------------------------------------------------------------------------ A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96660 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Question: Would you buy a new Squeezebox player if it became available? - Yes , if less than $100 - Yes, if less than $200 - Yes, if less than $500 - Yes, if less than $1000 - Yes - price is no object; I just want the best sound - No - I would NOT buy another Squeezebox player ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb wrote: > As a said in another tread , a complete system must span the whole price > range otherwise it's actually less attractive for any buyer. > > More models actually increase the strength of the lineup, there is a > device for for every conceivable purpose and they all play well together > . > > I'll be happy with an digital out only device ( as evident by my > signature , there is no piont in interfacing my hifi in any other way > ). > > The software itself could be improved in so many ways that we leave that > for other treads , let's just say that even if like it it lacks obvius > features and probably not so obvius ones that I would love if I get > exposed to them . I agree the diversity of the ecosystem is a huge asset, overall. However, Logitech has kept the radio idea for itself, as evidenced by their intent to sell it as part of the UE ecosystem. Additionally, the radios compete more directly with the exploding field of mini-speaker systems and apple airplay systems with built in speakers. This is to say it is a crowded market in which it is both difficult and expensive to distinguish any given product. Though I would immediately acquiesce that margins are likely the highest and the market is arguably the largest. In so far as #2 and #3 are concerned - they are aimed directly at satisfying the existing SB enthusiast market by accommodating future expansion of existing SB systems (as evidenced by your own example), and providing a point of entry into the SB ecosystem for which there are few direct competitors, if any: Naim and Linn have laughably high margins that kept them from competing with the SB price point; Sonos is both slightly more expensive and doesn't support high quality play back; Cambridge's software is painful and their app doesn't run on some recent android phones; Olive has promise, but is also relatively expensive, and necessarily ties in a hard-drive containing device if 24/192 playback is desired; UPnP based systems are painful to use, and make library curation a Sisyphusian task - thus the value of the SB ecosystem's dedicated software (including syncing). The point is #2 and #3 are products in markets where SB can handedly stand out and continue to thrive - as it has before - in terms of price-to-quality ratio. SB has been the price-to-quality leader from the beginning, and it can continue as such, by continuing to stand out where the not-perfect-but-usually-awsome software is a huge asset (i.e. not the iTunes / AirPlay / crowded market of mini-portable systems - though this is not to say iTunes integration isn't important to use cases #2 and #3) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ninthsrw's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=57550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96660 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
