. I would agree that there is not good
documentation for trouble-free installation and that initial installation
(done right) could be a problem for non-tech customers (think of generic
wi-fi problems alone, which is a prerequisite for a useable system, and
which a lot of non-tech people really struggle with getting right,
especially in larger spaces) .

But i can't emphasize enough that IF setup properly it does not require
on-going support and customers get enormous benefits and enjoyment from the
system WITHOUT having to endlessly tinker with it. Our customers don't
tinker with it. They just use it.

Sonos is no treat on the initial setup, either, especially when setting it
up with their wireless system in a large space (it can be way worse since
you can't really tweak their proprietary wireless network, where you can
with standard Wi-Fi). .

Better installation documentation would help as would some simple 'best
practices' (like: problems increase if the squeezebox server computer and
SBs are connected wirelessly, so please use wired Ethernet whenever
possible, or another: the system runs smoother and encounters less
problems if squeezecenter is installed on a dedicated computer, if not
possible, install it on an 'always on' computer; do not install
squeezecenter on a laptop. Or another: please try to ensure your Wi-Fi
network is properly setup and functioning prior to installation). Etc, Etc


On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 6:18 AM, nicolas75 <
nicolas75.536wjb1321269601 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:

>
> shaboyi;669664 Wrote:
> > I often see posts stating that the SB is not for the 'non-tech' crowd
> >
> Yes ...
>
> shaboyi;669664 Wrote:
> >
> > and/or you can't sell and instal them for non-tech consumers.
> >
> No, you just DO need an computer guy to install and support it.
> (Hifi dealers are not supposed to be computer guys)
>
>
> shaboyi;669664 Wrote:
> > Well, I do
> > install them for non-tech customers and they have virtually no problems
> > and
> > love the devices. It's true they get a professional installation with
> > a
> > dedicated server
> >
> That's the condition, You got it !
>
>
> shaboyi;669664 Wrote:
> >
> > but the idea that it cannot be done is simply false.
> >
> I don't remember reading it cannot be done
>
> shaboyi;669664 Wrote:
> > It
> > works flawlessly for most of our customers and problems are far and
> > few
> > between (with the notable, recent exception of the 7.6 debacle - yeah
> > that
> > hurt and cost us). Nor is it all that complicated for our installers
> > if a
> > few rules are adhered to: a very solid whole home wi-fi network,
> > hard
> > wired server, hard-wired SBs, a dedicated server (with musicip),
> > pre-planning for mysqueezebox.com and streaming apps, and, at the end,
> > a
> > leisurely walk-thru/tutorial with the customer. Done this way,
> > Sonos,
> > which we also install, does not compare in terms of reliability,
> > quality or
> > features. We'll install it for customers who demand it, but steer the
> > rest
> > away.
> >
> > It's certainly true that we sell to an upscale niche market who have
> > the
> > money to spend for the setup, server and the service we provide, but
> > done
> > right you can't beat it for a full featured digital audio solution.
> >
> >
>
> So you confirm that in its current state, this product cannot be
> suitable for wide audience, without dedicated computer aware staff to
> install and support the system.
> With the price it costs, which may exceed the devices price, does it ?
>
> Otherwise they have to stick to very basic use (streaming internet
> radios for example), which is most customers do.
>
>
> --
> nicolas75
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> nicolas75's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15823
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91532
>
>

maggior
2011-11-14, 11:12
But i can't emphasize enough that IF setup properly it does not require
on-going support and customers get enormous benefits and enjoyment from the
system WITHOUT having to endlessly tinker with it. Our customers don't
tinker with it. They just use it.


When you say "they just use it", do you mean that they have a static music collection? I can't imagine many people have a completely static music collection.

Once it's setup, the one stumbling block I would see is adding new music to the library.

How do you address that issue with your customers?

I ask only because I'm curious.

garym
2011-11-14, 11:38
I know of a professional home audio/home theater installer in my area that interestingly enough installed tons of duet systems for his customers. I know one of his customers. He essentially installs these as a PANDORA system and the customers don't even realize that they could use it for their own music. In most cases, he ALSO installs an ipod or iphone cradle attached to another input on the stereo system.

So his customers are using pandora and the CONTROLLER for that, and if they want their OWN music, they insert ipod into cradle connected to stereo and choose an alternative input source on their receiver.

Yes, this is sorta lame in terms of not exploiting the SB system. On the other hand, the customers don't know any better. They are happy to have pandora throughout the house, and happy to play music from their ipods.

Synch in the house is created because the installer has put speakers in all the rooms where sound is wanted and connected ALL these speakers back to the receiver (and perhaps a speaker switch that is clearly labled). And he's put volume controls next to light switch in each room to which that room's speakers are connected.

So the user can listen to anything from the home system (which is typically the home theater system as well) by selecting which room the user wants sound in.

The speakers in the various rooms are not audiophile, just OK. And of course we can look at this in amazement and think that this is equivalent to buying a BMW and then putting it in neutral and having friends push us around to move from place to place.

But as have others have mentioned, there are lots of people that don't pay that much attention to their music stuff. If I put a gun to their head they couldn't tell me the difference between an mp3 vs AAC

p.s. My friend was amazed when I was able to program her mysb.com account to add a number of internet radio stations she likes to her favorites (radioparadise). I offered to set up her own music to also play on the SB, but she didn't want to be bothered. She said "why do I need that, it is already on my ipod."

EDIT: And of course this same person (and others) are always very impressed with what I can do with my home system. But not impressed enough to want to bother with it for themselves. Of course these same people like the depth and breadth of my collection of over 200,000 tracks when they ask to hear stuff but at the same time think I'm insane and ask "how could you ever listen to all that music?"

Mnyb
2011-11-14, 13:08
This statement is bizzare !

"
> So you confirm that in its current state, this product cannot be
> suitable for wide audience, without dedicated computer aware staff to
> install and support the system.
> With the price it costs, which may exceed the devices price, does it ?
>
> Otherwise they have to stick to very basic use (streaming internet
> radios for example), which is most customers do.

"

People have computers and people have wifi and network and routers BEFORE adding a squeezebox to it .

And have been ripping CD's before for use on their PC . Or frankly been stealing tons of files with p2p software for ages.

You are implying that so called normal people can't operate their own computers (install a program, for example squeezeboxserver) .

Nor can they use their own router or add clients to their own network (for example follow the instructions on a Radio/Touch to make it connect )

And the the impossible task of putting a CD in the "cup holder" .

And you deliberately misinterpret parts of what shaboyi tries to tell us.

An observation , custom installs is not for for everyone these kind of clients obviously have money and are not at all interested in some diy to make this fly, they have more profitable things to do with their busy life.

A person with more time than money can do this for himself, with some care it actually works.

People are not imbeciles I have observed them driving cars operating heavy machinery using computers in their work etc.

Regarding "very basic use"

Many people would be quite satisfied with just a spotify or pandora machine , not all people have music collections these days or if you are uniterested in sq you find it faster on spotify than in your own CD pile anyway .

Streaming services is the great time saver for non hifi people , the hours I spent tinkering with the system pales in comparison to the time used to rip thousands of CD's .

I think someone only wanting the "very basic use" of streaming service realize this, a couple of hours on a weekend wasted but you suddenly saves 100's of hours not having to rip your scratched cd's and what about the warped vinyl and old cassettes .

And there is of-course problems a lot of them , but the basic architecture is ok .

A problem some won't admitt to is the "unreliable scanning" is in reality that all the files you downloaded with p2p are tagged by cretins, such a collection would of-course be a horrible mess and not usable by any other way than "music folder" it often looks very odd in album or artist ;)

slate
2011-11-14, 13:42
There are also the hopeless cases like my parents (65-69). My dad used a pc at work, but the technical stuff does not interest him. Still need assistance everytime he want to flush his camera.

They have had B&O TVs for 35 years and still have to look at the remote when using it.

They would not be able to install neither SQ or Sonos.

So not sure what they should get when their 29 year old Beocenter 7700 dies.

But it is the same for most of my family; they can connect things but if it doesn't work they give up... it have to be plug&play... the ifruit way

sherington
2011-11-14, 23:32
My Pa - now 85 - has an SB3 stuck (with tape) to the top of his enormous projector TV, connected wirlessly to his desktop PC, with SB server on it & hooked to his "surround sound system" - plays his classical collection almost all day - never has a problem. It really took all of 20 mins to set it all up for him & teach how to "get at" his collection - which I had also digitized in less than a day with dBpowermmp. The whole thing took way less than a day and he has been a really happy bunny ever since - he has been running now for about 5 years.

kesey
2011-11-15, 07:02
My Pa - now 85 - has an SB3 stuck (with tape) to the top of his enormous projector TV, connected wirlessly to his desktop PC, with SB server on it & hooked to his "surround sound system" - plays his classical collection almost all day - never has a problem. It really took all of 20 mins to set it all up for him & teach how to "get at" his collection - which I had also digitized in less than a day with dBpowermmp. The whole thing took way less than a day and he has been a really happy bunny ever since - he has been running now for about 5 years.

Well done sherington. Nice story. Its great to hear that your Pa is listening to his music via the SB3.

When a person is willing to learn, nice things can happen.

My wife is a technophobe of the first order. She used to love her various Nokia phones - 6310s etc because they were so easy to use. She was very much reluctant to move to her HTC Desire even though she knew from the kids that it would work for her. Now she's emailing, googling, bopping photos all over the shop, using Viber, Whatsapp and loads of handy programs.

She uses the Squeezebox Boom and has a series of favorites (ripped CDs, radio stations etc.) that she likes. She has no interest in messing with Squeezecentre or that sort of thing. No problem. I do. But if I didn't she would be perfectly happy with the use she gets out of the Boom.

The Slim/Squeeze series of products is useful, and as easy or difficult or as esoteric to use as a person chooses to make them. That to me is what makes them great. They work. The Squeezebox Classic is a work of art - a beautiful pretty thing that allowed music a new way out of the box.

vrette
2011-11-15, 07:36
Just listed my Revue on eBay. I'm just going to bite the bullet and buy a xBox to use as an extender with my HTPC running Windows 7 Media Center. Buh-bye Google TV...

nicolas75
2011-11-15, 11:24
This statement is bizzare !

"
> So you confirm that in its current state, this product cannot be
> suitable for wide audience, without dedicated computer aware staff to
> install and support the system.
> With the price it costs, which may exceed the devices price, does it ?
>
> Otherwise they have to stick to very basic use (streaming internet
> radios for example), which is most customers do.

"

People have computers and people have wifi and network and routers BEFORE adding a squeezebox to it .

And have been ripping CD's before for use on their PC . Or frankly been stealing tons of files with p2p software for ages.

You are implying that so called normal people can't operate their own computers (install a program, for example squeezeboxserver) .

Nor can they use their own router or add clients to their own network (for example follow the instructions on a Radio/Touch to make it connect )

And the the impossible task of putting a CD in the "cup holder" .

And you deliberately misinterpret parts of what shaboyi tries to tell us.

An observation , custom installs is not for for everyone these kind of clients obviously have money and are not at all interested in some diy to make this fly, they have more profitable things to do with their busy life.

A person with more time than money can do this for himself, with some care it actually works.

People are not imbeciles I have observed them driving cars operating heavy machinery using computers in their work etc.

Regarding "very basic use"

Many people would be quite satisfied with just a spotify or pandora machine , not all people have music collections these days or if you are uniterested in sq you find it faster on spotify than in your own CD pile anyway .

Streaming services is the great time saver for non hifi people , the hours I spent tinkering with the system pales in comparison to the time used to rip thousands of CD's .

I think someone only wanting the "very basic use" of streaming service realize this, a couple of hours on a weekend wasted but you suddenly saves 100's of hours not having to rip your scratched cd's and what about the warped vinyl and old cassettes .

And there is of-course problems a lot of them , but the basic architecture is ok .

A problem some won't admitt to is the "unreliable scanning" is in reality that all the files you downloaded with p2p are tagged by cretins, such a collection would of-course be a horrible mess and not usable by any other way than "music folder" it often looks very odd in album or artist ;)

You simply missed the most important part of my post.
Which is people are not necesseraly stupid or imbecile (should I point out that YOU misinterpret what I said ?)
They simply do not accept to loose time with unreliable products or weird interface, only acceptable when you have a geek or nerd way of thinking.
And in that respect, I do think they are much smarter than geeks or nerds.

I can deal with computers, I do develop softwares much more complicated than LMS.
I am like the vast majority of Logitech target market (tech aware or not).
I don't want to mess with geek behavior, because computers and softwares are not a hobby, there are tools.
This market DEMAND stuff reliable and easy to install.
SBS/LMS is not, a bunch of customers say so.

One should not blame tags or artwork when LMS crashes (it almost never happened to me, but it does happen a lot for many customers), nor loosing time fixing tags if they don't care about them.
Why ?
Because this is not acceptable, and no other popular music software crash with bad or stupid artwork, leaving the customers with unusable library.

Forcing people to fix their artwork IS stupid (except as a TEMPORARY workaround until the mandatory LMS fix is done).

The only acceptable solution is 2 mandatory things :
- Allow people to suppress ANY kind of scan if they want.
- Make the scanner "bad-artwork-and-bad-tagging-proof"

Check MediaMonkey if you don't understand what it means.

It is not because a few dozens of geeks on a forum say those customers are wrong (or stupid), and that their one-armed blind 110 years old grandfather, or their six monthes old baby little sister, installed LMS with their right foot, while developping a funny perl plugin with the left big toe, use it without trouble, are happy with it, and so that everybody should be happy, that those few dozens of geeks are right.

