On 12/20/05, CardinalFang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It was fine in the early days when all that was needed was a enhanced > scripting solution to push files around, but to remain commercially > competitive, SlimServer needs to look as good as and be as > ergonomically efficient as an Apple product. You can question how right > Apple have got it, but so many people use iTunes and that's what they > now expect from a digital music software product. > > I guess you could write a Java front end app to drive SlimServer, but > we're back to software Buckaroo. There are better ways to do it.
I don't see how "Java front-end app plus from-scratch rewrite of SlimServer" is supposed to be better than "Java front-end app plus proven, tested, feature-complete SlimServer". This isn't a question of Java vs. Perl, it's a question of native control application vs. browser-based interface. The scope of SlimServer dicates a separate front end and back end; a Java-based front end does not necessitate a Java server. _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
