Goodsounds;340948 Wrote:
> 2. It seems there are more daily trouble posts from linux users than
> from Win uses, even though the first group is likely a very small
> fraction the size of the second. What conclusion to draw from that? I think
> Pat's answer to #1 covers this, albeit a good propor
I'm buying the beer, so you're on your own for transportation.
--
Goodsounds
Goodsounds's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14201
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=5259
Goodsounds wrote:
> I might buy you a beer or two, if you promised to leave your
> mumbo-jumbo at home.
Sorry, I'm genetically incapable of doing that for long.
I'm in the general Washington DC area, or send first class airfare and
I'll go anywhere :-)
--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/
pfarrell,
Thanks for thoughtful comments. I do know some programmers, but most of
the engineer-geeks I know have moved into management/sales/marketing
type jobs, and have left their hands-on technical work behind. Most of
my friends are not geeks, which I attribute to Darwin's theory of
natural s
ModelCitizen;340989 Wrote:
> If all goes smoothly then that might be a different matter... I've never
> experienced that though.What you're describing is precisely what I'd
> experienced with Linux up
to even two years back - I'd tried and abandoned multiple flavours of
Linux on multiple occasio
Goodsounds wrote:
> 1. I see postings here from Linux users having trouble, and the
> conversations involve entries and files full of stuff resembling
> hieroglyphics. Are you saying one can use linux without exposure to
> such things?
One can trivially use linux without such stuff. One can not se
agentsmith wrote:
> I have a current spec dual core R61 thinkpad almost dedicated to serving
> SqueezeCenter, and the performance is painfully slow. Slow as in
> waiting 10 seconds+ for each click.
>
> Mind you my library is 2+ titles. So is library size a concern?
Yes, library size is a bi
egd;340898 Wrote:
> Oh, and for what it's worth, I'm not an engineer, technician,
> programmer, support consultant or anything else IT related or remotely
> technical in nature.
It doesn't matter if it worked for you though does it? It has not
worked for me multiple times (on various computers) a
egd;340895 Wrote:
> You've missed the point completely, if you're intelligent enough to
> identify an icon on a screen and click on it with a mouse (and I assume
> you are as you use windows) you're also sufficiently technically
> proficient to use a Linux distribution out of the box.
Some quest
egd;340894 Wrote:
> and nobody is asking you to do either, you're simply allowing ignorant
> bias to convince you that using Linux necessitates hacking code and/or
> scripting.
Guilty on both counts! :)
I'm more than ignorant about computers (any type or OS), it's not what
I'm into. I'm only
Goodsounds;340813 Wrote:
> I respect people who work in IT, programming, engineering, etc., no more
> or less than those in other occupations. My work (not technological)
> also takes years of education and experience, and is complicated,
> challenging and technical. The subject matter would put
ModelCitizen;340873 Wrote:
> No one can tell me that a technically illiterate person can install/use
> Linux in a standard PC user manner (we are not talking
> pre-prepared/configured embedded use here) as simply as they can
> Windows. Even now. MC, I've no idea what hardware you're running on,
Goodsounds;340813 Wrote:
> I respect people who work in IT, programming, engineering, etc., no more
> or less than those in other occupations. My work (not technological)
> also takes years of education and experience, and is complicated,
> challenging and technical. The subject matter would put
toby10;340706 Wrote:
> I know Linux is on my WRT54G, but beyond admin controls via the UI, I
> sure won't be hacking the code or doing any scripting. Me and millions
> of others just don't do that. and nobody is asking you to do either, you're
> simply allowing ignorant
bias to convince you tha
I have a current spec dual core R61 thinkpad almost dedicated to serving
SqueezeCenter, and the performance is painfully slow. Slow as in
waiting 10 seconds+ for each click.
Mind you my library is 2+ titles. So is library size a concern?
I have been asking for the feature where one can loa
I am not technically illiterate. Over the past eight years I have had
various attempts at installing lots of different flavours of Linux,
right from full blown 4 disc Free BSD installations to Michaels simple
single disc SC installation.
Every single installation has failed and all have cost me a
> And here we are at the point to ask Logitech why they do not also offer
> a SC integrated media server.
Because it has been asked many times before. Discussed to death eg. in
thread titled "Logitech is missing an opportunity" or similar.
> A computer is a higly complex mixture of hard- and so
And here we are at the point to ask Logitech why they do not also offer
a SC integrated media server. To get a complete solution which can be
used by everybody - just to enjoy music.
A computer is a higly complex mixture of hard- and software. The simple
Windows/Linux PC do not exist.
--
jo-wi
My comments were not intended to be critical, sarcastic, or negative, so
I'm sorry if that was how they seemed to you. My opinion is different
from earlier comments you and some others had made, I was just trying
to express myself. I can't improve on pfarrel's short and sweet
comment.
I respect p
Goodsounds;340760 Wrote:
> As the self appointed spokesperson for the silent majority (of PC users
> who don't know or care what happens inside the box), I have some
> observations:
With comments like "If the box has Linux, it would not be purchased in
the first place. Other than by mistake." it
Goodsounds;340760 Wrote:
>
> "the "computer as toaster" folks will never knowingly install Linux.
> They will never choose Linux."
>
> 100 percent correct
>
> "a large section of the population uses Linux without even knowing it
> every day, and likes it"
>
> First part is correct, of course,
As the self appointed spokesperson for the silent majority (of PC users
who don't know or care what happens inside the box), I have some
observations:
"the "computer as toaster" folks will never knowingly install Linux.
They will never choose Linux."