Logitech target market, those who pay for the devices, hifi dealers choosing a product to sell it in order to make a living (not spending their time writing on a forum that customers are stupid because the product is so great), those people, some tech-aware, some others not, say that in its current state, those products are not reliable and easy to use for wide audience.

Fortunately it seems that Logitech CEO has figured out that.
With a little hope, this may be easily corrected.
Aknowledge that a software like MediaMonkey is years ahead LMS as far as files selection, library management, and scanning reliability are concerned (anybody not convinced should seriously try).
Make LMS behave more or less the same way for those functionalities.
This would solve more than 3/4 of squeezeboxes customers problems ...

aubuti
2011-11-15, 15:26
Aknowledge that a software like MediaMonkey is years ahead LMS as far as files selection, library management, and scanning reliability are concerned (anybody not convinced should seriously try).

I'm curious to try MediaMonkey, but before I go to the bother of installing it, could you explain how MM gets the tracks from my computer to my stereo systems? I've browsed the MM web page, and so far to me it looks to be more like iTunes, Winamp, Foobar2000, etc. That is, designed to play back on the computer itself, or possibly output to an audio system via soundcard, USB, or maybe digital output. But maybe I'm overlooking something. Thanks.

nicolas75
2011-11-15, 15:52
I'm curious to try MediaMonkey, but before I go to the bother of installing it, could you explain how MM gets the tracks from my computer to my stereo systems? I've browsed the MM web page, and so far to me it looks to be more like iTunes, Winamp, Foobar2000, etc. That is, designed to play back on the computer itself, or possibly output to an audio system via soundcard, USB, or maybe digital output. But maybe I'm overlooking something. Thanks.

I am using it like Winamp or Foobar2000 on a computer.
It may be possible to run it with some smartphone plugins, but I didn't check and I don't know.
[Edit] searching on MediaMonkey forums, there are actually android apps to use smartphones as remote for MediaMonkey ...

I have a USB dac connected to the computer and to my stereo system.
It behaves like a external soundcard.
Since I do need a computer with the Squeezebox Touch anyway and have everything wired, I am seriously thinking in replacing the Squeezebox Touch system by a good USB dac, a small silent nettop, and a good user friendly music software (ideally with some android smartphone app as a remote for the software).

Some good nettops running Windows 7 have a remote, can be connected to a Touch screen (not squeezebox touch here, but computer touch screen), softwares can probably be run with an android smartphone.

There is a MediaMonkey plugin for Squeezeboxes (MonkeySqueeze), but I don't know how it works exactly and I understood I do need LMS and its database to use it.
If so, I cannot get rid of LMS scanner.

The point is not to compare MediaMonkey to Squeezeboxes system (I don't really like the look of MediaMonkey interface, but that's just me).
The point is to see that it is not that difficult to have a software which can :

- select some files wherever there are (internal HDD, external HDD, network location, usb stick)
- add full directories to the library if you feel like it.
- have an advanced library management with automatic rescan if you really want it
- etc ...

All that without any hassle for normal users, no mandatory scans, no unexpected rescans when you don't expect them, no scan or rescan crashes (at least nothing compared to SBS/LMS)

I give MediaMonkey example because I use it, and think that file selection and library management are really great and reliable, I also use Foobar2000 and it is fine too, but it is probably the same for Winamp, etc ...

aubuti
2011-11-15, 16:35
I have a USB dac connected to the computer and to my stereo system.
It behaves like a external soundcard.

Ah, that's what I was afraid of. Doesn't sound like a solution for me. And I'm already familiar with the capabilities of all-purpose audio/media software like iTunes, Winamp, Foobar, Songbird, etc etc. Thanks anyway.

garym
2011-11-15, 17:20
Ah, that's what I was afraid of. Doesn't sound like a solution for me. And I'm already familiar with the capabilities of all-purpose audio/media software like iTunes, Winamp, Foobar, Songbird, etc etc. Thanks anyway.

yep, my pre-SB system was Foobar2000 on laptop w/USB HDD > S/PDIF > Benchmark DAC I > stereo. I also looked at MediaMonkey for a bit (and it was quite good), but liked the infinite flexibility of Foobar2000 and its plugins. But it was the search to get my music storage and computer away from the stereo, as well as far removed from any internal soundcard issues (which are many!) that got me to SB products. Wasn't even thinking about Synching players at the time, but that has now become a critical factor as well.

gruntwolla
2011-11-15, 21:24
The main issue throughout this thread is one that has been discussed God knows how many times in these forums, mainly along the lines that if one is a geek, go for Squeezebox; if not try Sonos or others.

Speaking purely for myself, I've long thought that view to be well off the mark. The average under 25 these days is extremely tech savvy, perfectly happy to download and use apps for their smartphones etc, so to suggest they can't cope with SBS/LMS software is ridiculous. Equally, for those who treat their music seriously, it is not a problem as they tend to know what they want, and do the research accordingly. So we are left with the large percentage of people who either can't be bothered, or are genuinely happy with inferior products.

For that last group, why would they be interested in wifi players at all. If they're happy with an ithingy dock playing aac files,then who are we to criticise?

So this brings us on to who Squeezeboxes should be aimed at, how to make them more user friendly, and how to market them. Personally, I've thought for a long time that Logitech have missed a trick by not having their own branded version of a vortebox. A box that can rip and tag accurately,with a stable linux version of SBS/LMS preinstalled, and perhaps a 250 GB HD could be pretty cheap if produced in bulk, and could be offered as a bundle with the Touch.I certainly wish I had heard of Vortebox BEFORE I ripped/tagged and added cover art to all my cds.

I also think it's incorrect/unhelpful to state that mediamonkey ( for example) is years ahead of LMS/SBS. I used to use mediamonkey in my pre SBS days, and I certainly don't miss it. The name SBS kind of gives it away really.It's primarily a SERVER, and as far as I'm concerned it does that rather well. Having said that, things can always be improved,can they not?
Regards,
Trev

Gingernut63
2011-11-15, 22:04
@nicolas75, aubuti


There is a MediaMonkey plugin for Squeezeboxes (MonkeySqueeze), but I don't know how it works exactly and I understood I do need LMS and its database to use it.
If so, I cannot get rid of LMS scanner.

This is not totally correct. If you have LMS on your PC then you don't have to have a LMS music database, hence no scanning. An empty folder is all that is required for the music folder address. MediaMonkey can manage your music database and it tells Squeezebox what to play. LMS is still required and anyway it has useful plugins that MediaMonkey doesn't. LMS on a Linux NAS (e.g. ReadyNAS DUO) does require a managed music database due to file format issues between the windows OS and Linux.

Try MediaMonkey(basic)/MonkeySqueeze for yourself and see the advantages of playing your music collection on Squeezebox using these freeware programs. The official release is here: http://www.mediamonkey.com/addons/browse/item/monkeysqueeze/

Also try the MonkeySqueeze Development site for the latest beta which has playlist sync: http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=59907

MrC
2011-11-15, 22:51
Ah, that's what I was afraid of. Doesn't sound like a solution for me. And I'm already familiar with the capabilities of all-purpose audio/media software like iTunes, Winamp, Foobar, Songbird, etc etc. Thanks anyway.

Try JRiver Media Center w/Whitebear. You can stream your raw FLACs directly to your SBs.

Mnyb
2011-11-15, 23:43
yep, my pre-SB system was Foobar2000 on laptop w/USB HDD > S/PDIF > Benchmark DAC I > stereo. I also looked at MediaMonkey for a bit (and it was quite good), but liked the infinite flexibility of Foobar2000 and its plugins. But it was the search to get my music storage and computer away from the stereo, as well as far removed from any internal soundcard issues (which are many!) that got me to SB products. Wasn't even thinking about Synching players at the time, but that has now become a critical factor as well.

Very similar to what I had , but in my case it was an stationary computer a long catv coax to my DAC.
i was alo using foobar 2000, which brings up the other problem with a computer centric solution.
it's top down you sit at the computer and pushing out music to your system.
And you mentioned the soudquality, fiddling with asio for all and/or kernel streaming to have good soundquality ( without the kmixer messing it up ) this also removed system sound from the output.

I got bored with that and basically only used while I was using my computer and for years I did not have any conection to my stereo untill I
got my first squeezebox. It instanly gave me the two things I lacked in my competer centric setup.

* computer independent soundquality.

* a bottom up solution where I pull music from my collection via the player UI I don't have to be near the computer hosting the music I did not have mine in the listening room even when I used it for music ( I can not have a noisy pc in the listening room bizarre idea )
this also leads to an architechture where multiroom is an natural extension and these player started to multiply.

this worked rigth out the box, no fiddling and nerd solutions yet that came later ;)

I later added a small not so power consuming server to the party ( headless no monitor or keyboard ) it just sits in a corner in another room.

My current favorite UI is iPeng it brings a very nice UI where i miss very little.

I sometimes use desktop software to genrate a playlist for later use with the squeezebox system.

The web-UI i dont regard it a player that would be unfair, but as an admin interface to the server with some player like cabalilities.

No the squeezebox system is not near what it could do alot of unfullfilled posibilties.

If ever wanted to go back to a topdown solution again it would be an laptop + usb dac, the squeezebox is not the tool for that.

Another thing that is special with squeezeboxserver is that by design it is NOT a media manager you can be assured that it never writes to files or touch the tags or move them or do anything to them. It just scan them so that they can be served to the players ( the whole collection can be stored read only ).
The idea is that there is plenty of software out ther that does this much better, this probably includes
Media Monkey :) and ripping CD or bying music has other solutions that logitech never could compete with.

That is a design choice and a holy cow here ?

Should the software have more media manager like capacity ? Some thinks it an extremly bad idea . I'm a bit ambivalent, but sometimes when I look at a track I'm playing and thinking why did I put it that genre ? I wish I could simply change it from the UI .
Honestly the worst case scenario if a media software botches the files is that you have to dig out your backup ?

The fear here with slim/logitechs *cough* track record in bugs would be that it would be a reoccuring event ?

Muele
2011-11-16, 00:30
Mediamonkey and the Squeeze-ecosystem obviously fill two different needs.

The one thing were they can easily be compared is the scanning. And MM is far ahead. Both in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and fault tolerance. Logitech could learn from that.

Btw I'm very pleased to hear that Logitech is devoted to Squeezebox. Lets just hope it is not too late and they have a (couple of) new model(s) up their sleeve, so they have something new and shiny to focus their (renewed?)marketing around.

Btw, what's up with the Touch/Radio placement in all their powerpoints and marketing? Radio everywhere, Touch nowhere. I do realize the Radio is very important and sells well, but it seems they are trying to hide the touch away.

Gingernut63
2011-11-16, 00:33
That is a design choice and a holy cow here ?

Should the software have more media manager like capacity ? Some thinks it an extremly bad idea . I'm a bit ambivalent, but sometimes when I look at a track I'm playing and thinking why did I put it that genre ? I wish I could simply change it from the UI .
Honestly the worst case scenario if a media software botches the files is that you have to dig out your backup ?

Good questions Mnyb. For me that is the most frustrating part about using LMS. It's not the plugins but the interface with your music collection. You cannot edit the files, creating playlists is a trial and it's slowww accessing music, and to top it off, there is the slow scanning.

It does depend entirely on what you want from it. I suppose if you play an album from beginning to end then it possibly does that ok. But it does really struggle outside of that area. I remember reading somewhere someone made a comment that LMS appeared to be created to manage a playlist of 100 albums without any thought of expansion. It really struggles with a large private music collection.

I'm not saying LMS is a waste of time, it does have it's uses but it does need an improvement in the management of the database. It maybe a holy cow to some, leave it as it is they say, but it's certainly not a religious experience for others.

cunobelinus
2011-11-16, 00:36
On 16 Nov 2011, at 07:30, Muele wrote:

> Btw I'm very pleased to here that Logitech is devoted to Squeezebox.

Pleased to where?

Muele
2011-11-16, 00:44
On 16 Nov 2011, at 07:30, Muele wrote:

> Btw I'm very pleased to here that Logitech is devoted to Squeezebox.

Pleased to where?

Ja, undskyld at engelsk ikke er mit modersmål. Men jeg rettede dog fejlen to minutter inden du nåede at påpege den.

sherington
2011-11-16, 01:00
I'm curious to try MediaMonkey, but before I go to the bother of installing it, could you explain how MM gets the tracks from my computer to my stereo systems? I've browsed the MM web page, and so far to me it looks to be more like iTunes, Winamp, Foobar2000, etc. That is, designed to play back on the computer itself, or possibly output to an audio system via soundcard, USB, or maybe digital output. But maybe I'm overlooking something. Thanks.

.. primarily for play lists. When I want to hear an album, then I usually use the SB system natively, as it were. Have used Winamp, Foobar and MediaMonkey - have to say that MM with MonkeySqueeze does it for me - the ONLY issue, to date, is the synching - when that is fixed, and it appears that it will happen, then it will be just about perfect. Great music library management, plus great playlist management. Have, in fact, almost never had a problem with the SB scanning system, although it is slow, but then I have learnt to be extremely anal about tagging - primarily use ID3-TagIT for quick fixes, and MP3Tag to make sure everything is tickety-boo and to add artwork to each track, if I can be bothereed!

Was quite delighted when I discovered MM and MS - solved one of my all time problems - creating large playlists quickly and easily, using my whole collection (just under 20,000 tracks) AND playing them. I tend to export the playlists so that they are available natively to SB, plus just play them thru MM if synching isnt an issue. Not perfect, I know, but then nothing really is and it works for me!

cunobelinus
2011-11-16, 01:41
Accepted.

