I like the look of this itv thing but only if it plays dvd movies at
full resolution.
The idea of ripping most of my dvd collection onto a big hard
drive/drives and playing movies from here rather than sifting through
boxes of dvd boxes. In fact exactly what the squeezebox did for my cd
Michaelwagner;136859 Wrote:
New thing found ... on my SB1, holding the volume up/down buttons
advances by 2.5 each increment. On my SB3, it's only 1 per increment.
For both systems, a single button push, up or down, is only worth 1,
but holding down the button on the SB1 causes increments
A Robot;135643 Wrote:
Apple likes to think they're ahead of Microsoft with OSX, but they're
just now catching up to Media Centre, and how many years has that been
out now?
The new iPods are nice, especially the shuffle... that thing is
ridiculously small.
Well - I use Mac @ home and
Michaelwagner;136153 Wrote:
OK, OK. [...]
I'll give [6.5b3] a whirl this weekend if time permits.
Well, I downloaded it and it's currently scanning.
I see 2 processes, a slim and a scanner. The scanner is eating the CPU
and the slim is snoring with one player playing. No sound skipping
Man, can't wait to try out 6.5. But I prefer to wait till official
release.
--
Nostromo
Nostromo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6322
View this thread:
Nostromo;136861 Wrote:
Man, can't wait to try out 6.5. But I prefer to wait till official
release.
Well, according to the schedule, official release is supposed to
coincide with availability of the transporter, and that's supposed to
be Monday the 18th, isn't it?
So official release isn't
kdf;136219 Wrote:
Quoting bklaas bklaas.2e51tz1158260401 (AT) no-mx (DOT)
forums.slimdevices.com:
I'll look into adding the pulldown. FYI-- setting a cookie from a
different skin for album sort order doesn't do the trick. Hopefully
I
can get something in place to make that a moot
Nostromo;136323 Wrote:
It seems I did sound like a whiner after all :lol:
You sounded a lot like someone else who came only a few weeks before
you and managed to anger practically everyone.
Perhaps unfortunate timing as much as anything else.
--
Michaelwagner
Patches are most welcome.
I know this is the conventional thing people say here for this kind of
comment.
It's just so boring: everybody's complaining (It's done by nerds and it
shows) and knows so much better, but nobody takes the time to do anything.
BTW: I totally disagree with that
Okay, how about this: mockups welcome. Draw what you want to see and
post a picture.
Everyone who complains says something similar to substantial
rethinking, but no one has said what they want,
Thanks. Exactly what I meant - but in English :-)
--
Michael
If it weren't Elgato might also have something to say about it, given
the name of their own EyeTV product.
Is the iTV so very different from the Elgato EyeHome? Seems to do
much the same to me. If so, the only exciting things about it seems
to be that it's being produced by Apple and that
I'm quite happy with the web interface as it is in 6.5, particularly
Fishbone. The performance issues that dogged it in 6.3 are all better,
and
the gallery view option is just what I wanted. Nokia770 is also a nice
skin,
but not really to my taste (too clearly designed for small screen).
On 14-Sep-06, at 12:40 AM, Nostromo wrote:
I'm quite happy with the web interface as it is in 6.5, particularly
Fishbone. The performance issues that dogged it in 6.3 are all better,
and
the gallery view option is just what I wanted. Nokia770 is also a nice
skin,
but not really to my taste
Michael Herger;136010 Wrote:
It's just so boring: everybody's complaining (It's done by nerds and it
shows) and knows so much better, but nobody takes the time to do
anything.
It reminds me of an old line from Mark Twain:
Everyone complains about the weather, but no one does anything about
On 9/14/06, Michaelwagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I gather 6.5 is better - I haven't had a chance to download it yet. Somaybe I'd better wait and see. Maybe this weekend if time permits.
Michael,You really should -- and soon! It's been in development for a long time and is a bigger leap forward
Michael Herger;136010 Wrote:
BTW: I totally disagree with that statement. Just because it isn't
flashy
as mediaplayers have to be today it isn't nerdy. In fact (and I'm
repeating myself): the web interface was the first thing I ever saw
from
SlimDevices (I didn't want to buy a
the gallery view replaces browse artwork.
