Re: [slim] Blog.Logitech: An Open Letter to Squeezebox Fans
I also successfully updated the FW of my spare Touch and Radio *without* registering them to mysb.com. On the Touch the 'left swipe' didn't work to abort registration during the initial setup, but - as gharris999 mentioned - disconnecting the WAN line from the broadband modem finally let the Touch give up asking for registration. If I remember correctly, the 'left swipe' (home button?) worked on the Radio. Running LMS 7.7.2. reinholdk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=36070 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96606 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Please tell me it ain't so.
I've been a Squeezebox user and advocate almost since the beginning. About the only product I didn't own was the original SLIMP3. I have a dozen devices and was just talking about streaming home solutions with an acquaintance the other day and showing off my SB solution where I could control my home BOOM from my phone 300km away (Orangesqueeze on Droid). Haven't been plugged into the community for a while though and was just poking my head back in due to some insomnia. What a surprise! I cannot understand why Logitech drove over the cliff with the higher end audio and highly flexible/customizable music server niche they bought from Slimdevices. My only hope is that Sean Adams gets off the beach , buys back the mess his vision has become (probably for pennies on the dollar now that Logitech has run it into the ground), and rescues us all. Hasn't he almost burned though the dump truck of money he got from Logitech on hookers and blow by now anyhow? :-D I kid! All Logitech needed to do was to keep the hardware production ticking along, market the darn stuff better, and support/manage the open source development that basically comes for free. Killing the golden goose indeed. I really think they failed with the marketing and didn't really understand their base. Daryle Tilroe's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=434 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96999 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Squeezeplay on Windows 8
kidstypike wrote: To be able to use Squeezeplay as a controller to control Squeezeplayer, you need to choose Squeezeplayer as the player you are controlling. Settings Choose Player SqueezePlayer I see the choose player option. But i don't care about using it as a controller. Quite the opposite: i want to use it as a player. w3wilkes wrote: I understand that. The interface of Squeezeplayer is almost identical to the interface on the Duet controller so I do know how to use it. Squeezeplayer does work completely if I actually run Squeezeserver on this PC, but I normally have it running on my WHS box. From the interface on Squeezeplayer it cannot see any of my players including itself. If I select my music it attempts to connect to Squeezebox server on my laptop (same machine as this problem Squeezeplayer) which is not active and gives the option to try again or switch libraries. I select Switch and it does show me my actual active Squeezeserver along with the non running Squeezeserver with the check mark. I then select the actual active Squeezeserver. It goes into the spin circle thing trying to connect and then fails with the retry or switch items. If I have the player dropdown in the web browser expanded you can see the squeezeplayer get added to the list of players that Squeezeserver sees. Squeezeplayer actually says it failed to connect. At this point I just take Squeezeplayer to the home screen and minimze it. It works as a player that can be controlled from the WebUI or either of my Duet controllers. Squeezeplayer itself is cannot see or control anything, much like a headless softsqueeze. Same here. Except Win8 in stead of WHS and for me it doesn't work as a dumb player. pizzaman's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=58151 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97252 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Please tell me it ain't so.
Ikabob wrote: I guess time will tell. But, I sense that LOGITECH is assuring us that they will remain accountable to us. LOGITECH'S statements are on record.. This is Dudley from the Logitech UE product team.. Logitech will continue to support these products with troubleshooting and support, the mysqueezebox.com website and the Squeezebox Controller Mobile App. The issue is the time frame and level of support, not their good intentions or whether they mean what they say. now. Time Frame: Technically they could shut down MySB.com tomorrow and Dudley's statement would still be accurate because they continued support for a period of time after they discontinued the SB hardware players. In this hypothetical and nonsensical case, a few months time frame. So the question is: what is a reasonable time frame? One year? Two years? Five years? Ten years? Every party involved (users, third party developers, subscription services, Logitech) will all have their own idea of a reasonable time frame. Support Level: Even if MySB.com exists five years from now, at what level? How often might we see outages? How long to fix broken Apps and services? Service providers like Rhapsody may update their API, how long for (any remaining) techs to update the MySB side? What services will even be available on MySB two years from now? But noone knows the answers including Logitech. It's the great unknown of time frame and service level that won't be answered until it happens. The one big ace in the SB hole is the similarity between MySB.com and UESmartRadio.com. Being so similar it likely would not take a monumental effort to keep MySB running updated if they are doing the same for UE. for as long as UE lasts anyway. :) toby10's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12553 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96999 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Please tell me it ain't so.
