MrSinatra;655049 Wrote:
>
> still, having said all that, the server does have HQ audio sound, and i
> think a free server that does video and pictures and audio well could
> lead to hardware adoptions.
>
So do I, if it does it well and it can be extended by third party
add-ons, but with the current priorities I seriously doubt this is
going to be the case, it feels like Logitech is focusing more on "good
enough for Revue before October".
However, an extensible open source based UPnP server which would be
able to manage and serve photo, video and music library would be really
great.
The question is just if Logitech can justify the investment needed to
accomplish something like this if they can't specifically earn money on
the server software. It's completely different with the Squeezebox units
which uses a proprietary protocol which makes it harder for other
manufacturers to take advantage of Logitech's investment in SBS. With a
standard UPnP server, Logitech Revue and similar Logitech UPnP devices
will have to compete with hardware media players from other
manufacturers who didn't have to invest in developing their own server
since they could just use the one provided by Logitech. As I look at
it, the only way Logitech can earn money on the server software is to
use a proprietary protocol only supported by their own hardware players
or by making sure the server software can only run on Logitech hardware
(server box or player with built-in server). I personally believe a
player with built-in server would be the preferred choice as people
would have a hard time justifying investing in a server box that can't
play music by itself. If the server software can be installed and used
on a PC, the competitors are going to be able to use it without having
to invest in any server development, the result is that Logitech will
pay for the investment and the competitors will be able to use it.
The question I'm still asking myself after all this is why Logitech
implement their own UPnP server when there are going to be a lot of
others available on the market with same functionality more or less for
free. My guess is that the main reason is that they feel it's a good
idea to have control of it themselves and that they feel it's a good
way to be able to justify continuous maintenance of server support for
Squeezebox devices.
--
erland
Erland Isaksson ('My homepage' (http://erland.isaksson.info))
(Developer of 'many plugins/applets'
(http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/User:Erland). If my answer
helped you and you like to encourage future presence on this forum
and/or third party plugin/applet development, 'donations are always
appreciated' (http://erland.isaksson.info/donate))
------------------------------------------------------------------------
erland's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3124
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=90063
_______________________________________________
beta mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta
