pablolie wrote: > The key here is to define "work" - would the software continue to be > officially worked on and thus available for new OS updates that, over > time, are sure to obsolete any application frozen in time? No. > > However, the way I see it, for the foreseeable future it is easy to > create a dedicated appliance that can run the music environment for many > years. That appliance is self-contained, can stay frozen in time OS-wise > with the last official LMS release (whould it come to that) and can be > controlled/accessed via a web server. One copuld also use free software > such as VMware Player (not an andorsement) to run an old OS and the LMS > application on top of a newer machine and OS if needed (for as long as > said virtualization software vendor supports the old OS, that is). > > So I don't worry too much. I often wonders about all of the LMS upgrades > I have done over the years - where they really necessary? Why not simply > stay with an old, proven version? Honestly, the only new feature I ever > required ion the SBS/LMS software was support for new players or in rare > cases error fixes (I don't remember which version utterly screwed up > synchronization, that and making the wireless usable are the only > upgrades I ever recall feeling I really needed). > > I think some new technology development will eventually once again yet > more fundamentally change the way I listen to music. I am not *that* > old, but I feel my way of listening to music (relatively high end > *stereo* system in a dedicated environment) relegates me to dinosaur > status. :)
Very much agree. I run my main Squeezebox system with an old QNAP NAS and the endless upgrading of Slim Server/ Squeeze Center/ Squeezebox Server/ LMS/ whatever they are calling it this month has caused me many headaches. I can't say I've ever noticed any major improvements with any of the upgrades but they did frequently break the system and leave me without music, in some cases for weeks until I could get the time to figure out how to fix things. The only ones that were worthwhile were when I needed to do so to access a specific service, like when Napster was taken over by Rhapsody. Whereas the open nature of the system where you roll your own server hardware is flexible, they probably should have got something like the Squeezebox Touch with it's integral server capabilities out much earlier (only with beefier processor power). Then you could buy the Touch as the initial player and base the rest of the system around that. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ slimfast's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29669 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
