JJZolx wrote: > You've lost me... Who's talking about "masses" or selling anything in > stores? > Sorry, I think my mind went a bit ahead of the thread :-) When reading John's post again it's pretty clear that he is talking about a low volume solution which doesn't have to be sold through local stores.
JJZolx wrote: > > I haven't addressed mysb.com functionality, but how can a Squeezebox > replacement NOT rely on LMS or another server that implements SlimProto? > If it doesn't, then it's not a Squeezebox. > > John's post talks of circuit boards an IR input, so I presume that he's > talking about building something that resembles and operates like a > Squeezebox. We're no longer talking about taking a Raspberry Pi or other > off-the-shelf computer and making it work like a Squeezebox to feed a > USB DAC. For the most part, that's been done. My post above simply tries > to outline what I feel would be the minimum required I/O of an SB > replacement. Apart from the USB, it's not much different than the old > Receiver. > In my mind: Squeezebox replancement = A music streaming device that provides similar features as the Squeezebox (preferably but not necessarily compatible with existing Squeezeboxes) However, I think a DIY solution could make sense to some existing Squeezebox enthusiasts who have a desperate need to enhance their existing system, relying on LMS makes sense if you want to do something simple that works as a temporary solution until the market catches up with the needs we have. In my mind it doesn't really make sense to even package software and hardware together for this kind of system, just let each user buy the parts, load the software on it and assemble the device themselves. It would avoid the codec licensing issue pippin mentions, since you are just selling a circuit board and not a music streaming device. Still, if you just want a temporary solution, why not just get a used Squeezebox from eBay ? Surely there will be people selling their old Squeezeboxes on eBay during the years to come if people are still willing to buy it for the same price as a new one. I guess it could make sense if you like to experiment with DIY solutions, just because it's fun, but if not I can't really see the need unless you also handle the long term issues. If you want to do something more long term, you really need to handle LMS and mysqueezebox.com maintenance and then it will become a much bigger thing and in this case it might even be better to start over and build something with similar functionality instead of relying on LMS which have 10 years of architectural inheritance. Reusing someone elses code in a new system isn't always the easiest way to do things, in my experience you really earn most time by reusing functional specifications and possibly architecture/design and protocols if it's good, reusing code only really makes sense if you don't plan to change it or you already understand the code in detail. Of course, for LMS there isn't really any functional specifications to reuse and the protocols are barely documented, so the question is if it's really worth the trouble to try to branch and re-brand it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ erland's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3124 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97881 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