On 16 Nov 2011, at 07:44, Muele wrote:

>
> cunobelinus;670449 Wrote:
>> On 16 Nov 2011, at 07:30, Muele wrote:
>>
>>> Btw I'm very pleased to here that Logitech is devoted to Squeezebox.
>>
>> Pleased to where?
>
> Ja, undskyld at engelsk ikke er mit modersmål. Men jeg rettede dog
> fejlen to minutter inden du nåede at påpege den.
>
>
> --
> Muele
>
> BR Mogens
>
> 2 Radios (1 battery), 2 Controllers, 2 Receivers, 1 Softsqueeze (at
> work), SqueezeCommander and SqueezePlayer on Se X10 mini and HTC
> Desire. Served by an old 800 mhz IBM T21 Thinkpad (Yes I know most
> phones have more cpu-power these days, but it gets the job done).
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Muele's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21310
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91532
>
>

socistep
2011-11-16, 03:29
I've reduced the amount of time I spent 'working' on my SB/music system this year (first born arrived in Jan), 4 main tools I use to reduce the overhead

1) Reliable server - Invested in a HP proliant microserver which is rock steady, quick and quiet
2) Vortexbox - Installed on above, have had for a number of years and reduces the manual ripping/tagging work
3) Erlands plugins - Use ratings/dynamic playlists, 'top rated' playlists form the bulk of background/casual listening
4) Spotify - Use spotify for other playlists and also for music on the go, this has reduced the time needed to get music onto iphone/android phone for in car and on the go music

Before I spent quite a bit of time making sure tags/artwork was correct, still had a lot to go but that has dropped down the priority list, I will probably once a month go in and correct new music tags where I wasn't happy with the vortexbox result (e.g. year or genre incorrect) - I've probably spent more ad-hoc time rating tracks in my library however limited time - I prefer now just to chill out and listen to the music :-)

nicolas75
2011-11-16, 06:35
@nicolas75, aubuti



This is not totally correct. If you have LMS on your PC then you don't have to have a LMS music database, hence no scanning. An empty folder is all that is required for the music folder address. MediaMonkey can manage your music database and it tells Squeezebox what to play. LMS is still required and anyway it has useful plugins that MediaMonkey doesn't. LMS on a Linux NAS (e.g. ReadyNAS DUO) does require a managed music database due to file format issues between the windows OS and Linux.

Try MediaMonkey(basic)/MonkeySqueeze for yourself and see the advantages of playing your music collection on Squeezebox using these freeware programs. The official release is here: http://www.mediamonkey.com/addons/browse/item/monkeysqueeze/

Also try the MonkeySqueeze Development site for the latest beta which has playlist sync: http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=59907

Thanks.

The problem is that from MediaMonkey forums and your messages, there are annoying delays (I use mainly flac files ...) with this plugin.
I must say I don't feel like being a beta tester like with LMS.
If I have to install LMS, start it with an empty database, and so on, I guess it will be much easier to run directly MediaMonkey with a smartphone application, and replace the Touch by a good USB dac ...
With a small silent and nice Nettop like Asrock ones, it may be the perfect solution.
I am more inclined to check how easily MediaMonkey can be controlled with a smartphone, than mixing Squeezeboxes, LMS and MediaMonkey.

At this point It seems to me that good solution are
- LMS get decent files selection and library management, and I can stick with it.
- LMS doesn't and I have to completely get rid of LMS

If I have to get rid of LMS
- Squeezeboxes can be used without LMS at all (I can accept TinySBS if it is improved, there are simple bugzilla bugs to fix for that) and I keep the Touch without LMS, Squeezebox being only hardware client for MediaMonkey like software.
- If not possible, I replace the Touch by a good USB dac and forget about Squeezeboxes.


The mere point here is that Logitech is a hardware company, not a software company.
They make money with squeezeboxes, not with LMS (which is free).
A smart manager should understand that a squeezebox Touch should be seen as a network soundcard from any PC music software, or as a standalone device running an optimized TinySBS.

If people want to mess with LMS and its weird scanning, it is there, they can use it, but it should be only another not mandatory option.

nicolas75
2011-11-16, 06:40
Ah, that's what I was afraid of. Doesn't sound like a solution for me. And I'm already familiar with the capabilities of all-purpose audio/media software like iTunes, Winamp, Foobar, Songbird, etc etc. Thanks anyway.

I have to check how MediaMonkey can be controlled with a smartphone application.
Didn't knew it was possible before I answered your question and checked forums.
There are several ones, apparently some with WIFI.
If one of them really works fine, that would be great, and the small nettop running MediaMonkey could be hidden.

nicolas75
2011-11-16, 06:45
I also think it's incorrect/unhelpful to state that mediamonkey ( for example) is years ahead of LMS/SBS. I used to use mediamonkey in my pre SBS days, and I certainly don't miss it. The name SBS kind of gives it away really.It's primarily a SERVER, and as far as I'm concerned it does that rather well. Having said that, things can always be improved,can they not?
Regards,
Trev

You probably never use your library the way a lot of people does.
If you want to play some files wherever there are located, without necesseraly keeping them in your database, and make frequent changes to your library, MediaMonkey is really years ahead LMS (ease of use, speed, reliability).

The first time I tried MediaMonkey was several years ago, and at that time, it was already much more convenient than LMS is today.

There is NO file selection feature in LMS.
You have to declare a directory to LMS, and place this file in this directory.
If you just want to play a flac file located on a USB stick, and then disconnect the stick and forget about this file, LMS behavior is a nonsense.

nicolas75
2011-11-16, 07:08
Ok, it seems MediaMonkey even have addons to behave as a server controlled with a web interface.
The more I see it, the more MediaMonkey seems to be everything LMS should be.
I really use it in a much too basic way ...

socistep
2011-11-16, 08:22
You probably never use your library the way a lot of people does.
If you want to play some files wherever there are located, without necesseraly keeping them in your database, and make frequent changes to your library, MediaMonkey is really years ahead LMS (ease of use, speed, reliability).

The first time I tried MediaMonkey was several years ago, and at that time, it was already much more convenient than LMS is today.

There is NO file selection feature in LMS.
You have to declare a directory to LMS, and place this file in this directory.
If you just want to play a flac file located on a USB stick, and then disconnect the stick and forget about this file, LMS behavior is a nonsense.


Your obviously quite frustrated that SBS/LMS doesn't meet your requirement, however I suspect for the majority of users it works well and does what they want - it does for me complimented by Erlands plugins.

However I can understand where users get frustrated around playlists, as mentioned I tend to user ratings based playlists and edit on the fly if needed as well as Spotify playlists rather then spending a lot of time myself on creating playlists - I also heavily used the LastFM 'my library' and 'my recommendations' playlists before they started charging - I prefer to get others to do the work rather then spending ages myself creating playlists but every user is different.

aubuti
2011-11-16, 10:50
This is not totally correct. If you have LMS on your PC then you don't have to have a LMS music database, hence no scanning. An empty folder is all that is required for the music folder address. MediaMonkey can manage your music database and it tells Squeezebox what to play. LMS is still required and anyway it has useful plugins that MediaMonkey doesn't. LMS on a Linux NAS (e.g. ReadyNAS DUO) does require a managed music database due to file format issues between the windows OS and Linux.

Try MediaMonkey(basic)/MonkeySqueeze for yourself and see the advantages of playing your music collection on Squeezebox using these freeware programs. The official release is here: http://www.mediamonkey.com/addons/browse/item/monkeysqueeze/

Also try the MonkeySqueeze Development site for the latest beta which has playlist sync: http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=59907
Thanks for the additional information. You say MM "tells Squeezebox what to play". Is this true if LMS is on a Linux box? And does it apply to multiple SBs, and to sync'd or different streams?

To be completely honest, I don't have problems with SBS scanning (haven't tried LMS yet), and don't have problems with SBS at all except for a few minor bugs. But I have an open mind and am willing to see what advantages MM or other approaches offer, especially advantages that don't involve controlling the music from a laptop or desktop computer (so the MM smartphone app has potential appeal). Having the computer hidden away and multi-room capability are two "must tick" boxes for me.

EDIT: Never mind the first question ("Is this true if LMS is on a Linux box?"), as I now see the answer is yes it can (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=89046&page=3). Would still be good to know the answers to the other Qs. Thanks.

Gingernut63
2011-11-16, 12:31
EDIT: Never mind the first question ("Is this true if LMS is on a Linux box?"), as I now see the answer is yes it can (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=89046&page=3). Would still be good to know the answers to the other Qs. Thanks.

I think it's time to list the pros and cons of using MediaMonkey/MonkeySqueeze with Squeezebox. LMS is still required and remember MonkeySqueeze is under constant development:

Pros
- MM/MS can tell LMS/Squeezebox what to play
- You can multisync devices as normal using LMS
- MM/MS can communicate with Linux NAS Devices with LMS installed
- Playlist sync is available in the latest MonkeySqueeze Beta release There is a no lag between tracks anymore.
- LMS does not have to manage a music database
- MM provides quick access to the music library and is not hindered by a very large database
- Creation and use of Playlists is very easy
- All supported audio formats play

Cons
- MM/MS cannot do multiple streams
- MM/MS cannot play audio in-sync with Squeezebox (at the moment). Although you can mute MM and use SqueezePlay on the same PC, synced with the other devices.
- PC and MM/MS must be on for the sync to work. Not a major issue if running LMS on the PC.
- LMS will need to link to a music database if SB devices are to individually access music

Using MediaMonkey/MonkeySqueeze with Squeezebox won't appeal to everyone. I have my PC on all the time and use MediaMonkey to play music. I have a hardwired connection to my HiFi system and to the pergola outside. I have a Boom in the Kitchen plus I use Squeeze Player on my phone connected a portable audio system. When required (quite often) I have the same music playing throughout the house. I can use the Boom separately to either play music direct from the LMS database or access internet radio.

Would I like MediaMonkey to manage the SB system full time, absolutely, however it cannot do everything that LMS can do. It's also important to point out that MediaMonkey is now a multimedia player with a DLNA server in the latest release.

Gotta go, I am happy to answer further questions at anytime. Try MM/MS with SB, it's not hard to setup and you can always go back to your present setup at anytime.

aubuti
2011-11-16, 12:48
Thanks, Gingernut63, for laying out the pros and cons so clearly. Given my situation, I personally don't see the appeal, because SBS works reliably for me, and MM/MS's inability to do multiple streams is a dealbreaker. But I'm glad it's there for others who might benefit. Keep up the good work.

Mnyb
2011-11-16, 12:59
Thanks, Gingernut63, for laying out the pros and cons so clearly. Given my situation, I personally don't see the appeal, because SBS works reliably for me, and MM/MS's inability to do multiple streams is a dealbreaker. But I'm glad it's there for others who might benefit. Keep up the good work.

There is also Muso and Moose and some script to use foobar2000 directly .

It enhances the whole platform if alternative ways to use the system is developed .

I'm quite satisfied with iPeng as UI on my iPad .

paulster
2011-11-16, 13:24
There is NO file selection feature in LMS.
You have to declare a directory to LMS, and place this file in this directory.
If you just want to play a flac file located on a USB stick, and then disconnect the stick and forget about this file, LMS behavior is a nonsense.

That's because LMS is designed for people who buy their music.

gruntwolla
2011-11-16, 13:51
You probably never use your library the way a lot of people does.
If you want to play some files wherever there are located, without necesseraly keeping them in your database, and make frequent changes to your library, MediaMonkey is really years ahead LMS (ease of use, speed, reliability).

The first time I tried MediaMonkey was several years ago, and at that time, it was already much more convenient than LMS is today.

There is NO file selection feature in LMS.
You have to declare a directory to LMS, and place this file in this directory.
If you just want to play a flac file located on a USB stick, and then disconnect the stick and forget about this file, LMS behavior is a nonsense.

You are pretty strident with your opinions, but when all is said and done that is all they are - opinions.

All I want from my squeezebox SERVER is to to stream my flac and mp3 files to my 5 squeezeboxes around the house, and sync them as and when needed. This is exactly what it does. I only ever access the web interface for maintenance. Everything else is done on Squeezecommander. I hardly ever buy cd's anymore - Spotify and Napster work seamlessly, and there are plenty of sites to download hi res files.

If a friend should pop by with some flac files on a stick, then admittedly my choice is limited, but as previously stated, no one is suggesting that SBS/LMS can't be improved.

However, regarding the things LMS can do that MM cannot - does that make MM behaviour a nonsense? Of course not - one was designed as a player, the other a server.

Finally, when I eventually upgrade to my much longed for Cyrus hifi system, you would be welcome to come round to my house and plug your USB stick straight into the back of the amp!

Trev

Grahame
2011-11-16, 14:04
There is NO file selection feature in LMS.
You have to declare a directory to LMS, and place this file in this directory.
If you just want to play a flac file located on a USB stick, and then disconnect the stick and forget about this file, LMS behavior is a nonsense.

Not True, This feature has been around since pre LMS, it's just non intuitive.

Get the file path to the file / folder / directory of interest

In the Web Interface

Paste this into the Internet Radio -> Tune In URL Field

Click on the play (Tune in) or Add Buttons

See your desired files queued up or played using the file reference , rather than a stream URL.

Result.