100 percent correct
"a large section of the
aubuti;340645 Wrote:
> Very well put CatBus!
>
> And to Toby10, I suggest you try out a "LiveCD" version of Ubuntu or
> some other modern Linux distribution. It won't install anything on your
> machine, but you'll see that it isn't really 'scary' at all.
Yeah...sure..that's what they to
It's a good idea with the LiveCD, I've done it to get familiar with
Ubuntu and it's really simple added to a running Windows installation.
After playing around some time it was a much easier job to setup my
dedicated SC server (VIA C7 fanless).
--
jo-wie
CatBus;340639 Wrote:
> To summarize, quite a large section of the population uses Linux without
> even knowing it every day, and likes it. But they'd never install it.
> I'd even go so far as to say they'd never install Windows or OSX
> either. They buy a box, and if that box comes with Window
pfarrell;340625 Wrote:
> Linux is huge in embedded systems, for example every
> Tivo, every Linksys WRT54G router, etc.
>
> Its simple, the "computer as toaster" folks will never knowingly
> install
> Linux. They will never choose Linux.
To summarize, quite a large section of the population use
egd;340365 Wrote:
> and it is to this inclination you're leaning when you tell people it's
> difficult. Even my folks and in-laws are running Linux without
> difficulty. The most complex (sic) bit about running SC on Ubuntu is
> editing a text file to add it to the repository.
I can certainly
aubuti;340263 Wrote:
> You can run SC on your basement machine and control it from your laptop.
The SC interface seems to work faster if you are not running the server
from the same machine you are using the browser on.
So in summary (in order of necessity):
a) Shorten lists
b) Run server on fa
egd;340365 Wrote:
> The most complex (sic) bit about running SC on Ubuntu is editing a text
> file to add it to the repository.
As long as you remembered to disable apparmor...
--
radish
radish's Profile: http://forums.s
pfarrell;340244 Wrote:
> Plus I tend to under promise and over deliver.and it is to this inclination
> you're leaning when you tell people it's
difficult. Even my folks and in-laws are running Linux without
difficulty. The most complex (sic) bit about running SC on Ubuntu is
editing a text fil
You can run SC on your basement machine and control it from your laptop.
Just point the laptop's browser to http://:9000/classic/ ,
substituting your gaming rig's IP for . However, if you're
loading up 500 items to a page, then the constraint could be the
computer (browser) you're using for contro
Thanks for all the suggestions. After reading some responses, I delved a
little further and found some causes of the problems:
- I've been using my laptop with a 1.73GHz Pentium M to control
Squeezcenter. Switching to my quad-core gaming rig in the basement
sped it up quite a bit. But I don't w
egd wrote:
>> For most folks, I'd recommend #1. As there is a non-trivial learning
>> curve with linux
>Sorry Pat, with all due respect I don't agree with you at all. I'd have
> agreed with your statement 5 years ago, but not today - installing and
> running something like Ubuntu and adding SC to
No problems with 1K+ track playlists here either. Modest dual core
processor with 1 Gig RAM, running win2K, and using Firefox browser.
Like MeSue suggested, try Firefox or the new Google browser.
--
Skunk
http://www.last.fm/user/TheSkunk/
--
sfgorman;340074 Wrote:
>
> Problem is, the interface is so slow that once I have a decent number
> (100+)of songs in the playlist, and I add something else to the
> playlist, the whole interface freezes up for 10+ seconds to add the
> songs to the playlist before I can resume browsing my collect
pfarrell;340090 Wrote:
> 1) get a faster computer, they are cheap.
> 2) use Linux instead of Windows
>
> For most folks, I'd recommend #1. As there is a non-trivial learning
> curve with linuxSorry Pat, with all due respect I don't agree with you at
> all. I'd have
agreed with your statement 5
bhaagensen;340130 Wrote:
> How about using the old interface instead. I believe it is faster in
> some cases. Just point your brower to:
>
> serverip:9000/classic
Didn't know you could do that. Cool!
--
dekaliber
dekal
sfgorman;340074 Wrote:
>
> What alternatives do I have to browse my collection, build a playlist,
> and control my squeezebox all in one interface? Has anyone built a
> 3rd-party interface with improved performance? Thanks!
>
> -Steve
How about using the old interface instead. I believe it i
Steve,
You're making some pretty large playlists - really from hundreds up to
one thousand tracks? Sometimes by choosing tracks or albums
individually? This must take a long time. And is a playlist of hundreds
of tracks (literally, several days long) really useful to you?
Maybe you should try on
The slowness you describe doesn't sound normal, but you didn't post any
system specs, so no idea what the problem could be.
Is it slow no matter what skin you use? What about a different
browser?
FYI-- you can use any software to build playlists and it will be a
better experience than trying to
sfgorman wrote:
> What alternatives do I have to browse my collection, build a playlist,
> and control my squeezebox all in one interface? Has anyone built a
> 3rd-party interface with improved performance? Thanks!
Two obvious choices:
1) get a faster computer, they are cheap.
2) use Linux inst
sfgorman;340074 Wrote:
> What alternatives do I have to browse my collection, build a playlist,
> and control my squeezebox all in one interface? Has anyone built a
> 3rd-party interface with improved performance? Thanks!
If you're on Windows, try Moose as a frontend to SC. And for faster
respo
I've been a squeezebox owner for over 3 years, and have become
increasingly frustrated with the software. The "squeezecenter"
software is just embarrassingly slow, especially compared to the old
slimserver software. I'm looking for suggestions (settings, plugins,
anything?) that might improve my
43 matches
Mail list logo
