On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Sike <[email protected]> wrote: > I presume that the current thin-client model will continue and > therefore the support for the older devices. The SB3 is not a massive > leap from the Slimp3. Apart from the better screen, wireless and the > audio handling, it's pretty much the same device.
You might want to clarify what you mean by this. I suspect you mean in terms of high-level UI and capabilities of the device (e.g. they both have a rectangular screen and both produce audio). From a technical perspective it is a massive leap. I doubt the SB3 and the SliMP3 share even one single hardware component. They are separated by years of development and two (arguably more) product generations. They definitely don't share the same network protocol. But, as you suggest, good software development practices have made it relatively easy to keep support for the older devices. Indeed, this latest round of synchronization improvements actually improved sync for the oldest of devices as well. I'm sure that the effort was very real and measurable to include slimp3 in that work, but Alan either volunteered it or got paid for it. One final note: there will come a time when there are no more slimp3 devices being used. I had three of them, but they are all retired. It might be beneficial for a release of the server to encourage optional reporting of the number of older devices that are in use. Then there would be concrete information about how many of these devices are actually in use on servers that are being upgraded. One can always run an old version of the server software if necessary. Ben _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
