azinck3;189365 Wrote: > This sort of functionality is well outside the design parameters of > slimserver which is designed to serve and support slim devices' > hardware (SB/transporter)
THEY are the ones who put the ability to stream a stream to someone on the net, including supporting a software player. they advertise this ability. this wasn't some after-thought, they wanted it in there, and all i'm asking for is this functionality be made easier to use. its not that big a stretch... azinck3;189365 Wrote: > so it's not terribly surprising that such functionality hasn't been > built in. It seems a bit beside the point to complain that it's "VERY > confusing" when it's not at all what the system was designed for. simply not true. they put it [some functionality] in there. the problem is that it doesn't work well, not that it isn't supposed to be there. and it is very confusing. azinck3;189365 Wrote: > Slimserver doesn't use "sessions" (which is specific terminology in web > software) in the way you mean i can't speak to that specifically, but is it not true that in theory the way it works is that multiple people from the net can reach my SS and tell it to do things that won't impact me locally, or interfere with each other? (such as the settings or what music to play) i realize in practice its probably problematic, but thats exactly what i'm complaining about. anyway, thats what i meant by sessions. i don't know if stream.mp3 allows more than one player to connect to it or not, does it? i guess i figured each session would have its own stream.mp3, but i guess thats not the case... azinck3;189365 Wrote: > and the ability for stream.mp3 to support multiple players is extremely > limited if not nonexistent (do some searching...there's a good deal of > discussion on the issue and the last I saw was that it's essentially > not possible -- the type of streaming necessary to run what is > essentially a radio station from slimserver is not built in). ok, i understand what you are saying, but actually what i was thinking, (and as i just said, i guess its not like this) is that each session connecting to SS would have its own 'stream.mp3' unique to it. i think it could be done, the Q is how would you IP address it? azinck3;189365 Wrote: > What you suggest fundamentally differs from the SS paradigm. In > Slimserver, players (hardware, software or mp3) do not equate to > viewers. That's one of many things that make SS really good at what > it's designed for but not so good for what you want to do. i understand that listening via the net to SS is secondary, but it is something they put in there. allow me to restate my request entriely, and tell me if this is something not "too far" from SS now: i would like the ability to control locally the skin and the settings (like bitrate limiting) for any single remote user who happens to listen to my SS. as it is now, i can't do that. only the remote user can do it, and its hard for a novice to configure. thats a much more limited request, and not too far from current SS implementation, is it? -- MrSinatra www.LION-Radio.org Using: Squeezebox2 w/SS 6.5.2 (beta!?) - Win XP Pro SP2 - 3.2ghz / 2gig ram ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MrSinatra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2336 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33543 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
