While slim sounds appealing the idea that every signal is sent back to the server just seems unnecessary and wasteful. This is a $300 device with the processing power that used to be common in workstations. It's not an ATM where security is an issue, I can't think of a scenario where a volume/mute command from the unit should ever require authorization from the server.
It doesn't seem unreasonable to process certain commands locally/instantly and then report the status to the server. If the server doesn't know that the volume was reduced for a little bit is less important than the user waiting for a response from the server. I'm controlling the device not my server! My expectation is that commands from the remote control which comes directly from me should preempt anything else going on, as much as possible. I don't think I'm alone here. I don't mind lag in somethings, but this just seems like failure by design. For the record I have a Squeezebox with 70% 802.11g signal connecting to a 1gb RAM ReadyNas NV+ (which I know is a little slow) but I think Slim will ultimately be in for a rude awakening if they expect their competitors to be hampered by this same design flaw. The Squeezebox can continue to play for a minute or two with the server completely off, so it is capable of some asynchronous behavior. All I'm asking is please take this into consideration with the various performance improvements you have lined up over the next year. I honestly can't recommend this device as long as it has this limitation because there's no telling when this can crop up in a wifi network. -- sander ------------------------------------------------------------------------ sander's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10737 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33695 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