toby10 wrote: The issue is the time frame and level of support, not their good intentions or whether they mean what they say. now. Time Frame: Technically they could shut down MySB.com tomorrow and Dudley's statement would still be accurate because they continued support for a period of time after they discontinued the SB hardware players. In this hypothetical and nonsensical case, a few months time frame. So the question is: what is a reasonable time frame? One year? Two years? Five years? Ten years? Every party involved (users, third party developers, subscription services, Logitech) will all have their own idea of a reasonable time frame. Support Level: Even if MySB.com exists five years from now, at what level? How often might we see outages? How long to fix broken Apps and services? Service providers like Rhapsody may update their API, how long for (any remaining) techs to update the MySB side? What services will even be available on MySB two years from now? But noone knows the answers including Logitech. It's the great unknown of time frame and service level that won't be answered until it happens. The one big ace in the SB hole is the similarity between MySB.com and UESmartRadio.com. Being so similar it likely would not take a monumental effort to keep MySB running updated if they are doing the same for UE. for as long as UE lasts anyway. :) Excellent points and I totally agree. Because of the large numbers of consumers who have invested large amounts of money in these excellent LOGITECH products with expectations of longevity and functionality, I do not think LOGITECH would want the publicity from disgruntled consumers. The meaning of the word reasonable might be interpreted differently. LOGITECH has been a successful company and earned a reputation by maintaining high business and ethical standards and they and their shareholders, no doubt, wish to maintain this public image and reputation. I really have faith that LOGITECH will do the right thing and honor their obligation to its loyal and supportive customers. IMHO Ikabob's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32088 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96999 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Do any Squeezeplayers actually have the horsepower to play 192/24 remote streams?
Triode wrote: Touch is the only player which can play 192k streams and needs 7.8 if its wav. If the requirement is to stream from another source on the local lan then I don't see why this will be any different from streaming from the LMS - the client code in squeezeplay is the same. Clearly the server will need to be tuned with large max size send buffers etc but I don't see why another server app could not source the stream. I have been doing some research: LOCAL 96K OR 192K FLAC FILES SERVED BY LMS - Radio, Squeezeplay: LMS down samples using flac.exe | sox.exe $resample; audio intelligible; no buffer stalls; I suppose ditto for Duet, Squeezebox - Transporter: LMS just sends the file; audio is intelligible; no buffer stalls; I suppose ditto for Touch REMOTE 96K OR 192K STREAMS SERVED BY A 3RD PARTY SERVER - Radio, Squeezeplay: Audio intelligible; but there are frequent buffer stalls; using direct streaming or indirect (proxy via LMS) makes no difference - Transporter: A 96k the audio is intelligible; no buffer stalls; but at 192k the output is white noise I don't have a Touch so cannot test it. Conclusions: 1) Apparently the newer players have DACs that can handle hi-res audio, but they don't have the buffer capacity for it 2) One oddity is that Transporter can play a 192k Flac served by LMS but it outputs white noise on a 192k Flac from a 3rd party server AndrewFG's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15838 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97244 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Do any Squeezeplayers actually have the horsepower to play 192/24 remote streams?
AndrewFG wrote: I have been doing some testing: LOCAL 96K OR 192K FLAC FILES SERVED BY LMS - Radio, Squeezeplay: LMS down samples using flac.exe | sox.exe $resample; audio intelligible; no buffer stalls - I suppose ditto for Duet, Squeezebox - Transporter: LMS just sends the file; audio is intelligible; no buffer stalls; - I suppose ditto for Touch REMOTE 96K OR 192K FLAC STREAMS SERVED BY A 3RD PARTY SERVER - Radio, Squeezeplay: Audio intelligible; but there are frequent buffer stalls - Using direct streaming or indirect (proxy via LMS) makes no difference - Transporter: At 96k the audio is intelligible; no buffer stalls; but at 192k the output is white noise I don't have a Touch so cannot test it. Conclusions: 1) Apparently the newer players have DACs that can handle hi-res audio, but they don't have the buffer capacity for it 2) One oddity is that Transporter can play a 192k Flac served by LMS but it outputs white noise on a 192k Flac from a 3rd party server Be careful - the standard Touch kernel only supports 96k sample rates with the built in devices - you will need the EDO kernel for 192k and then only on spdif/usb, the built in analog won't work. I very much doubt you will really get above 96k though with the other devices as there's no kernel driver support for them. The alsa layer can do resampling, but I suspect this will result in lots of cpu load and no real benefit. You should could test against squeezeplay or squeezelite on linux for 192k support - I would expect this to work with your server as long as the send buffer is large enough in your server - the clients will wake approx once every 100ms if starved of data, so you want to make sure your server can maintain a streaming rate. Triode's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97244 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Please tell me it ain't so.
Ikabob wrote: Excellent points and I totally agree. Because of the large numbers of consumers who have invested large amounts of money in these excellent LOGITECH products with expectations of longevity and functionality, I do not think LOGITECH would want the publicity from disgruntled consumers. The number of squeezebox customers of logitech is so very tiny compared to their total customer base that I doubt Logitech cares about them one way or another. And longevity in today's computer hardware market is 2 years max. After that the assumption is throw away and replace. Logitech will make business decisions based on what their management thinks will maximize shareholder value. If they think that bad publicity will have an impact on their bottom line, they'll think about this. But again, squeezebox sales have been only a footnote to Logitech profits. garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96999 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Please tell me it ain't so.
garym wrote: The number of squeezebox customers of logitech is so very tiny compared to their total customer base that I doubt Logitech cares about them one way or another. And longevity in today's computer hardware market is 2 years max. After that the assumption is throw away and replace. Logitech will make business decisions based on what their management thinks will maximize shareholder value. If they think that bad publicity will have an impact on their bottom line, they'll think about this. But again, squeezebox sales have been only a footnote to Logitech profits. You're probably right,Gary. I definitely respect your opinion. The 2 year and then throw it away part is hard for me to understand. It's true,IMO, that hardware becomes outdated in a short time (2 years), but the hardware is still functional for an indefinite period of time. I have computers over ten or more years old that are functional though lacking some newer features. Cellular phones still function after many years. My expectation of a product that is purchased especially a radio is that it will be functional for an extended period of time. I believe that intentionally terminating the functionality is uncharted territory. I do believe that LOGITECH will stand by us. Time will tell. Ikabob's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32088 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96999 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Please tell me it ain't so.
garym wrote: The number of squeezebox customers of logitech is so very tiny compared to their total customer base that I doubt Logitech cares about them one way or another. And longevity in today's computer hardware market is 2 years max. After that the assumption is throw away and replace. Logitech will make business decisions based on what their management thinks will maximize shareholder value. If they think that bad publicity will have an impact on their bottom line, they'll think about this. But again, squeezebox sales have been only a footnote to Logitech profits. You're probably right,Gary. I definitely respect your opinion. The 2 year and then throw it away part is hard for me to understand. It's true,IMO, that hardware becomes outdated in a short time (2 years), but the hardware is still functional for an indefinite period of time. I have computers over ten or more years old that are functional though lacking some newer features. Cellular phones still function after many years. My expectation of a product that is purchased, especially an audio device, is that it will be functional for an extended period of time. I believe that intentionally terminating the functionality of a purchased product is uncharted territory. I do believe that LOGITECH will stand by us. Time will tell. Ikabob's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32088 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96999 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Please tell me it ain't so.
