sawdin wrote:
> Many SB owners are 'techies' and/or audiophiles.  I'm curious as to how
> many SB owners have built their own inexpensive (under $1,000) digital
> music servers (e.g., by using a laptop or  by building a server from
> scratch using something like an Atom 1.6 Ghz processor, etc.)?

It will be impossible to get a valid count. But I have been running my
SqueezeBoxServer on a left over Desktop PC for six or seven years. I had
it laying arround in the basement, it was trivial to install SBS, and I
was done.

The big time effort went into ripping the CDs, I have
831 albums with  10512 songs by  535 artists.

> In addition, what do SB users consider to be the Pros/Cons of going the
> SB route?  Likewise, what do you consider to be the Pros/Cons of
> building your own server?

I don't understand this question at all. I have a bunch of SqueezeBoxen,
they all talk to the single Server. Its not a question of buying one or
more SB hardware boxes, the whole point of the old "Slim" hardware was
that it was all you needed to put music everywhere.

I sync my players for parties, and to provide background music.


> Below is a post I put up on Computer Audiophile in a thread on DIY
> music servers, in which I took a newbie stab at the Touch vs. DIY
> server question.  

I have a Touch. And a SB2, and a Transporter, and a Boom, and a Radio
and a Controller and a Duet.

I don't see much value in thinking about "either" a Touch or a server.

The Touch has a built-in, limited function server, that can address
customers who don't have a large music collection and don't want to
bother setting up a server.

But mine works great with my server.

I don't own a big enough USB thumb drive to store my whole collection on
it. In fact, I'm getting a 1.5TB disk drive from Newegg later this week,
so I can keep on increasing my library.


> he found 'Squeezecenter to be slow and buggy and the
> wireless remote controller felt nice, but it would hang multiple times
> per day.

I have, as I said above, been running assorted SqueezeBox servers for
years. I don't find it buggy. I even run Beta code, and it all works,
and has been for many months. I have been running the current 7.5 tree
since last September. Its fine.

I have no idea what the person who had problems was doing.

There are known problems with trying to run the server on a grossly
underpowered cheap file server. The solution is to not waste money on a
commercial server and use some random old PC that you have laying
around. Or you can buy a suitable system for $50 on craigslist.

The Touch is just the current model of the SlimDevices line, replacing
the old SqueezeBox Classic. If you want, you can use it just as you used
the SqueezeBox classic, and as you have been able to use every product
going back to the SliMP3.

The Touch has a much prettier display, but no one makes you look at it,
and no one makes you use the touch screen. The market realities are that
a nice color touch screen costs less than the old VFD display used by
Slim Devices for years.


-- 
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

_______________________________________________
Touch mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch

Reply via email to