The advantage is that now any album listing can be shown as a list of
album titles,
or a grid of album covers. A cookie stores the choice, so it
persistent per-browser, per-server,
and per-skin.
it also means that they both use the same code,
Ben Sandee;136082 Wrote:
You really should -- and soon! It's been in development for a long time
OK, OK.
I've been working between 60 and 80 hour weeks at work, trying to keep
my little company afloat, so at the end of the day I haven't had time
to download the latest and greatest. I'm still
On 9/14/06, Nostromo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are the album covers labeled now? The name of the album should beunderneath the album cover, IMO. Or it should be an option.
They are labeled. It's quite nice now.Ben
___
discuss mailing list
CardinalFang;135586 Wrote:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/12/live-from-the-steve-jobs-keynote-its-showtime/
At the end, the iTV, plays music, video, photos etc and plugs into your
stereo and TV. Just goes to show that the Transporter was a good
strategic move...
Paul
640x480 on a flat
Ben Sandee;136157 Wrote:
On 9/14/06, Nostromo Nostromo.2e4u6z1158250501 (AT) no-mx (DOT)
forums.slimdevices.com
wrote:
Are the album covers labeled now? The name of the album should be
underneath the album cover, IMO. Or it should be an option.
They are labeled. It's quite nice
Kyle;135783 Wrote:
Jobs said in his presentation that iTV was, in effect, a working title
until they come up with something better.
The iTV name is destined to be replaced with something else, because
Apple can't trademark it. (No company can claim exclusive use of the
term.)
--
TiredLegs
bklaas;136166 Wrote:
Anyone know why you can't use gallery view when browsing by artist?
It's a bit counter-intuitive, especially at first, but if you start
browsing by album there's a drop down menu that let's you select sort
order. There's various combinations of artist, album, year, and
Quoting bklaas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Anyone know why you can't use gallery view when browsing by artist?
Well, you can once you drill down to the individual artist, but not
when you are viewing, say, artists that start with R.
simple answer, an artist doesn't have cover art.
However, what you
kdf;136178 Wrote:
Quoting bklaas bklaas.2e4wqn1158253801 (AT) no-mx (DOT)
forums.slimdevices.com:
Anyone know why you can't use gallery view when browsing by artist?
Well, you can once you drill down to the individual artist, but not
when you are viewing, say, artists that start with
Quoting bklaas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'll look into adding the pulldown. FYI-- setting a cookie from a
different skin for album sort order doesn't do the trick. Hopefully I
can get something in place to make that a moot point.
ah, how odd. its sorted for me. I guess I must have put the
It's just so boring: everybody's complaining (It's done by nerds and
it
shows) and knows so much better, but nobody takes the time to do
anything.
I'm somewhat new to the open source scene. And I think I understand
your point of view, up to a certain point. You put a lot of blood and
Nostromo;136267 Wrote:
I'm somewhat new to the open source scene. And I think I understand your
point of view, up to a certain point. You put a lot of blood and
sweat, to improve SlimServer and we're all greatful for it. And you
were not paid for it.
But try to understand our point of
I think what's trying to
be said here is that complaints are often thrown around in the general
forum by those who won't even spend the time to formulate a well
crafted idea for a solution. Saying things like god, the web interface
sucks isn't constructive.
I just spent 15 minutes on my own
For the record, don't shut up. Just be nice, offer ideas, and watch
things move forward.
For the record, I didn't plan to shut up. I'm always nice and I always
try to be constructive. ;-)
--
Nostromo
Nostromo's
Well, if I sounded harsh, I'm sorry. English isn't my native language
either. :)
--
Nostromo
Nostromo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6322
View this thread:
Nostromo;136284 Wrote:
For the record, I didn't plan to shut up.
Good.
I'm always nice and I always try to be constructive. ;-)
So one thing that's been tried here and seemed to work was, someone
took a paint program and said I'd like to see a squeezebox that looked
like this.
Then at
Michaelwagner;136312 Wrote:
Good.
