Home of the Squeezebox™ & Transporter® network music players.
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Patrick Dixon
    Guest

    Open firmware for SB2?

    "it's worked very well for Linux."

    Really? As someone struggling to get FC3 configured, googling for
    information produces many more people with Linux problems than there are
    solutions out there.

    BTW anyone care to help with my problem getting Slimserver 5.4.0 to start up
    correctly?

    -----Original Message-----
    From: discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
    [mailto:discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com]On Behalf Of Phil Karn
    Sent: 13 March 2005 08:26
    To: Slim Devices Discussion
    Subject: [slim] Open firmware for SB2?


    Patrick Dixon wrote:
    > IMHO, the two biggest threats to Slim Devices' competitive advantage are:
    >
    > * Product design - most 'normal' people think the Roku styling is better.


    Maybe. Personally, I think basic functionality and reliability are far
    more important. Then again, my Squeezeboxes are all black.

    > * Simple software installation - most 'normal' people can't (or can't be
    > bothered) to spend hours reconfiguring their computer to get an

    application
    > running - if it doesn't work reliably straight from the tin, they'll just
    > send it back and move on.


    Absolutely!

    > The second produces a major dilemma - the opensource community is
    > notoriously geeky and seems to just love wading though reams of poorly
    > documented or undoccumented source code to re-configure it for some

    strange
    > combination of a Linux installation. But if the company concentrates on
    > supporting and making the software work seamlessly with Windows and iUnix,
    > it will probably alienate the geeks.


    I don't think that's really a big dilemma. These sorts of "sponsored
    open source" projects work best when the volunteers work on the features
    that personally interest them, and the commercial sponsor acts as the
    project "glue" -- merging patches, conducting regression testing, and
    managing the release cycle. I can't see how any geek could oppose the
    mere existence of a stable Windows version (though that's arguably a
    contradiction in terms) so long as the code he's interested in remains
    open and hackable.

    What I *do* find discouraging is the distressing unreliability of even
    the 5.4 version of the server software. I shouldn't have to install the
    version du jour just to get a fix for a bug that keeps crashing my
    server in routine usage.

    There ought to be two code bases: a relatively stable, no-frills version
    with an emphasis on robustness, and an experimental version with all the
    latest gimmicks. As new features prove themselves and become stable,
    they can be backported to the stable version. This is hardly a novel
    concept; it's worked very well for Linux.

    Most of the volunteers would probably prefer to play with the
    experimental release, while the people at Slim Devices would maintain
    the stable version. After all, their product is pretty much useless
    without a server to drive it.

    --Phil

  2. #2
    Phil Karn
    Guest

    Open firmware for SB2?

    Patrick Dixon wrote:
    > "it's worked very well for Linux."
    >
    > Really? As someone struggling to get FC3 configured, googling for
    > information produces many more people with Linux problems than there are
    > solutions out there.
    >


    I was talking about Linux, which is just an OS kernel. There has
    traditionally been a production branch and a development branch, with
    features from the development branch integrated back into the production
    branch after they've been adequately tested. As a result, the production
    branch has been remarkably stable. All of my Linux boxes routinely run
    for months at a time without crashing; when they do, it's almost always
    because of a hardware failure like a crashed disk or a power failure.

    BTW, I use Debian, not Red Hat.

    --Phil

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •