Listener Wrote: > > However, I am a retired software engineer and found the enhancement > request to be wrong-headed. It does not work well for a novice to ask > for a specific enhancement without detailing his problem with the > current system. When that request is not based on a clear > understanding of how Slimserver works or the distinctions between file > formats, it just leads to chaos and hard feelings. > Bill Just to clarify...I started this thread. I am no novice. I am a 20-year software engineering veteran. I have worked for many years for companies like Apple and Adobe - companies that strive very hard to "get it right" when it comes to usability. And I feel that I was quite clear in describing the problem I would like to see solved, namely:
A WAY TO HAVE A SINGLE CENTRALIZED LIBRARY OF MY DIGITAL MUSIC IN A SINGLE HIGH-QUALITY COMPRESSED (BOTH ON DISK AND OVER-THE-WIRE) FORMAT (PREFERABLY LOSSSLESS, DEFINITELY NOT MP3), THAT LIVES ON A LOW-POWER LINUX BOX, AND THAT CAN BE ACCESSED AND PLAYED BY BOTH ITUNES CLIENTS AND SQUEEZEBOX CLIENTS WITHOUT NEED FOR INTERMEDIATE SERVER-SIDE TRANSCODING. I really don't see what is so incredibly controversial or "wrong-headed" about this request. To be fair, I understand that this could be solved equally well by Apple if they would simply add FLAC support to iTunes. It could also be solved by SlimDevices if they would license Apple Lossless and include it in their firmware. As a customer of both Apple and Slim, I really don't care how the problem is solved. (Well, maybe I have a slight preference for FLAC - open standards and all.) I would just like it solved... -- samlw ------------------------------------------------------------------------ samlw's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2818 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=19155 _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