So one thing that's been tried here and seemed to work was, someone
took a paint program and said I'd like to see a squeezebox that looked
like this.
Then at least we know what you're thinking about.
Like I said, I love the Squeezebox, but I'm not
JohnnyLightOn;135682 Wrote:
Like gwak and bklaas said, I have no desire to have a TV on just to
listen to music. I don't want an extra TV just for this, and I
definitely don't want to be using up an expensive flat-screen just to
browse my music. Plus, having the TV on would often be very
)p(;135732 Wrote:
Can you elaborate a bit what you feel the pain is as I am thinking on
going the tv route.
peter
I must admit that I'm thinking it would be good too - after all I've
often read on these fora the benefits of having the web interface for
music selection, so why the sudden
well they're calling it the iTV then are they?
Not in this country they won't, theres no way that the venerable
working class tv channel we have over here will lie down and let that
happen, it should be a fun court case to keep an eye on anyway.
Nick.
--
Grumpy_Git
Look: if you have a TV in your front room, and you want to play music in
the front room, you may as well use the TV to display your collection
than some poxy monochrome display a couple of inches wide. How can
anyone claim they'd rather surf their music connection on a squeezebox
and arcane
I find surfing the library via remote is quite easy on the SB. I just
Browse Artist select album play.
Slim -REALLY- needs to fix up the web interface. It was designed by
linux nerds and it shows.
--
A Robot
A
I was thinking: Apple's success in this arena is not exactly assured.
Anyone remember Apple's last Squeezebox killer? It was some sort of
overpriced boombox you could plug your iPod into. Well I've seen one
mention of it since but it's so obscure only 4-6 months after its
release I can't even
Grumpy_Git;135766 Wrote:
well they're calling it the iTV then are they?
Not in this country they won't, theres no way that the venerable
working class tv channel we have over here will lie down and let that
happen, it should be a fun court case to keep an eye on anyway.
Nick.
Jobs said
Slim -REALLY- needs to fix up the web interface. It was designed by
linux nerds and it shows.
Patches are most welcome.
--
Michael
---
Help translate SlimServer by using the
SlimString Translation Helper (http://www.herger.net/slim/)
I too used to think that a full screen TV based music browser was The
Way Forward (tm), but having tried it, I was wrong. In fact - I know
several people who went the HTPC route and they've all gone back to
much simpler solutions, most involving Squeezeboxes. Some obvious
issues:
* Navigating
On Sep 12, 2006, at 6:55 PM, olof wrote: Another point, my SlimServer database is in sync with my iTunes library. Can I migrate to iTunes 7 without problem ??? I upgraded to iTunes 7 on my Mac without incurring problems with SlimServer.Kudos to SlimDevices for making this so seamless through so
Radish,
Very good points. I considered a HTPC, even the little Apple etc and
finally chose the Squeezebox.
It is still possible that Apple's product will become popular. Maybe
Slimdevices can consider adding a video out as an OPTIONAL feature,
where the Cover Art or Photo Albums can be watched.
SoftwireEngineer;135836 Wrote:
It is still possible that Apple's product will become popular.
I have no doubt it will become very popular - it's a great price and it
will appeal to a lot of people. But as every slimdevices fan knows,
popular isn't always equivalent to best :)
--
radish
radish;135859 Wrote:
But as every slimdevices fan knows, popular isn't always equivalent to
best :)
How true. I'm amazed at how many people believe that Bose is high-end
audio. The power of advertising ...
--
Kyle
Chip Hart wrote:
I don't know what you're cackling about, either, it's hardly a
new or revolutionary concept. I've friends whose networkable DVD
players were doing the same (using Twonky or something) for years.
Same price, too.
Following up on
Chip Hart;135915 Wrote:
Chip Hart wrote:[color=blue]
Following up on myself. A friend told me about a toy he bought
a while ago that he really likes:
http://www.hauppauge.com/pages/products/data_mediamvp-w.html
Boy, $149, list.
S-Video and composite
)p(;135732 Wrote:
Can you elaborate a bit what you feel the pain is as I am thinking on
going the tv route.