For Bonus Points, work out the request / command sent to LMS generated by this interaction, then embed it in a shell extension, so you could play the file directly from the file system (in much the same way as the foobar2000 Shell / File Explorer Context Menu additions) - Or have an app you could drag and drop the file onto to play them, or whatever Operating system dependent mechanism works for you.

The Capability is there - its just how you expose it in a useful manner.

socistep
2011-11-16, 14:05
You are pretty strident with your opinions, but when all is said and done that is all they are - opinions.

All I want from my squeezebox SERVER is to to stream my flac and mp3 files to my 5 squeezeboxes around the house, and sync them as and when needed. This is exactly what it does. I only ever access the web interface for maintenance. Everything else is done on Squeezecommander. I hardly ever buy cd's anymore - Spotify and Napster work seamlessly, and there are plenty of sites to download hi res files.

If a friend should pop by with some flac files on a stick, then admittedly my choice is limited, but as previously stated, no one is suggesting that SBS/LMS can't be improved.

However, regarding the things LMS can do that MM cannot - does that make MM behaviour a nonsense? Of course not - one was designed as a player, the other a server.

Finally, when I eventually upgrade to my much longed for Cyrus hifi system, you would be welcome to come round to my house and plug your USB stick straight into the back of the amp!

Trev

LMS is a very effective server with a decent but improvable interface, where it lacks is playlist management IMO however you can add Erlands plugins, ipeng/squeezecommander, other programs to create static playlists or for windows users look into MM/MS on what that offers.

In terms of plugging a USB drive then I guess the only option is to transfer into your music folder then you can play from there without having to re-scan

socistep
2011-11-16, 14:06
Not True, This feature has been around since pre LMS, it's just non intuitive.

Get the file path to the file / folder / directory of interest

In the Web Interface

Paste this into the Internet Radio -> Tune In URL Field

Click on the play (Tune in) or Add Buttons

See your desired files queued up or played using the file reference , rather than a stream URL.

Result.

For Bonus Points, work out the request / command sent to LMS generated by this interaction, then embed it in a shell extension, so you could play the file directly from the file system (in much the same way as the foobar2000 Shell / File Explorer Context Menu additions) - Or have an app you could drag and drop the file onto to play them, or whatever Operating system dependent mechanism works for you.

The Capability is there - its just how you expose it in a useful manner.

interesting, I didn't know that! thats easier to what I mentioned about copying to music folder

aubuti
2011-11-16, 14:15
If a friend should pop by with some flac files on a stick, then admittedly my choice is limited, but as previously stated, no one is suggesting that SBS/LMS can't be improved.
Maybe I travel in the wrong circles, but a friend has popped by with music on a USB stick exactly once. It wasn't exactly "geeky" to copy the files to my hard drive, play them immediately using browse music folders, and delete them when he left. The only thing that took longer than if I had used player software is that I had to copy the files first, instead of playing them directly from the USB.

More commonly someone comes by with tunes on a CD or a portable music player. The former is easily accommodated on my main system by the vestigial Sony CD player left in the rack specifically for this purpose. The latter is easily accommodated on my main system by the "MP3" input on the front panel of my NAD integrated amp, or by the inputs on my Boom or Radio.


However, regarding the things LMS can do that MM cannot - does that make MM behaviour a nonsense? Of course not - one was designed as a player, the other a server.
+1

aubuti
2011-11-16, 14:17
Not True, This feature has been around since pre LMS, it's just non intuitive.
<snip>
See your desired files queued up or played using the file reference , rather than a stream URL.
Slick. Nice tip.

gruntwolla
2011-11-16, 14:20
Not True, This feature has been around since pre LMS, it's just non intuitive.

Get the file path to the file / folder / directory of interest

In the Web Interface

Paste this into the Internet Radio -> Tune In URL Field

Click on the play (Tune in) or Add Buttons

See your desired files queued up or played using the file reference , rather than a stream URL.

Result.


The Capability is there - its just how you expose it in a useful manner.

Thankyou

gruntwolla
2011-11-16, 14:29
Maybe I travel in the wrong circles, but a friend has popped by with music on a USB stick exactly once. It wasn't exactly "geeky" to copy the files to my hard drive, play them immediately using browse music folders, and delete them when he left. The only thing that took longer than if I had used player software is that I had to copy the files first, instead of playing them directly from the USB.

More commonly someone comes by with tunes on a CD or a portable music player. The former is easily accommodated on my main system by the vestigial Sony CD player left in the rack specifically for this purpose. The latter is easily accommodated on my main system by the "MP3" input on the front panel of my NAD integrated amp, or by the inputs on my Boom or Radio.




You're absolutely right - I was just alluding to the " nonsense" of not being able to just plug and play!

nicolas75
2011-11-16, 14:41
That's because LMS is designed for people who buy their music.

Can you explain what you mean ?
When I buy some music online or rip a CD I bought, I am not allowed to put the result on a usb stick, or external HDD, I am not allowed to take this usb device and play it on another SB system I own in another house ?
I do have to copy it on the local library even if I finally decide this library is too big, and I don't want to keep the files ?
I am not allowed to use music files recorded but myself and friends when we play music ... ?

Let's be serious and grow up ... :)

nicolas75
2011-11-16, 14:45
Not True, This feature has been around since pre LMS, it's just non intuitive.

Get the file path to the file / folder / directory of interest

In the Web Interface

Paste this into the Internet Radio -> Tune In URL Field

Click on the play (Tune in) or Add Buttons

See your desired files queued up or played using the file reference , rather than a stream URL.

Result.

For Bonus Points, work out the request / command sent to LMS generated by this interaction, then embed it in a shell extension, so you could play the file directly from the file system (in much the same way as the foobar2000 Shell / File Explorer Context Menu additions) - Or have an app you could drag and drop the file onto to play them, or whatever Operating system dependent mechanism works for you.

The Capability is there - its just how you expose it in a useful manner.

Thanks for the tip.
But when you are used to normal music software interface, I doubt somebody can call that user friendly and easy to use.
The option to copy the file to the library and delete it after is also an option, but certainly not as logic and as fast as playing it with normal software.

paulster
2011-11-16, 14:47
When I buy some music online or rip a CD I bought, I am not allowed to put the result on a usb stick, or external HDD, I am not allowed to take this usb device and play it on nother SB system I own in another house ?
I do have to copy it on the local library even if I finally decide this library is too big, and I don't want to keep the files ?

You can do whatever you want with it, but most sensible people would add music they've purchased to their library (or libraries in the case of owing more than one property), and that's the model LMS is designed to support.

If you want to make it difficult for yourself then knock yourself out, but don't come here telling us it's nonsense because you want to make it difficult for yourself.


Let's be serious and grow up ... :)

Pot and kettle springs to mind.

nicolas75
2011-11-16, 14:51
You can do whatever you want with it, but most sensible people would add music they've purchased to their library (or libraries in the case of owing more than one property), and that's the model LMS is designed to support.

If you want to make it difficult for yourself then knock yourself out, but don't come here telling us it's nonsense because you want to make it difficult for yourself.

I suggest you tell your reasons to Logitech CEO, and teach him what Logitech market is :)
Please do not apply for a job at Logitech concerning LMS develoment ...

Grahame
2011-11-16, 15:05
Thanks for the tip.
But when you are used to normal music software interface, I doubt somebody can call that user friendly and easy to use.
The option to copy the file to the library and delete it after is also an option, but certainly not as logic and as fast as playing it with normal software.

Here's another Hack that allows you to browse music on a mounted drive ( or elsewhere that's not part of your music library. ) , without copying

Add a Shortcut at the top level of your music directory (Symbolic Link) to where your USB mounts (e.g. G:\ ) , and name the shortcut , say USB_DRIVE

(This approach allowed support of multiple physical drives when SBS only supported a single top level music directory)

Then you can Browse Music Folder -> USB_DRIVE , and away you go ...

aubuti
2011-11-16, 15:10
Add a Shortcut at the top level of your music directory (Symbolic Link) to where your USB mounts (e.g. G:\ ) , and name the shortcut , say USB_DRIVE
That same idea occurred to me when this whole topic came up about how difficult it is to play from a USB stick, but I never got around to testing it. Thanks for confirming that it works.

nicolas75
2011-11-16, 15:16
Add a Shortcut at the top level of your music directory (Symbolic Link) to where your USB mounts (e.g. G:\ ) , and name the shortcut , say USB_DRIVE

(This approach allowed support of multiple physical drives when SBS only supported a single top level music directory)

Then you can Browse Music Folder -> USB_DRIVE , and away you go ...

Thanks, that's a useful trick.

MeSue
2011-11-16, 19:30
Not True, This feature has been around since pre LMS, it's just non intuitive.

Get the file path to the file / folder / directory of interest

In the Web Interface

Paste this into the Internet Radio -> Tune In URL Field

Click on the play (Tune in) or Add Buttons

See your desired files queued up or played using the file reference , rather than a stream URL.

Result.

For Bonus Points, work out the request / command sent to LMS generated by this interaction, then embed it in a shell extension, so you could play the file directly from the file system (in much the same way as the foobar2000 Shell / File Explorer Context Menu additions) - Or have an app you could drag and drop the file onto to play them, or whatever Operating system dependent mechanism works for you.

The Capability is there - its just how you expose it in a useful manner.

Nice tip! I never knew that. Copied it to my tips file cuz I'll probably forget how when I need it.

I tested it out on a folder and yep, it works... but it adds the files to my library. It will be interesting to see if it goes away the next time my library is scanned. The files themselves not going to disappear as in the case of a USB drive... this was music I had moved to another disk area because I just didn't want it in my library anymore.

Could be handy for things like audiobooks where you generally listen only once.

Mnyb
2011-11-16, 22:52
You can do whatever you want with it, but most sensible people would add music they've purchased to their library (or libraries in the case of owing more than one property), and that's the model LMS is designed to support.

If you want to make it difficult for yourself then knock yourself out, but don't come here telling us it's nonsense because you want to make it difficult for yourself.



Pot and kettle springs to mind.

+++1000

We seem to have a rather skilled troll on the forum (6/10).
You can not hate every aspect of a product and still be using it ?
You get your money back and move on .
Maybe it is more fun to wind everyone up while waiting for the rma :)

Gingernut63
2011-11-16, 23:14
Add a Shortcut at the top level of your music directory (Symbolic Link) to where your USB mounts (e.g. G:\ ) , and name the shortcut , say USB_DRIVE

(This approach allowed support of multiple physical drives when SBS only supported a single top level music directory)

Then you can Browse Music Folder -> USB_DRIVE , and away you go ...

Good idea. Here is a suggestion to make sure you can access the same usb drive all the time. Mount the usb drive to a folder on your computer and then browse to the folder in LMS. This gets around the issue of another usb device taking the drive letter and a new one is assigned to your usb drive.

The following link has acceptable instructions on how to do this: http://www.rakshitk.com/blog/2008/05/22/how-to-mount-usb-drives-to-a-windows-folder/

nicolas75
2011-11-17, 13:11
Thanks, Gingernut63, for laying out the pros and cons so clearly. Given my situation, I personally don't see the appeal, because SBS works reliably for me, and MM/MS's inability to do multiple streams is a dealbreaker. But I'm glad it's there for others who might benefit. Keep up the good work.

I just tried MonkeySqueeze 2.0 with MediaMonkey 4 and LMS 7.7.0
It is just GREAT to say the least ...
Very easy to install and configure within a few minutes, you can still use LMS the normal way if you feel like it, and MediaMonkey make things so much simpler for basic use.

Probably the biggest and best software improvement I have seen in the last 4 years for my squeezebox ...

It is really more than worth a try.

shaboyi
2011-11-17, 20:43
Please, please, please replace the Touch, get a good USB dac and enjoy
MediaMonkey. You should be happier.

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:35 AM, nicolas75 <
nicolas75.53as5z1321450561 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:

>
> Gingernut63;670431 Wrote:
> > @nicolas75, aubuti
> >
> >
> >
> > This is not totally correct. If you have LMS on your PC then you don't
> > have to have a LMS music database, hence no scanning. An empty folder
> > is all that is required for the music folder address. MediaMonkey can
> > manage your music database and it tells Squeezebox what to play. LMS is
> > still required and anyway it has useful plugins that MediaMonkey
> > doesn't. LMS on a Linux NAS (e.g. ReadyNAS DUO) does require a managed
> > music database due to file format issues between the windows OS and
> > Linux.
> >
> > Try MediaMonkey(basic)/MonkeySqueeze for yourself and see the
> > advantages of playing your music collection on Squeezebox using these
> > freeware programs. The official release is here:
> > http://www.mediamonkey.com/addons/browse/item/monkeysqueeze/
> >
> > Also try the MonkeySqueeze Development site for the latest beta which
> > has playlist sync:
> > http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=59907
>
> Thanks.
>
> The problem is that from MediaMonkey forums and your messages, there
> are annoying delays (I use mainly flac files ...) with this plugin.
> I must say I don't feel like being a beta tester like with LMS.
> If I have to install LMS, start it with an empty database, and so on, I
> guess it will be much easier to run directly MediaMonkey with a
> smartphone application, and replace the Touch by a good USB dac ...
> With a small silent and nice Nettop like Asrock ones, it may be the
> perfect solution.
> I am more inclined to check how easily MediaMonkey can be controlled
> with a smartphone, than mixing Squeezeboxes, LMS and MediaMonkey.
>
> At this point It seems to me that good solution are
> - LMS get decent files selection and library management, and I can
> stick it.
> - LMS doesn't and I have to completely get rid of LMS
>
> If I have to get rid LMS
> - Squeezeboxes can be used without LMS at all (I can accept TinySBS if
> it is improved, there are simple bugzilla bugs to fix for that) and I
> keep the Touch without LMS
> - If not possible, I replace the Touch by a good USB dac and forget
> about Squeezeboxes.
>
>
> The mere point here is that Logitech is a hardware company, not a
> software company.
> They make money with squeezeboxes, not with LMS (which is free).
> A smart manager should understand that a squeezebox Touch should be
> seen as a network soundcard from any PC music software, or as a
> standalone device running an optimized TinySBS.
>
> If people want to mess with LMS and its weird scanning, it is there,
> they can use it, but it should be only another not mandatory option.
>
>
> --
> nicolas75
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> nicolas75's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15823
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91532
>
>

nicolas75
2011-11-18, 02:51
Please, please, please replace the Touch, get a good USB dac and enjoy
MediaMonkey. You should be happier.