Ikabob wrote: You're probably right,Gary. I definitely respect your opinion. The 2 year and then throw it away part is hard for me to understand. It's true,IMO, that hardware becomes outdated in a short time (2 years), but the hardware is still functional for an indefinite period of time. I have computers over ten or more years old that are functional though lacking some newer features. Cellular phones still function after many years. My expectation of a product that is purchased especially a radio is that it will be functional for an extended period of time. I believe that intentionally terminating the functionality is uncharted territory. I do believe that LOGITECH will stand by us. Time will tell. I agree that the hardware can last forever. I have perfectly working radios from the 1930s, 40s, and 50s (I collect old radios). I expect my Squeezebox hardware to last many years as should you. And with LMS and a computer or NAS that can run LMS, the core functions can continue forever. So nothing worth worrying about. Things will work out I'm sure. garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96999 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Do any Squeezeplayers actually have the horsepower to play 192/24 remote streams?
AndrewFG wrote: I have been doing some testing: LOCAL 96K OR 192K FLAC FILES SERVED BY LMS - Radio, Squeezeplay: LMS down samples using flac.exe | sox.exe $resample; audio intelligible; no buffer stalls - I suppose ditto for Duet, Squeezebox - Transporter: LMS just sends the file; audio is intelligible; no buffer stalls; - I suppose ditto for Touch I don't have a Touch so cannot test it. 2) One oddity is that Transporter can play a 192k Flac served by LMS but it outputs white noise on a 192k Flac from a 3rd party server NOTE LMS TRANSCODES 192 TO 96 FOR BOTH TOUCH AND TRANSPORTER NO SQUEEZEBOX DO 192K NATIVELY PER DEFAULT . So transporter is playing 192k by transcoding to 96k in LMS . The Touch can be tricked to do that by Triodes suite of small apps and hacks ,but for a general purpose solution for your whitebear I think you should try to invoke the standard transcodings for each player . Can the stream be proxied trough LMS so it's normal logic can work as designed ? Would this enable a Triode EDO enhanced Touch to actually get 192k as LMS will know of this capability . Sounds like you into getting a Touch on Ebay to load EDO on if you want to pursue and test this ? Wonder if squeezelite on a suitable linux computer will give you a true 192k squeezebox to try with ? Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97244 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Please tell me it ain't so.
garym wrote: I agree that the hardware can last forever. I have perfectly working radios from the 1930s, 40s, and 50s (I collect old radios). I expect my Squeezebox hardware to last many years as should you. And with LMS and a computer or NAS that can run LMS, the core functions can continue forever. So nothing worth worrying about. Things will work out I'm sure. Yeah. While I don't believe mysb.com is going anywhere soon, the primary reason for my using a SB Touch over other solutions is the ability to stream bit-perfect, 24/96 (or greater) FLAC, etc. audio to my system from my server. It will continue to do that independent of mysb.com. This is why I had no hesitation purchasing a second one after its discontinuance (but before the price increases). I can always find something to stream MOG if I need to. ;) Jack Gilvey's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=57582 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96999 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Squeezeplay on Windows 8
Since all you really need/want is a player on your Win8 box have you tried using SoftSqueeze rather than SqueezePlay? SoftSqueeze even has a headless mode so that you can run it with no UI at all. Yes, you can control it from the WebUI or your Android. w3wilkes's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=22973 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97252 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Squeezeplay on Windows 8
Hmm , what firewall and intivirus you migth have to alter settings in both and sorry to say disabling firewalls does not *really* disable them in many cases ( unistall is what works ). Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97252 ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