Here's a way to get the TV/no-TV experience yourself: If you've got a
cable service that has digital music channels, compare using those to
using the Internet radio stations on the
Slim -REALLY- needs to fix up the web interface.
Michael Herger;135787 Wrote:
Patches are most welcome.
I know this is the conventional thing people say here for this kind of
comment.
However, in this case, the things that most people don't like about the
web interface will need more than
On 9/13/06, Michaelwagner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: Slim -REALLY- needs to fix up the web interface.Michael Herger;135787 Wrote:
Patches are most welcome.I know this is the conventional thing people say here for this kind ofcomment.However, in this case, the things that most people don't like
Jack Coates;135986 Wrote:
Okay, how about this: mockups welcome.
Certainly much less intimidating.
--
Michaelwagner
Michaelwagner's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=428
View this thread:
More importantly, they've finally realised iPods should be gapless.
Makes me think about buying one...
--
radish
radish's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=77
View this thread:
radish;135588 Wrote:
More importantly, they've finally realised iPods should be gapless.
Makes me think about buying one...
I need to update mine and that new 80gig model should hold a decent
amount of high quality recordings.
Paul
--
CardinalFang
You're only young once, but you can be
That 80gig unit will hold about 250 full albums encoded with Apple
Lossless! At $349, I am definitely in. My 40gig unit has served me
well but the backlight has stopped working. Add in the gapless
playback and this is an automatic sell.
David
--
dnighorn
CardinalFang;135586 Wrote:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/12/live-from-the-steve-jobs-keynote-its-showtime/
At the end, the iTV, plays music, video, photos etc and plugs into your
stereo and TV. Just goes to show that the Transporter was a good
strategic move...
I'm interested as to how
I'm interested, but I'm going to hold off until someone I trust tries
the gapless out. There are far too many variables for me to just take
Steve's word for it ;)
--
radish
radish's Profile:
Smiley Dan;135597 Wrote:
I'm interested as to how you think the Transporter plays with this.
To me Transporter is the total opposite, it is more audiophile than
pragmatic.
That was my point, the SB3 will look very poor value next to this new
Apple device, so it was a smart move for Slim to
CardinalFang wrote:
That was my point, the SB3 will look very poor value next to this new
Apple device, so it was a smart move for Slim to go more audiophile.
At first glance, the Apple prototype iTV doesn't appear to be of much in
the way of competition to the Squeezebox. All they share is
Nick Silberstein;135608 Wrote:
CardinalFang wrote:
That was my point, the SB3 will look very poor value next to this
new
Apple device, so it was a smart move for Slim to go more audiophile.
At first glance, the Apple prototype iTV doesn't appear to be of much
in the way of competition
I found it interesting that the thing has no composite video out! Won't
hook up to just any old TV you have laying around...
--
andyg
andyg's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3292
View this
is a 'component out' the same as a 'composite out'?
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/09/dsc_0999.jpg
regardless i hate the idea of having my watt sucking flat screen tv on
just to play or listen to music
-gwak
--
gwak
CardinalFang;135611 Wrote:
A nice big TV screen also allows you to browse music using a nice big
display and everyone has a TV or two in the house
I don't. In fact, not relying on a TV for display was a principal
requirement I had when scoping out the purchase that ended up being the
CardinalFang;135611 Wrote:
...and everyone has a TV or two in the house
Sorry no tv in my house ;-))
Another point, my SlimServer database is in sync with my iTunes
library. Can I migrate to iTunes 7 without problem ???
Thanks
--
olof
Ehh, I don't know. These multipurpose devices just end up never doing
anything all that well.
I'd rather have a dedicated device.
'Course the general public won't see it that way, I'm sure it will be a
big seller. All the sheeple with white cords hanging from their ears
will want one.
--
a nice little blurb on ehomeupgrade sums up my feelings on iTV well.
http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/entry/3018/is_apple_late
I thought exactly the same thing when I read Jobs' pitch of near DVD
quality when describing 640x480 movie downloads (and DRMed movie
downloads, at that). I think Jobs could
andyg;135612 Wrote:
I found it interesting that the thing has no composite video out! Won't
hook up to just any old TV you have laying around...
