Mark Lanctot;188768 Wrote: > I'm not so sure it's a poor design choice. Since most of its power is > housed in the server, the Squeezebox is the most customizeable, > flexible, changeable tech device of any sort available today IMHO.
I agree mostly, my only gripe, that's been somewhat misunderstood here, is that the Squeezebox UI should be a little more asynchronous. It seemed to me this change could be made in firmware and could potentially use LESS processing power and network bandwidth. My understanding the way it is now: remote volume down pressed->Squeezebox: Volume down Squeezebox->SlimServer: Is this OK? SlimServer->Squeezebox: It's OK. Squeezebox: Volume down What I would like to see: remote volume down pressed->Squeezebox: Volume down Squeezebox: Volume down Squeezebox->Slimserver: Volume turned down My assumption was since this is something the Squeezebox already does, and the cpu is capable of, I was just wondering if the architecture was flexible enough to allow this. SuperQ and ceejay both said this is not the case, everything is done on the server by design and no exceptions are allowed. As a neophyte processing some commands locally, and doing somethings like scrolling text, completely independent of the server makes sense to me, but I'll defer to the experts on other consequences of those changes. -- 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