Can you explain why this strange piece of advice ?

Like a lot of people, I loved the SB Classic, I love the Touch hardware, but I am fed up with SBS/LMS.
It is a common point of view you will find in a lot of forums, even on this one.
Nobody forces you to share this point of view.

The Touch is a terrific piece of hardware.
It is nice, great for internet streaming.
The internal Dac is excellent.

It is certainly not now that I got rid of LMS problems (with MonkeySqueeze) that I am going to leave the Touch.

Why people like you are having a problem if Squeezebox users can take advantage of those terrific hardware without suffering this weird and unreliable software it comes with ?

If you do want to stick with LMS and nothing else, that is perfect.
Do it, nobody will force you to do otherwise.

sebp
2011-11-19, 08:26
Here's (my rough and probably inaccurate translation for) an excerpt from an interview (http://www.clubic.com/internet/google/google-tv/actualite-458400-logitech-interview-junien-labrousse.html) by Junien Labrousse (Executive Vice President, Products and President, Logitech Europe):

Now that Airplay technology becomes the general rule, what's the future of the Squeezebox digital music streaming range of products?
The Squeezebox range of products fills a very specific need. Listening to Internet radios, accessing online music services (Deezer and Spotify, for example). There are several things to improve: we have to simplify the product's positioning because it's hard to sell, but we also have to work on the user interface. The first Squeezebox was used to stream music anywhere in one's house. Internet radios came later. In fact, most of Squeezebox customers today are more interested by the Internet radio capability. Many of our developments aren't absolutely necessary any more, and we need to rework the product from start for a positioning change. Naturally, we'll keep the features our users have liked so far.
Doesn't smell very good, if you ask me...

Mnyb
2011-11-19, 08:45
Here's (my rough and probably inaccurate translation for) an excerpt from an interview (http://www.clubic.com/internet/google/google-tv/actualite-458400-logitech-interview-junien-labrousse.html) by Junien Labrousse (Executive Vice President, Products and President, Logitech Europe):

Doesn't smell very good, if you ask me...

Blast :-/ wonder if we be able to access local files at all and with what sound quality.

With our usual luck dumbing down the product will not make it easier to use or make it more attractive for new customers it will just get dumber .

Most of the complications is still outside logitechs controll (wifi + computer firewalls and antivirus and network setup ) If the install process where simply to throw it trough the front door the masses would still think it's geeky and to hard to use and return to their iPod docks .
And squeezeboxes will be useless.

If by a slim chance they suceed they will immediately be outcompeted by all other cheap internetradios out there .
It will just be another cheap internet radio, no special sauce here ?

Next thing to sacrifice is sound quality and build quality to get to the 99$ mark

Mnyb
2011-11-19, 08:56
On the other hand fixing all the bugs could get us along way without sacrificing anything....

toby10
2011-11-19, 09:06
" In fact, most of Squeezebox customers today are more interested by the Internet radio capability. "

Like it or not (I do) this is the future of the entire product line and I'd bet it's the key reason Logitech was really interested in SB in the first place.

Mnyb
2011-11-19, 09:33
" In fact, most of Squeezebox customers today are more interested by the Internet radio capability. "

Like it or not (I do) this is the future of the entire product line and I'd bet it's the key reason Logitech was really interested in SB in the first place.

that is not the part I'm troubled by :) it's the rest, using internet radio with a squeezebox is already quite simple, improvements here could probably gain more varied and better content.
And some bug s ironed out with mysb.com it's noted unreliability for many users defunct alarms etc.
better and easier apps and search mechanism .
the streaming market is somewhat neglected by logitech all kinds of services popping up all around the world. We are often the last to enjouy a new service rarely the first.

CharlieG
2011-11-19, 11:55
" In fact, most of Squeezebox customers today are more interested by the Internet radio capability. "

Like it or not (I do) this is the future of the entire product line and I'd bet it's the key reason Logitech was really interested in SB in the first place.

I guess I'm one of the few Squeezebox users who does not use Internet radio at all (just used it for a short time in 2009). I do understand how some would use it to discover new music but I don't see myself using it as a primary source (unless sound quality has gotten better).

garym
2011-11-19, 12:03
I guess I'm one of the few Squeezebox users who does not use Internet radio at all (just used it for a short time in 2009). I do understand how some would use it to discover new music but I don't see myself using it as a primary source (unless sound quality has gotten better).

I use internet radio a lot, but not so much for music (although I sometimes use Radio Paradise 192 streams as background music). I have lots of my own music and for main music listening I use that. But my wife and I prefer all the many news stations we can get from elsewhere. For example I like things that are on WNYC-AM (one of the public radio stations in NYC). And I enjoy (in a strange way) the morning Jazz show (as much history/talking as music) called Bird Flight on NYC's WKCR with Phil Schaap. These are just a handful of examples. I like canadian broadcasting for certain things, local stations in Texas where I'm from, etc.

This said, I want LMS to be excellent for my own FLAC files *and* for internet radio and services (spotify, pandora, etc.).

edit: and there are a number of stations that stream at 128kb or better and are quite decent. Of course, for news/talk quality is fine even at 32kbs.

Mnyb
2011-11-19, 13:04
Much of internet radios problems is in it's multitude of everything from streaming quality to a plethora of formats apps and streaming aggregatetors broadcasters and whatnot .
Sometimes working against their user interest and revert to obscure formats only usable from a pc , or by constantly shift url to something else .

Constantly shifting URL should be a crime

There are at least 10000's of stations playing "greatest hit's" or "dance music" why ? there is so much repetition .

Helping users to wade trough that and locate the content of interest would be the mission statement

Talk radio and pods is it any better, not gotten i to that yet .

Make squeezebox a better podcast player bookmark and resume anyone ?

If you build a meta service it should not only aggregate and present. mysqueezebox.com does that but in 1/100 of the speed needed to keep up with the development, why not present a new app/service every week.

The apps should be better .

Example Triode surpassed logitechs spotify implementation on his spare time ? Try the shoutcast app, every time I try to use it has crashed in some new funny way.

But a greater goal would be to traverse *all* apps and services a user subcribes to and get the content presented in a user friendly way in a consistent UI .

If I want to listen to science podcasts or have some "party music with the latest electronica" I don't really care for if the playlist is aggregated from 758 different providers.

Or if I want to hear "Blues" mysqueezebox.com should use be able to find in everywhere in all my services and radio stations and make suggestions .

mysqueeezebox.com should of-course learn my preferences and eventually be able to smartly present things I might be interested in.

Ofcourse in a user friendly fashion.

Improvement of their own phone/pad app could be great for mysqueezebox.com only users .

Why not global settings ? I would like to able to filter out any radio channel <128kbs if it music and <64k if it is talk and make it prefer higher bitrates and put those on top in the searches.

Gingernut63
2011-11-19, 14:08
Is having your own music collection now a thing of the past?
Do the majority of Squeezebox users what their music collection in "the cloud"?
Do the majority of Squeezebox users only listen to radio?
Do they care about the fidelity of the sound?

Big decisions. Could have huge ramifications for Squeezebox and it's users. I doubt that the status quo will remain. If this is true then be prepared for major changes and not necessarily good ones. I've yet to see positive outcomes when businesses reinvent a line to make it more profitable. As already highlighted, standards will drop straight away. From a business point of view the current hardware is too expensive for mass adoption so there will be a push to produce cheaper units with less quality. If they retain the high quality gear while doing this then not a problem but only time will tell.

If they concentrate on internet sources at the expense of local content then I'm sure a large number of users will be annoyed and will rethink their use of Squeezebox. Maybe I'm in the minority on this one or am I just showing my age?

Interesting times. Of course until we get more facts this is all supposition.

paulster
2011-11-19, 14:53
I hear you.

I was dismayed enough when they introduced a mono product (the Radio) and then discontinued the Transporter without a proper hi-fi component replacement.

Funny enough I was just thinking about adding a couple of Touches to get some more zones, but I'm now going to look at the alternative products available where there is some sort of commitment to hi-fi.

Mnyb
2011-11-19, 15:29
I hear you.

I was dismayed enough when they introduced a mono product (the Radio) and then discontinued the Transporter without a proper hi-fi component replacement.

Funny enough I was just thinking about adding a couple of Touches to get some more zones, but I'm now going to look at the alternative products available where there is some sort of commitment to hi-fi.

The Touch is still a fine player , but uncertain future is never good .
For local playback one could just stick to the current version of everything for a long time .

However this indicates that there may be some kind of future for the products the alternative would have been that they discontinued it.

castalla
2011-11-19, 15:38
Why all the panic and rumour?

The Touch is perfectly useable via LMS, even if development stops and/or mysb.com shuts down. That's a lot more then many other systems which depend almost exclusively on a database server accessible via the internet.

Calm down.

erland
2011-11-20, 00:14
Here's (my rough and probably inaccurate translation for) an excerpt from an interview (http://www.clubic.com/internet/google/google-tv/actualite-458400-logitech-interview-junien-labrousse.html) by Junien Labrousse (Executive Vice President, Products and President, Logitech Europe):


Now that Airplay technology becomes the general rule, what's the future of the Squeezebox digital music streaming range of products?
The Squeezebox range of products fills a very specific need. Listening to Internet radios, accessing online music services (Deezer and Spotify, for example). There are several things to improve: we have to simplify the product's positioning because it's hard to sell, but we also have to work on the user interface. The first Squeezebox was used to stream music anywhere in one's house. Internet radios came later. In fact, most of Squeezebox customers today are more interested by the Internet radio capability. Many of our developments aren't absolutely necessary any more, and we need to rework the product from start for a positioning change. Naturally, we'll keep the features our users have liked so far.

Doesn't smell very good, if you ask me...

If you ask me, this was a very positive message, because it shows that:
1. Logitech is aware that they need to focus on the user experience to make the products a success, something they haven't done during the last years with all the technical non music and non user related focus.
2. Logitech is planning for a future and doesn't plan to abandon the Squeezebox products as some people seems to think.
3. Logitech are aware of the fact that even if some people doesn't like it online streaming services is important for a success among the masses.
4. Logitech are aware that they can't drop important features that exist today, like playback of locally stored music.

If I ask more or less any of my friends when they last purchased a CD, it's not during the last years, they all get their music through other channels than CD's these days. Some purchase music as electronic downloads from Apple, some of gets music from torrent sites, but most of them just gets music from online streaming services. I'm not sure how it looks like in other countries but I'm imagining it's going to be pretty much the same situation everywhere around the world fairly soon.

Audiophiles are still going to want the CD because of the quality difference, but Logitech can't target audiophiles because on that market they are going to compete with HiFi manufacturers and most audiophiles are going to trust something with a HiFi manufacturer logo on the front a lot more than something with a Logitech logo on the front.

erland
2011-11-20, 00:25
I was dismayed enough when they introduced a mono product (the Radio) and then discontinued the Transporter without a proper hi-fi component replacement.

Funny enough I was just thinking about adding a couple of Touches to get some more zones, but I'm now going to look at the alternative products available where there is some sort of commitment to hi-fi.

I would suggest that anyone that wants HiFi should either get a Squeezebox Touch, as it's likely going to be the last Squeezebox with excellent audio quality, or get something from a HiFi manufacturer that you know is going to be there tomorrow and you know is going to focus on HiFi also tomorrow.

The only issue with HiFi manufacturers is that even if they are focusing on audio quality they aren't necessarily focusing on streaming audio, so their products can have other disadvantages compared to Squeezebox products, but if audio quality is the number one priority my feeling is still that a HiFi manufacturer is the right choice for you. Just be aware that things like synchronized playback between different rooms aren't necessarily going to be something they focus on 2 years in the future, because it's not something that enhance the audio quality from an audiophile perspective.

paulster
2011-11-20, 00:28
Audiophiles are still going to want the CD because of the quality difference, but Logitech can't target audiophiles because on that market they are going to compete with HiFi manufacturers and most audiophiles are going to trust something with a HiFi manufacturer logo on the front a lot more than something with a Logitech logo on the front.

They still own the SlimDevices brand. Use it.

My Ultimate Ears personal monitors are still called Ultimate Ears since Logitech bought them, because no touring professional in their right mind would rely on a Logitech-branded product. There's no reason why they can't do the same for hi-fi, and use Logitech for the more consumer-oriented products like the radio et. al.

erland
2011-11-20, 00:40
They still own the SlimDevices brand. Use it.

My Ultimate Ears personal monitors are still called Ultimate Ears since Logitech bought them, because no touring professional in their right mind would rely on a Logitech-branded product. There's no reason why they can't do the same for hi-fi, and use Logitech for the more consumer-oriented products like the radio et. al.

