NFLnut;277139 Wrote: > And this pretty much places aisde my desire to run Squeezecenter on an > NAS because I can't imagine how slow THAT would be. Besides, there is > no reason to take my opinion so personally. >
Which may be the wrong decision. SC is also often VERY slow on some of my development systems up to locking up the whole system, yet it's always on the same situation: SC runs on the same machine as the browser, especially if it's Firefox and has a lot of tabs open, also running Softsqueeze will completely kill performance. It's just too much for a single core system on Windows. But running it off a NAS (ok, mine has quite a bit of performance) gets rid of that situation, actually making things better, Unix scheduling vs. Windows scheduling seems to help, too. BTW, what's your idea of "very slow". You state 30s-1min. For what is this? If it's loading a album view page with, say 75 albums including artwork (my configuration), then you will probably never get happy with SC since indeed I haven't seen any setup that beats that. SC is on the feature rich side and a heavy weight server so if speed is all you care about: it will probably never be competitive to the likes of Twonky in this respect but then they don't manage the player and my players connected to Twonky are actually slower. Maybe using a front end like Moose or the Controller would help with that. -- pippin --- see iPeng at penguinlovesmusic.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ pippin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13777 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=44309 _______________________________________________ beta mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/beta
