pippin wrote: > No, it's just my opinion after spending quite a bit of time on the topic > over the last year. It's overly complex, uses badly performing > interfaces like SOAP and the architecture is 1990ish not taking into > account the realities of today's world.
Well, I have spent more than a "bit of time" on it; more like ten years (which probably explains why it is "1990ish"). And yes, it does take hard work to master the protocol; you need to actually read the documents; and you need to make an effort... pippin wrote: > I especially do not believe that it's possible to do a well-performing > controller-renderer model that does not have the CP on either the server > or the renderer. I know there are extensions that would help but they > are being supported by close to nobody. I suppose belief is a matter of religion. The architecture considers three entities, the CP, the DMS and the DMR. Each such entity may be either on the same machine, or on another machine. The physical location does not make any difference... pippin wrote: > I know good people who have tried hard to do multiroom-synchronization > with UPnP and who have failed and reverted to proprietary solutions > instead. I don't doubt they are good people. If you want to do multi-player sync in UPnP then you have to either A) implement the UPnP push streaming model, and or B) implement the SyncPlay(), SyncStop() and SyncPause() actions. Your "good" people seem to be implementing the UPnP pull streaming model (HTTP GET), and also implementing only the (non sync'ed) Play(), Stop() and Pause() actions. And these good people then start to yammer about UPnP not supporting sync'ed play... C'mon, get real!! pippin wrote: > At best it's a data source protocol. Which is why it works for video > where this is actually all you need. No need for gapless transitions > between movies and you also rarely queue up dozens of them at a time. > Plus your CP is usually on the renderer, after all, you do already have > a screen. As mentioned before, the location of the CP is irrelevant. And, I am sorry to say it, but the gapless play " issue" comes back down to your "good" people. If you want to do gapless play in UPnP, then you need to implement both the SetAvTransportUri() action AND the SetAvNextTransportUri() action. Anyone who ignores implementing the SetAvNextTransportUri() action, (or who does not even know what it means), has no authority to yammer about UPnP not supporting gapless playback. pippin wrote: > DLNA will go away. It won't... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ AndrewFG's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15838 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95603 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