The reason is that Logitech isn't used to sell products to audiophile markets and neither was Slim Devices. The current situations is also that I believe they have managed to get rid of everyone from Slim Devices who potentially might have known how to market something on the audiophile market.

So they could certainly get around the brand label issue as you describe, but it doesn't matter if they don't understand how to market/sell it because then it's only going to be purchased by people on these forum.

Just to illustrate what I mean, I walked into my local HiFi store earlier this year and asked them about which audio streaming solution they recommended, they totally trashed anything from Logitech/SlimDevices, including the Touch and even Transporter which they said wasn't nearly as good as Sonos or Teac. Main reason for this is not the audio quality, which we all know is likely better in Touch/Transporter, but because Logitech/SlimDevices doesn't know how to market it to make HiFi stores actually recommend it to their customers. They had both Sonos, Teac and Touch/Transporter in the store, they just didn't recommend anything from Logitech/SlimDevices, likely because their margins/benefits were better if I purchased Sonos or Teac.

If Logitech wants to sell products to audiophiles, I strongly believe they also have to manage to get the HiFi stores interested in selling them, and I'm pretty sure this isn't going to be a priority within Logitech.

Mnyb
2011-11-20, 01:16
If you ask me, this was a very positive message, because it shows that:
1. Logitech is aware that they need to focus on the user experience to make the products a success, something they haven't done during the last years with all the technical non music and non user related focus.
2. Logitech is planning for a future and doesn't plan to abandon the Squeezebox products as some people seems to think.
3. Logitech are aware of the fact that even if some people doesn't like it online streaming services is important for a success among the masses.
4. Logitech are aware that they can't drop important features that exist today, like playback of locally stored music.

If I ask more or less any of my friends when they last purchased a CD, it's not during the last years, they all get their music through other channels than CD's these days. Some purchase music as electronic downloads from Apple, some of gets music from torrent sites, but most of them just gets music from online streaming services. I'm not sure how it looks like in other countries but I'm imagining it's going to be pretty much the same situation everywhere around the world fairly soon.

Audiophiles are still going to want the CD because of the quality difference, but Logitech can't target audiophiles because on that market they are going to compete with HiFi manufacturers and most audiophiles are going to trust something with a HiFi manufacturer logo on the front a lot more than something with a Logitech logo on the front.

I was not convinced about point 4 the rest I agree .
If local playback gets really small compared to streaming it might be seen as just a cost and deleted.
But on the other hand there is no big difference from the current situation with very slow unguided development .
"bugfixes and better MOG" was all that was in future plans no 7.8 or 8.0 repo says something too ?

"Many of our developments aren't absolutely necessary any more, and we need to rework the product from start" ugh .
What could be scrapped from the very limited functionality it has, it cant even manage playlist that are not playing on any player (without plugins) ? Things could get reworked in a more user friendly fashion but that's another angle.

And this "Naturally, we'll keep the features our users have liked so far" seems promising but which users ? all the web Radio only users that are unaware of the local playback possibilities .

paulster
2011-11-20, 01:23
You can, of course, hope that this guy is so far removed from the users, developers and marketing department that he has no clue what he's talking about and they'll be left to get on making it the product it should be.

But that's always assuming that marketing have any clue, since they unfortunately tend to lead product development these days. :-(

erland
2011-11-20, 01:46
I was not convinced about point 4 the rest I agree .
If local playback gets really small compared to streaming it might be seen as just a cost and deleted.
But on the other hand there is no big difference from the current situation with very slow unguided development .
"bugfixes and better MOG" was all that was in future plans no 7.8 or 8.0 repo says something too ?

It can't get much worse than it already is, can it ?
Except for some new streaming services, when was the last time we got something that enhanced the music browsing/listening experience ?



"Many of our developments aren't absolutely necessary any more, and we need to rework the product from start" ugh .
What could be scrapped from the very limited functionality it has, it cant even manage playlist that are not playing on any player (without plugins) ? Things could get reworked in a more user friendly fashion but that's another angle.

I don't think we should worry too much, as long as they are willing to spend development resources on it we should be better of than we are today, especially if the current developers remains and is able to explain why certain features are needed and they continue to make it possible to enhance the system through third party add-ons.

SBS/LMS isn't really limited, it's one of the most featured streaming server available on the market IMHO. So I'm sure there are a lot of things that could be dropped without affecting most of us.

Of course, some people are going to be disappointed when a feature is dropped but they will be even more disappointed if Logitech would drop the complete product. Some dropped features are IMHO preferred instead of dropping the complete product line which I think some of us have been worried about for some time.

Mushroom_3
2011-11-20, 01:53
I'm not sure I understand why Logitech would want to concentrate on Internet radio. In the UK that market is well catered for with several models from the established radio manufacturers. Most have DAB, and/or FM radios built in as well. Some have CD players or iPod docks. The Logitech Radio, while cheaper than most, does not have many "extras", and as far as I am aware, Logitech doesn't have much of a radio history.

Gingernut63
2011-11-20, 02:00
But that's always assuming that marketing have any clue, since they unfortunately tend to lead product development these days. :-(

Don't you mean marketing and accounting?

I think Logitech started well improving on the Slim Server ideas but over time they have lost direction and during the last couple of years they have been treading water. The exception being the radio.

Logitech are a company that markets computer gadgets and remote controls and I don't think Slim Devices/Squeezebox is a good fit and they probably realise that. The product is too expensive to be a match with the rest of the product line.

They have tried other delivery systems before and since the purchase and they have all been of a much lesser quality to Squeezebox.

Anyway as castalla has stated, while the hardware still functions we can still have a Squeezebox network, it just seems that the future doesn't look too bright at the moment. Sorry erland, I didn't see that many positives coming out of the interview myself, maybe I'm a glass half full person.

erland
2011-11-20, 02:24
Anyway as castalla has stated, while the hardware still functions we can still have a Squeezebox network, it just seems that the future doesn't look too bright at the moment. Sorry erland, I didn't see that many positives coming out of the interview myself, maybe I'm a glass half full person.
I guess it's just a matter of what you expected them to say, I was personally worried that they would say that they are going to drop the Squeezebox line and focus on iPod docks instead. So compared to that, the interview was pretty positive.

I think we all can see the negative side effect of less focus on audio quality and less focus on local music playback, but in my mind that's still better than no focus at all on Squeezeboxes, which is pretty much is what we have had during the last year.

It doesn't matter if we like it or not, but if Squeezebox is going to survive within Logitech they need to be able to bring it to the masses, and to be able to do that they are going to make some people on these forums disapointed but in my mind that's still better than the alternative which would be to drop the product line completely.

Gingernut63
2011-11-20, 02:43
It doesn't matter if we like it or not, but if Squeezebox is going to survive within Logitech they need to be able to bring it to the masses, and to be able to do that they are going to make some people on these forums disapointed but in my mind that's still better than the alternative which would be to drop the product line completely.

True. Nothing has happened yet so there is always hope that things aren't as bad as predicted. Time will tell.

One other quick comment. In Australia we have little access to online music delivery such as Spotify (well in Spotifys case none actually). I'm sure there are many other countries not in the US or Europe area that are in the same predicament. Yet I know many business are putting a lot of effort into online music delivery or access. It really #@%%$$# me off that we can't access it. Oh well I suppose I better get used it, in the short term... hopefully.

paulster
2011-11-20, 02:45
It doesn't matter if we like it or not, but if Squeezebox is going to survive within Logitech they need to be able to bring it to the masses, and to be able to do that they are going to make some people on these forums disapointed.

That's where I disagree with you. The reason they haven't brought it to the masses is because they've been absolutely hopeless at marketing and positioning it.

If you walk into any given Best Buy in the States, for example, you'll find it in with audio products, clock radios, computer accessories or other random locations. Not so with Sonos that has proper branding displays and strict placement rules, because they've taken the time and effort to work out how it needs to be pitched.

Logitech are big enough and experienced enough to be able to do this; they just haven't bothered and have let it slip right through their fingers.

The product manager should be sacked and they should get someone in who actually understands what the product it, what demographic will purchase it and, just as important, see how their competitors (i.e. Sonos) are pitching and placing their products, and then use their significantly larger corporate backing to beat them at their own game. It's product marketing 101.

erland
2011-11-20, 02:52
That's where I disagree with you. The reason they haven't brought it to the masses is because they've been absolutely hopeless at marketing and positioning it.

If you walk into any given Best Buy in the States, for example, you'll find it in with audio products, clock radios, computer accessories or other random locations. Not so with Sonos that has proper branding displays and strict placement rules, because they've taken the time and effort to work out how it needs to be pitched.

Logitech are big enough and experienced enough to be able to do this; they just haven't bothered and have let it slip right through their fingers.

The product manager should be sacked and they should get someone in who actually understands what the product it, what demographic will purchase it and, just as important, see how their competitors (i.e. Sonos) are pitching and placing their products, and then use their significantly larger corporate backing to beat them at their own game. It's product marketing 101.

Just to be clear, I 100% agree with you regarding this, it's just that I don't think it's enough, I think it will require changes in the software too. However, without proper marketing it's never going to work independent which software changes they make, selling an audio streaming device to the masses is always going to require more advertisement/marketing than mices and keyboards. I assume there are people within Logitech that understands this.

toby10
2011-11-20, 03:41
........
It doesn't matter if we like it or not, but if Squeezebox is going to survive within Logitech they need to be able to bring it to the masses, and to be able to do that they are going to make some people on these forums disapointed but in my mind that's still better than the alternative which would be to drop the product line completely.


If you ask me, this was a very positive message.... .

If I ask more or less any of my friends when they last purchased a CD...

.... but most of them just gets music from online streaming services. I'm not sure how it looks like in other countries but I'm imagining it's going to be pretty much the same situation everywhere around the world fairly soon........

+1 ;)

Precisely why I am also encouraged by the comments and the general direction. I see the same trends with my friends and acquaintances, as well as my own listening.

I think many of the "audiophile" SB customers (I don't qualify myself) too quickly dismiss the offered online content with a "who needs it" attitude. Well, the majority of customers want it and SB needs it to stay relevant in the streaming hardware market. The mass production of these players keeps the per unit price *very* reasonable. Take away such services and your unit sales will plummet, making a Touch player much more expensive and eventually dropped by Logitech (or whoever) all together as an under performer in their product offerings.

Like everyone else I hope they don't dumb it down too much, we wait we see.

verypsb
2011-11-20, 05:53
I think many of the "audiophile" SB customers (I don't qualify myself) too quickly dismiss the offered online content with a "who needs it" attitude.

I would qualify myself as a "audiophile" user, but I don't think the issue is the "who needs it" attitude, but the "There aren't any streaming services available" attitude.

In the Netherlands you can choose between Spotify, Spotify and Spotify. Oh, you can get Spotify, too.

I just cancelled my Spotify subscription, I couldn't justify the costs of the premium subscription needed for Spotify on the Squeezebox, while I buy several CDs (and/or downloads) a month. That's severel times the costs of a Spotify premium subscription. I didn't use Spotify that much...

200+ Labels Withdraw Their Music From Spotify: Are Its Fortunes Unravelling?
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/11/200-labels-withdraw-their-music-from-spotify-are-its-fortunes-unravelling/all/1

toby10
2011-11-20, 07:00
I would qualify myself as a "audiophile" user, but I don't think the issue is the "who needs it" attitude, but the "There aren't any streaming services available" attitude.....

Agreed. But imagine how much more popular SB players would be in your market if there were actual competing streaming choices. That's my point. ;)

More services = more choices = more interest = more streaming hardware sales (for all mfr's, not just SB).

sebp
2011-11-20, 07:04
I would qualify myself as a "audiophile" user, but I don't think the issue is the "who needs it" attitude, but the "There aren't any streaming services available" attitude.
+1, although I would only qualify myself as a music lover.

Music is too important for me not to own it, and these online services are like loaning music. I just don't like this idea.

They may be a great way to discover new music, but I couldn't live with them as my sole mean of listening to music.
I'm perfectly aware most people would, though.

In these trouble times, I'm worried that if I ever get to lose my job and am broke someday, I wouldn't be able to continue paying for them, but would still be able to listen to the thousand albums I've bought so far (and even try to sold some to make some cash).

Even if I could afford it today, I'm not a subscriber to this kind of services today because I simply wouldn't use them enough to make it worth the monthly cost.

Gingernut63
2011-11-20, 12:33
Music is too important for me not to own it, and these online services are like loaning music. I just don't like this idea.

They may be a great way to discover new music, but I couldn't live with them as my sole mean of listening to music.
I'm perfectly aware most people would, though.

In these trouble times, I'm worried that if I ever get to lose my job and am broke someday, I wouldn't be able to continue paying for them, but would still be able to listen to the thousand albums I've bought so far (and even try to sold some to make some cash).

Agree with all the above. I like to have ownership and control over the music I listen too. I would however like to access a streaming music service for a short time just to see what all the fuss is about. Indeed I have a friend who is mad keen for me to try it but as previously posted I have no access ;).

The internet is a communication system, what happens if it falls over or someone cuts through a cable etc... How can you access the music then?

Who is driving streaming music online? Is it the customers or is the companies? I also don't like the idea of storing my data online in "the cloud". Do we as consumers actually sit down and think of the ramifications of adopting new technology and services. Again, who is driving a lot of these ideas?

amcluesent
2011-11-20, 12:59
>The product manager should be sacked and they should get someone in who actually understands what the product it, what demographic will purchase it <

Yep. I've just seen a TV advert for the Brennan player on Sky News here in England. If a one product SME can do marketing, why not Logitech?

castalla
2011-11-20, 13:18
>The product manager should be sacked and they should get someone in who actually understands what the product it, what demographic will purchase it <

Yep. I've just seen a TV advert for the Brennan player on Sky News here in England. If a one product SME can do marketing, why not Logitech?