But an old monitor would work. We shall see, I think it's an important
device and I hope that Slim can hold onto their market.
Paul
--
radish;135598 Wrote:
I'm interested, but I'm going to hold off until someone I trust tries
the gapless out. There are far too many variables for me to just take
Steve's word for it ;)
Well you certainly shouldn't trust me ; ) but it seems to work ok.
iTunes 7 introduces a new tag for
Mark Lanctot;135623 Wrote:
Ehh, I don't know. These multipurpose devices just end up never doing
anything all that well
Absolutely - I have a special PC for word processing, one with a bigger
screen for spreadsheets and one with an graphics card for games.. :-)
And combination DVD/CD
CardinalFang;135586 Wrote:
Just goes to show that the Transporter was a good strategic move...
By getting out of the consumer audio market as fast as they can and
jumping head-first into the high dollar boutique audiophile market?
You may be right.
--
JJZolx
Jim
Muhahahahaha. I knew ditching the Squeezeboxes and going the Mac way was
a good idea. Waiting in anticipation for the iTV - exactly what I
wanted. A silent Front Row front end.
--
rhyzome
rhyzome's Profile:
The SB still has a market for the few of us left that enjoy a good
stereo system. Audiophile snobs not included. They belong in the
basement. I don't watch TV, and certainly don't need every form of
entertainment stuffed in every orifice 24/7 via 17-channel
four-dimensional surround LCD plasma
bklaas;135625 Wrote:
a nice little blurb on ehomeupgrade sums up my feelings on iTV well.
http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/entry/3018/is_apple_late
I thought exactly the same thing when I read Jobs' pitch of near DVD
quality when describing 640x480 movie downloads (and DRMed movie
downloads,
andyg;135612 Wrote:
I found it interesting that the thing has no composite video out! Won't
hook up to just any old TV you have laying around...
Apple has a tradition of weaning users off outdated connectors. Serial
ports and floppy drives have been gone from Macs for years.
Still, what
rhyzome;135634 Wrote:
Muhahahahaha. I knew ditching the Squeezeboxes and going the Mac way was
a good idea. Waiting in anticipation for the iTV, exactly what I wanted.
A silent Front Row front end.
All of you guys yammering about displays - got no remotes on your flat
screen tellys?
rhyzome;135634 Wrote:
Muhahahahaha. I knew ditching the Squeezeboxes and going the Mac way was
a good idea. Waiting in anticipation for the iTV, exactly what I wanted.
A silent Front Row front end.
All of you guys yammering about displays - got no remotes on your flat
screen tellys?
If
Like gwak and bklaas said, I have no desire to have a TV on just to
listen to music. I don't want an extra TV just for this, and I
definitely don't want to be using up an expensive flat-screen just to
browse my music. Plus, having the TV on would often be very
distracting and bothersome.
--
rhyzome wrote:
Muhahahahaha. I knew ditching the Squeezeboxes and going the Mac way was
a good idea. Waiting in anticipation for the iTV - exactly what I
wanted. A silent Front Row front end.
It's exactly what many of us here didn't want: a GD television
or CRT in our
The iTV is something I might throw in my HT system, but I doubt it. It
defintely won't go anywhere near my 2 channel setups.
Give me my Transporters in a week and I'll have exactly what I've been
waiting for.
--
Sleestack
*headphone:* singlepower sds-xlr at, classe sacd2, hd650
*2
I don't have a TV anywhere near my stereo either. Neither shall I have -
and I am not a niche audiophile type either. Just someone who has a nice
comfortable living room that I don't feel I need to watch TV in the
whole time!
Let's wait to see how it sounds.
Can you control the unit by a web
rhyzome;135634 Wrote:
Muhahahahaha. I knew ditching the Squeezeboxes and going the Mac way was
a good idea. Waiting in anticipation for the iTV, exactly what I wanted.
A silent Front Row front end.
All of you guys yammering about displays - got no remotes on your flat
screen tellys?
81 matches
Mail list logo