I suspect they are aimed at different consumers. The Brennan is also advertised in the UK daily press and Private Eye (!). A more direct competitor is the Cockail Audio x10.

Neither can do what, say, what the Touch can do - and neither are as flexible as players.

The x10 does have its fans and its own forum, the Brennan is very much a niche unit. Both are considerably more expensive than Logitechs.

Gingernut63
2011-11-20, 13:27
Oh dear, something has changed since this posting on a website about the Duet back in May 21, 2008

"Logitech bought Slim Devices, but we retained virtually all (I think we lost one) the same developers that brought you the Squeezebox Classic and Transporter. That includes the founder and lead product tinkerer Sean Adams, and our Director of Engineering Dean Blackketter. With the additional funding Logitech has thrown behind us, we actually expanded our engineering ranks quite a bit by hiring some of our most prolific community developers.

I can't speak for how the keyboard guys release their software, but the main reason we acquired these guys was their expertise in the field. The Logitech "overloards" have not taken over, in fact we're having an affect on the rest of the company in terms of how the greater Logitech releases and tests their software and products with our whole open source thing.

Mike

__________________
Michael Valera
Online Communities Manager
Logitech Streaming Media Business Unit
slimdevices.com"
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/digital-media-servers/logitech-squeezebox-duet
.

sebp
2011-11-20, 14:59
I guess it's just a matter of what you expected them to say, I was personally worried that they would say that they are going to drop the Squeezebox line and focus on iPod docks instead. So compared to that, the interview was pretty positive.
This is some kind of worst case scenario, but I'm afraid Logitech could design their future SB products as fat clients with closed-source firmware.

Being closed-source, they could embed all the required stuff to access online music services. mysb.com not being needed any more, they could shut it down (and I guess this alone would imply huge savings!).

Then, most potential consumers have always complained the SB couldn't simply connect to a UPnP server, but required a specific server. Logitech could just make the future SB a UPnP client. Say good bye to SBS/LMS.

Future will tell, but I find this scenario quite plausible.

I guess I should buy few Touch before it's too late...

toby10
2011-11-21, 04:37
........
The internet is a communication system, what happens if it falls over or someone cuts through a cable etc... How can you access the music then?
......

Very true and it doesn't even need to be physical cable cut. Services come and go based on business decisions like Napster ending services in Canada next month.

But I also think it is silly to worry about such things if you genuinely have an interest in using such services. You can take that same "what if" scenario and apply it to many things.
What if....
- my cable TV line is cut
- my TV antenna gets blown off my roof
- my sat TV service won't work in bad weather
- my gas goes out (cut line, shut off, whatever)
- my electric goes out (cut line, shut off, brown out, whatever)
- my local cell tower shuts off

.... you could drive yourself mad concerning yourself with so many dooms day prophecies. But none of them would impact my decision to avail myself of such services.

Or, closer to your heart, "I like the idea of LMS + MonkeySqueeze + MediaMonkey but there is always the chance that MonkeySqueeze might not be updated in the future to Win9 or OSX22, so I won't use it (enjoy it) in the mean time." ;)

toby10
2011-11-21, 04:49
...... I like to have ownership and control over the music I listen too. I would however like to access a streaming music service for a short time just to see what all the fuss is about. Indeed I have a friend who is mad keen for me to try it but as previously posted I have no access ;)......

I'm sure there might be a small segment of the streaming population that rely exclusively on services and own no music of their own. But I'd bet the vast majority of service users also have a music collection of varying degrees. I use both myself, my rather smallish music library of a few thousand songs and then I utilize several services for my enjoyment. Those services have indeed influenced numerous purchases of additional artists/albums into my music collection.

I do see your point and your interest in completely owning and controlling your music. I simply don't agree that it must be all or nothing, that's all. :)

socistep
2011-11-21, 06:28
I'm sure there might be a small segment of the streaming population that rely exclusively on services and own no music of their own. But I'd bet the vast majority of service users also have a music collection of varying degrees. I use both myself, my rather smallish music library of a few thousand songs and then I utilize several services for my enjoyment. Those services have indeed influenced numerous purchases of additional artists/albums into my music collection.

I do see your point and your interest in completely owning and controlling your music. I simply don't agree that it must be all or nothing, that's all. :)

For me the two co-exist nicely, I probably listen to my local music 75% of the time then spotify most of the rest and a small % of internet radio, I used to use LastFM heavily before that became subscription based.

Spotify is used for trialling new music, user playlists and the occasional ad hoc album/song I don't have in my collection.

jo-wie
2011-11-21, 07:41
I do not know if it's wise to last only on streaming services. Some people are not happy when they read messages like the following

http://www.stholdings.co.uk/2011/11/16/removal-of-content-from-spotify-simfy-rdio-napster/

castalla
2011-11-21, 07:51
Quoted from the posted link :

'As a distributor we have to do what is best for our labels. The majority of which do not want their music on such services. They provide poor revenue and have a detrimental affect on sales. Add to that, the feeling that their music loses its specialness by its exploitation as a low value/free commodity. Quoting one of our labels “Let’s keep the music special, fuck Spotify”

Requoting the above 'Let's keep music in our hands - you pay overinflated prices - that's the way we like it - f**k the punters'.

socistep
2011-11-21, 09:03
I do not know if it's wise to last only on streaming services. Some people are not happy when they read messages like the following

http://www.stholdings.co.uk/2011/11/16/removal-of-content-from-spotify-simfy-rdio-napster/

Yes availability can change, also some albums not available to stream such as Adeles and coldplay from this year

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

jo-wie
2011-11-21, 09:33
Weird music world, I can stream Adele 21 on Napster.

Edit: Coldplay I agree, only download available.

Gingernut63
2011-11-21, 13:38
Very true and it doesn't even need to be physical cable cut. Services come and go based on business decisions like Napster ending services in Canada next month.

But I also think it is silly to worry about such things if you genuinely have an interest in using such services. You can take that same "what if" scenario and apply it to many things.
What if....
- my cable TV line is cut
- my TV antenna gets blown off my roof
- my sat TV service won't work in bad weather
- my gas goes out (cut line, shut off, whatever)
- my electric goes out (cut line, shut off, brown out, whatever)
- my local cell tower shuts off

.... you could drive yourself mad concerning yourself with so many dooms day prophecies. But none of them would impact my decision to avail myself of such services.

Or, closer to your heart, "I like the idea of LMS + MonkeySqueeze + MediaMonkey but there is always the chance that MonkeySqueeze might not be updated in the future to Win9 or OSX22, so I won't use it (enjoy it) in the mean time." ;)

Are yes, but I don't care about the rest, I just want the music, can't get by without my music (oh and batteries just in case);)

Gingernut63
2011-11-21, 13:49
I'm sure there might be a small segment of the streaming population that rely exclusively on services and own no music of their own. But I'd bet the vast majority of service users also have a music collection of varying degrees. I use both myself, my rather smallish music library of a few thousand songs and then I utilize several services for my enjoyment. Those services have indeed influenced numerous purchases of additional artists/albums into my music collection.

I do see your point and your interest in completely owning and controlling your music. I simply don't agree that it must be all or nothing, that's all. :)

The multiple ways of accessing music in LMS must remain. To quote Devo "Freedom of choice is what you got, freedom of choice!, is what you want!" :)

As stated previously, this is all suposition at the moment.

toby10
2011-11-22, 02:24
The multiple ways of accessing music in LMS must remain. To quote Devo "Freedom of choice is what you got, freedom of choice!, is what you want!" :).......

I hear ya bud, I hear ya. :)

Recent posting of a new enthusiastic SB user just discovering a music service (and even questioning why he bothered ripping his 5k CD's).
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=671881#post671881

This is the growing trend of which I speak and why I believe it is absolutely crucial that SB continue adding services and maintaining MySB.com to be a reliable source.
The future of all things SB depends on it!

gruntwolla
2011-11-22, 13:54
[QUOTE=toby. I use both myself, my rather smallish music library of a few thousand songs and then I utilize several services for my enjoyment. :)[/QUOTE]

I used to think my collection of 400 odd cd's was quite a reasonable collection until I read garym's posts!!

Trev

garym
2011-11-22, 14:01
I used to think my collection of 400 odd cd's was quite a reasonable collection until I read garym's posts!!

Trev

;-) It's an illness (according to my wife). He doesn't post here anymore, but search the Forum for the user iPHONE. His collection makes mine look small! And one of my friends (who believe it or not does NOT do digital music, just CDs and albums) also has a much larger collection. And of course I have a head start...I've been buying music since about 1963....

toby10
2011-11-22, 14:24
I used to think my collection of 400 odd cd's was quite a reasonable collection until I read garym's posts!!

Trev

Yeah, but most of his stuff is like the Partridge Family, David Soul, the Osmonds, Kiki Di, the Carpenters, etc.... ;)

gruntwolla
2011-11-22, 14:57
Yeah, but most of his stuff is like the Partridge Family, David Soul, the Osmonds, Kiki Di, the Carpenters, etc.... ;)

Lol. I USED to own a Carpenter's cd. " Unfortunately" it got destroyed in a fire before I had a chance to rip it.
Trev

garym
2011-11-22, 15:02
I draw the line at David Soul. ;-)

browellm
2011-11-22, 15:56
Well, I think Logitech are still thinking about doing *something* with Squeezebox. They emailed me today with a massive survey all around SB that I duly filled out for them. It was huge and took ages. Hope they appreciate it!

mherger
2011-11-22, 23:14
> Well, I think Logitech are still thinking about doing *something* with
> Squeezebox. They emailed me today with a massive survey all around SB
> that I duly filled out for them. It was huge and took ages. Hope they
> appreciate it!

Interesting! Can you send me a copy of the questionnaire? (michael ät
slimdevices dot com). Thanks!

--

Michael

paulster
2011-11-22, 23:25
I got one a few weeks ago and then was invited to participate in a focus group, which I was genuinely excited about as it was a perfect opportunity to give some real world feedback on the Squeezebox products.

I waited in and they didn't show up. :-(

Turned out they decided they didn't need quite so many participants in the Los Angeles areas and omitted to tell me.

Mnyb
2011-11-22, 23:32
he he do they invite the usual suspects :) are not they a predictable bunch.

But it is much better than a random choice at the busstop " help what is this it's not an iPod "

paulster
2011-11-22, 23:37
he he do they invite the usual suspects :) are not they a predictable bunch.

It was the day after I'd registered a new product on the website (to make sure I got any promo offers) that I got the survey sent to me, so I guess it was probably more to do with that than the hard time I've given them here!

Phil Leigh
2011-11-23, 01:43
Yeah, but most of his stuff is like the Partridge Family, David Soul, the Osmonds, Kiki Di, the Carpenters, etc.... ;)

What's wrong with Kiki Dee and the Carpenters? (if you want to hear great songwriting, production and arrangement, listen to the Carpenters - seriously)

Kiki Dee's first 2 albums on Rocket are both great too.

browellm
2011-11-23, 02:56
> Well, I think Logitech are still thinking about doing *something* with
> Squeezebox. They emailed me today with a massive survey all around SB
> that I duly filled out for them. It was huge and took ages. Hope they
> appreciate it!

Interesting! Can you send me a copy of the questionnaire? (michael ät
slimdevices dot com). Thanks!

--

Michael

Hi Michael

Sent. Only thing I was a bit disappointed about was the Transporter wasn't in the devices list in the "what hardware do you have?" question.

toby10
2011-11-23, 02:57
What's wrong with Kiki Dee and the Carpenters? (if you want to hear great songwriting, production and arrangement, listen to the Carpenters - seriously)

Kiki Dee's first 2 albums on Rocket are both great too.

Now if you want to hear an arrangement bordering on heavenly I'd suggest:

Phil Leigh
2011-11-23, 03:04
Now if you want to hear an arrangement bordering on heavenly I'd suggest:

The original pressing (as pictured) of this album is legendary - only 1 copy is known to exist and has been lodged for "safekeeping" in the Vatican vaults, but the recent remaster fell victim to the "Quietness Wars", for which we should all be grateful.

castalla
2011-11-23, 03:47
.... spooky photo ... are they aliens?

toby10
2011-11-23, 04:15
Ha! I get a chuckle every time I see that album cover. Just too funny. :)

I do enjoy Karen Carpenter. Now Kiki I am not familiar with other than her duet with Elton (and I'd prefer not hearing that one again).

oktup
2011-11-23, 07:14
I suspect they are aimed at different consumers. The Brennan is also advertised in the UK daily press and Private Eye (!). A more direct competitor is the Cockail Audio x10.

Neither can do what, say, what the Touch can do - and neither are as flexible as players.

The x10 does have its fans and its own forum, the Brennan is very much a niche unit. Both are considerably more expensive than Logitechs.

Happened to notice the latest issue of "What Hi Fi" on the shelf recently while doing my grocery shopping (ahem). Front page and main feature was "The Top 10 Ways To Stream Your Music" (best models for audiophiles, the best on a budget, best for user-friendliness, etc). Not a single Squeezebox mention in the whole thing!

Squeezeboxen seem to have gone AWOL on the UK High Street too. One can only hope that Logitech is planning some kind of serious relaunch with a refreshed line-up, or something.

browellm
2011-11-23, 07:16
Happened to notice the latest issue of "What Hi Fi" on the shelf recently while doing my grocery shopping (ahem). Front page and main feature was "The Top 10 Ways To Stream Your Music" (best models for audiophiles, the best on a budget, best for user-friendliness, etc). Not a single Squeezebox mention in the whole thing!

Squeezeboxen seem to have gone AWOL on the UK High Street too. One can only hope that Logitech is planning some kind of serious relaunch with a refreshed line-up, or something.

Oh dear, that is seriously embarrassing for Logitech. I can't stand What HiFi, but there is no doubting the massive clout it has on the mainstream UK hifi scene.

castalla
2011-11-23, 07:36
They cover the 299 pound range upwards - there's nothing avalable from Logitech at those inflated prices.

socistep
2011-11-23, 08:16
I would have liked to be on the survey, shame it couldn't be opened to forum members!

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

oktup
2011-11-23, 08:33
They cover the 299 pound range upwards - there's nothing avalable from Logitech at those inflated prices.

But one of the categories was "best on a budget", IIRC! It would seem incredibly strange if they had set an arbitrary £299 *minimum* limit for a budget category. Or at least, I would have thought big companies with excellent PR departments would be in contact with magazine staff, and would ensure that any such articles are "fair, balanced and comprehensive", if you get my drift, etc.

toby10
2011-11-23, 08:40
It would also be very interesting to see how many of the ten tested units are from companies that advertise in their publication. ;)

Pascal Hibon
2011-11-23, 09:36
It would also be very interesting to see how many of the ten tested units are from companies that advertise in their publication. ;)

True.
And did they do a blind test like the streamer test in HiFi Choise magazine?

browellm
2011-11-23, 10:52
It would also be very interesting to see how many of the ten tested units are from companies that advertise in their publication. ;)

Ah, you are aware of What HiFi? then :D

funkstar
2011-11-23, 12:52
Well, I think Logitech are still thinking about doing *something* with Squeezebox. They emailed me today with a massive survey all around SB that I duly filled out for them. It was huge and took ages. Hope they appreciate it!
Interesting indeed. I filled it in and only got about three questions. They either didn't like that I was in the UK, or they didn't like the career choices for myself, my family or my close friends.

TheLastMan
2011-11-23, 13:18
What do music "consumers" without an interest in geeky / techy solutions want from a music system these days?

In order of importance as I see it:

1. The ability to play music from their iPod (unfortunately I think it will be necessary to concede Apple's dominance here)
2. A portable solution with an amplifier and built in speakers
3. The ability to use streaming services (Napster, Spotify etc)
4. Internet radio
5. Local file storage, or the ability to plug in storage to play local files
6. Multiple native file formats. Eliminate the need for any transcoding.
6. Player synchronisation
7. No need for a PC to be switched on to run distributed music.

I think there are a few product opportunities in there for Logitech Squeezebox.

You could tick most of these boxes with a merged Boom and Touch with added iPod dock. It would have the Touch basic server firmware that will enable the player to use a memory stick or portable hard drive to play content. I think this would have a market at $500 ($300 for the Touch part and £200 for the amp/speaker section)

That would still leave room for the Touch which is pretty much a perfect match for its niche. It just needs better marketing and possibly a better implementation of the basic server software for those not willing to run a server full time.

Personally I think a Touch / server combo with a built-in hard drive and pre-installed full copy of SBS/LMS would be a real coup. This would do away with the need for a PC, NAS or plug computer and all the issues that surround that. It should use "N" class wi-fi which nowadays is reliable enough to eliminate the need for the server to be wired permanently to the router which is too much of a physical tie. Also $500 ($300 for the Touch part and $200 for the server)

The Radio needs to go touch screen to keep up, but otherwise it is OK.

browellm
2011-11-23, 15:08
Interesting indeed. I filled it in and only got about three questions. They either didn't like that I was in the UK, or they didn't like the career choices for myself, my family or my close friends.

I'm UK too. I agree that some of the questions are response driven and open up other sections, but even so I'm surprised yours was so short.

I was miffed that the Transporter wasn't one of the options in the "What Hardware do you own?" question :-/

paulster
2011-11-23, 15:25
I was miffed that the Transporter wasn't one of the options in the "What Hardware do you own?" question :-/

Yes, I know. It's as though they're only interested in plastic products these days. A real shame.

toby10
2011-11-23, 16:01
Ah, you are aware of What HiFi? then :D

Never heard of it till the post in this thread. Just a hunch. ;)

AndreE
2011-11-27, 11:39
This is very interesting discussion.

I guess the real thread for average user comes from “external complexity”
Any mass-market solution should be easy to set-up and operate by one fingertip.
Interestingly TV solution rivals are: Samsung with its HUB, Philips with similar ideas and of course Apple.
Apple TV and coming real TV box will change the entertainment world soon.

I see that standard broadcast will have serious problems from this side.
Who needs a standard TV when you can stream everything from internet using one of HUBX or possible iTune?

Still market is fresh and many solutions are not mature, but main brands are already far ahead of most.
I personally believe that Logitech could launch the product doing both: audio and video.

I would be happy to move all my movies to the same server where my music is. But would it be really implementable and supported? Main argumentation against would be the piracy (as all discussions about movies). It would be great to move all DVDs and later Blue-Rays to the server and have them available at any time I need… and it is possible (to some extend) with Apple platform
Pity, I see Logitech is a bit too late to get to this market and… content provider is a key for success. Google did not fulfill this role.

Another alternative would be to move to the same field where big boys are – to start offering content like e.g. Apple does. But this would not fit to Logitech business model as it is now, and produces a lot of conflicts with many partners, even with Apple. I see it as less likely happening.

toby10
2011-11-27, 11:52
........
Who needs a standard TV when you can stream everything from internet using one of HUBX or possible iTune?.....

Once the content owners (networks, broadcasters) see their revenues slipping they will stop allowing internet broadcasting, some already do this.
Or they will start charging for internet broadcasting, effectively swapping cable/sat services for internet services.

Cable/sat companies pay big bucks to these content owners. Cable/sat = money to content owners. Internet = no money to content owners (in many cases).
So either the internet content will disappear or you will pay for it via internet. Either way, we'll pay for it, as we should. ;)

Mnyb
2011-11-27, 12:34
Once the content owners (networks, broadcasters) see their revenues slipping they will stop allowing internet broadcasting, some already do this.
Or they will start charging for internet broadcasting, effectively swapping cable/sat services for internet services.

Cable/sat companies pay big bucks to these content owners. Cable/sat = money to content owners. Internet = no money to content owners (in many cases).
So either the internet content will disappear or you will pay for it via internet. Either way, we'll pay for it, as we should. ;)

that is all and well as it should be, but the content providers and content owners are just as confused as the music industry on how to provide for the user it all a big mess rigth now.

Nobody is going to give consummers the absolute flexibility to shedule and cherrypick their own Tv experience, it to hard to sell the adds then, they depend on formats that the add buyers can understand like " day time TV" or a geographical or cultural context.

don't forget that the big money in TV comes from the comercials nobody would afford TV if it where all paid by the subscription , thats a fraction of the costs involved. So the TV exist to expose you to comercials, your favorite TV show is a tool to have you sitting there :)

They must reinvent how to sell add space in internet based TV. at first we will simply see cable TV 2.0 but you stick an ehternet wire into the box. more flexible solution that really use the internet will eventually emerge later much later .

I'm just thinking about how much potential add space they sold via my cabel TV subscription, to get some channel I want a bunch of other cr*p is bundled to it in a package, possibly I sometimes watch a channel I did not really wanted and happen to be exposed to a comercial bingo $$ they won :-/

boxes than can record TV is enough headache for them when people ffwd the comercials...

I see a future with even more product placement where you can click on the actors clothes and cars and get conected to some other content, a future where a TV show a comercial and propaganda is the same thing where no pure art exists and all information is disneyfied for your fammily friendly internet experience ;)

castalla
2011-11-27, 13:06
that is all and well as it should be, but the content providers and content owners are just as confused as the music industry on how to provide for the user it all a big mess rigth now.

Nobody is going to give consummers the absolute flexibility to shedule and cherrypick their own Tv experience, it to hard to sell the adds then, they depend on formats that the add buyers can understand like " day time TV" or a geographical or cultural context.

don't forget that the big money in TV comes from the comercials nobody would afford TV if it where all paid by the subscription , thats a fraction of the costs involved. So the TV exist to expose you to comercials, your favorite TV show is a tool to have you sitting there :)

They must reinvent how to sell add space in internet based TV. at first we will simply see cable TV 2.0 but you stick an ehternet wire into the box. more flexible solution that really use the internet will eventually emerge later much later .

I'm just thinking about how much potential add space they sold via my cabel TV subscription, to get some channel I want a bunch of other cr*p is bundled to it in a package, possibly I sometimes watch a channel I did not really wanted and happen to be exposed to a comercial bingo $$ they won :-/

boxes than can record TV is enough headache for them when people ffwd the comercials...

I see a future with even more product placement where you can click on the actors clothes and cars and get conected to some other content, a future where a TV show a comercial and propaganda is the same thing where no pure art exists and all information is disneyfied for your fammily friendly internet experience ;)

BBC manage without subscription - a yearly licence fee is sufficient - and results in the best radio and TV in the world. Subscription tv is a curse.

Mnyb
2011-11-27, 13:14
BBC manage without subscription - a yearly licence fee is sufficient - and results in the best radio and TV in the world. Subscription tv is a curse.

They do get some £ by selling those shows to other networks... or you could pay to get BBC (I can with my cable operator ).

Yes public service TV here in Sweden is OK to but with such small population not the financial strength of BBC and can't compete regarding producing some of the more expensive kinds of shows, you know they buy those from BBC sometimes :)

AndreE
2011-11-27, 14:00
don't forget that the big money in TV comes from the comercials nobody would afford TV if it where all paid by the subscription , thats a fraction of the costs involved. So the TV exist to expose you to comercials, your favorite TV show is a tool to have you sitting there :)

or abundantly high payments will be leveled to normal and a lot of expensive stuff, which are questionable, will go to nirvana - e.g. cost adjustment :-)
I would support this

AndreE
2011-11-27, 14:02
BBC manage without subscription - a yearly licence fee is sufficient - and results in the best radio and TV in the world. Subscription tv is a curse.
we do pay quite some money in Germany on monthly basis - i still question some content produced for it
some are very valid and interesting, but it could be definitely more efficient

paulster
2011-11-27, 14:37
BBC manage without subscription - a yearly licence fee is sufficient - and results in the best radio and TV in the world. Subscription tv is a curse.

They do get some £ by selling those shows to other networks... or you could pay to get BBC (I can with my cable operator ).

This is all very true. Whilst the BBC in the UK operates via the licence fee, they still have a very lucrative business selling shows and programming to other networks globally. The licence fee alone would not produce the same breadth and quality of programming.

That said, you still can't beat the Beeb. It's one of the things I really miss when I'm the other side of the pond.

toby10
2011-11-27, 15:38
Good god! Our government in the TV/entertainment business? No thanks. ;)

Gingernut63
2011-11-27, 16:20
Good god! Our government in the TV/entertainment business? No thanks. ;)

The ABC in Australia is very similar to the BBC; it provides the quality I look for in TV programs, some sourced from the BBC. The ABC while funded by Government, has it's own charter and operates independently. Without the ABC providing a quality alternative then all that would available is the dreaded reality programs that are destroying free to air at the moment, and crappy Australian and US sitcoms/soap ;).

It works very well, but if the ABC disappeared then TV for me would be out the window.

Mnyb
2011-11-27, 23:06
to work, a pulic service TV should operate under it's own charter and not under controll by the goverment, you see when it go wrong just tune in the weird channels on your cable TV.

men with mustach and khaki uniforms reading the news :)

DaveWr
2011-11-28, 01:53
to work, a pulic service TV should operate under it's own charter and not under controll by the goverment, you see when it go wrong just tune in the weird channels on your cable TV.

men with mustach and khaki uniforms reading the news :)

The BBC is changing, ex Tory party chairman heads it up. Budget frozen for 6 years. We Brits like to wreck what we have.

Gingernut63
2011-11-28, 02:48
The BBC is changing, ex Tory party chairman heads it up. Budget frozen for 6 years. We Brits like to wreck what we have.

Don't worry, the right wing Aussies politicians try the same thing with the ABC. It's a constant battle :(.

toby10
2011-11-28, 03:30
The ABC in Australia is very similar to the BBC; it provides the quality I look for in TV programs, some sourced from the BBC. The ABC while funded by Government, has it's own charter and operates independently. Without the ABC providing a quality alternative then all that would available is the dreaded reality programs that are destroying free to air at the moment, and crappy Australian and US sitcoms/soap ;).

It works very well, but if the ABC disappeared then TV for me would be out the window.

May work ok for your country, certainly won't work here. Entertainment wise our feds are involved in one national TV network (PBS) and one national radio network (NPR).
They have biased and botched those so badly it is not even funny.

There are local public access ch's and C-Span (fed's public access ch, live congressional votes & debates, committee hearings, etc...) as well as NASA TV.

But from an entertainment aspect let the free market and consumers decide what they want. Obviously, in the US anyway, our feds don't have a clue what it's citizens want.

AndrewFG
2011-11-28, 10:35
Good god! Our government in the TV/entertainment business? No thanks. ;)Spare a thought for the poor Italians. They have had to put up with "BBC" (Berlusconi Broadcasting Corporation) for decades...