[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-12-09 Thread your momo

Mark Lanctot;160927 Wrote: 
 But now that the first one is done, the rest require no extra setup.
 
Unfortunatelly not, this all need to be redone as this setup was also
on the HDD who die…
This laptop is now waiting for HDD change and whole system
re-installation.

Mark Lanctot;160927 Wrote: 
 
 How is this Slim's fault and how would direct access be any better?  A
 network-attached HDD could have died just as easily.
I never claim that's Slim's fault, as already told I have a full backup
of all my data (inc. music files) that is stored on an external HDD, so
it takes me less than one hours to restore all those data on a new HDD.
For the system re-installation it's another story.. 
What I say is that having to setup a PC and let it runing to feed Slim
product with music files from a mass storage is an overkill for me. I
accept to use the PC for some maintenance (CD-FLAC rip, music files
add/delete/move …etc) but while listening I would prefere having a
stand alone mode that is able to access directly an external HDD.


-- 
your momo

your momo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8095
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-12-08 Thread your momo

I'm back, I follow your hints and install SlimServer 6.5 on a 4 years
old Laptop (PIII,1GHz, 512MB, XPproSP2) it went nice …ok it tooks me
slightly more than 10min, but after one hour I was able to play music
(MP3 192kB files) from the server Laptop on a 2nd Laptop using
SoftSqueeze. I was proud of that, it works also while 2nd Laptop was
connected by WiFi.

This motivate me for more, so I install and configure EAC + AccurateRip
+ FLAC.exe following the installation guide in the Wiki. I also manage
this to work even it tooks me about 5 hours effort until I got my first
ever .FLAC file. I was also able to stream those new files using
SoftSqueeze, but obviously could not differentiate them from MP3 due to
the bad Laptop embeded speakers sound quality.

I had the oportunity to borrow a SqueezBox3 for this w-e and bring it
to work …user interface is straight forward.
This evening I was listening FLAC on my HiFi system since about 3
hours, audio quality was really good (SB3 - optical out – HT (preamp)
-Power amp). Now I could feel the power and superiority of FLAC against
MP3 (same file back to back). I was very excited of all the tests and
comparisons I plan to do this w-e until …the music suddenly stop.
The raison is the die of the server Laptop HDD, luckly I have a copy of
all the music I've ripped, but this is the end of my SB3 test…

Now you maybe better understand why having a stand alone mode would
have allow me to listen SB3 streamed music (direct out from my backup
HDD) while I reinstall a new HDD + all the apps in my Laptop  …instead
of that, my CD player will do the job.

This first experience convince me on two things:
- FLAC quality is really good and can/will replace all my CD
- Slim products need a stand alone mode to become a real CD player
alternative


-- 
your momo

your momo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8095
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-12-08 Thread Mark Lanctot

your momo;160865 Wrote: 
 This motivate me for more, so I install and configure EAC + AccurateRip
 + FLAC.exe following the installation guide in the Wiki. I also manage
 this to work even it tooks me about 5 hours effort until I got my first
 ever .FLAC file.

But now that the first one is done, the rest require no extra setup.

 The raison is the die of the server Laptop HDD, luckly I have a copy of
 all the music I've ripped, but this is the end of my SB3 test…

How is this Slim's fault and how would direct access be any better?  A
network-attached HDD could have died just as easily.


-- 
Mark Lanctot

Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-12-01 Thread MelonMonkey

Logitech WILL release more products and some of them will spin some of
the existing community on its head because they don't understand it. 
That's what makes the difference between an enthusiast and someone who
markets this stuff for a living.  Logitech might not always be on the
cusp of evolution, but they're good marketers none the less.

I'm sure the Slim community will grow by leaps and bounds and it won't
be through the existing product line alone.

Hey, people (all people, everywhere) are afraid of change, regardless
of what they say or even think to themselves.  It's basic human
nature.

If Logitech bought Slim to keep the product line exactly the way it is
now and keep the development team the exact size it is now and keep the
support the same way it is now (1 or 2 people?) then they may as well
have put the money into a blender and shredded it.

To bring Slim to the decent double-digit millions of revenue per year,
Logitech will have to innovate, release new products and market them.

Things may start off slow or look like they're not changing for a
while.  That's natural. But by this time next year I'm sure everyone
will have a clearer picture.  I don't know if I'd expect anything at
CES (at least in public), but I'm confident the folks at Logitech and
Slim aren't sitting on their collective asses pounding back beers and
watching TV.

In terms of past/previous products, there were quite a few that predate
Slim.  Audiotron, Rio Receiver, Rio Jukebox and even Riocar to some
degree did a lot of what's now part of the Slim offering.  All past
devices failed miserably in marketing, but the market itself also
features a much different landscape.  Everyone can thank Apple and the
iPod for really opening thiings up for digital domain music (music
without traditional physical media).  And currently there are a few
other companies doing respectably with their product lines (for now),
including Sonos, Olive and Sooloos (among others). Apple's basic
Airport streamer has probably sold more units than all products from
every other company combined and they'll likely do very well with their
new product with video in the new year.

Everyone has a slightly different take, but whoever still wants to be
making real money from audio in the future has to stay alert and
innovate.  I have full confidence in Logitech to capture and hold
significant market and mindshare.  They took the Harmony from obscurity
to number one in multiple categories - globally.


-- 
MelonMonkey

Bruno
*'Twisted Melon - Fine Mac OS Software' (http://twistedmelon.com) |
'mira - Personal Control for your Apple Remote'
(http://twistedmelon.com)*

MelonMonkey's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8466
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-28 Thread kyleki

MelonMonkey;157951 Wrote: 
 Anyway, adding HD to Transporter = bad.
 Creating and marketing Slim-branded server = good.
The original poster wasn't recommending adding a HD to the Transporter.
He was simply suggesting *another* way of accessing his music by
providing extra logic in the device itself so it can browse network
accessible storage - independent of a server.

It would be nice if you could:
1) connect network attached storage to LAN
2) connect Transporter to LAN
3) browse and play music from NAS without ever needing to install
slimserver on any PC.

Having this ability shouldn't need to preclude any existing
functionality of the slim devices, it should be in addition to it. 
Just as I have the option when powering on my SB2 to connect to my
slimserver or SqueezeNetwork, why not an additional option to browse a
network attached hard drive for music?  Would this be such a bad thing?


-- 
kyleki

kyleki's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2510
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-28 Thread Squirrel

Ah yes... Turtle Beach did something like this a few years ago with the
Audiotron. Plug it in, power it up and off it goes searching any
publically available shares on your network for any compatible music
files (MP3, WAV, WMA).

Problem is that Turtle Beach didn't realise they were onto a winner and
dropped the product. Shame, because it's about the only network music
player that will work without server software (just needs a NAS) or the
remote (nice front panel controls). They never actually got around to
adding FLAC support, and the character based LCD was a little basic.
Squeezebox's dot-matrix VFD is far more readable from across the room.

What would be really nice (and there is a big market for it) is a
standard Squeezebox (single display) in a slim 17 hi-fi component
sized case with front panel controls. Nothing as elaborate as the
Transporter, but something you can slot in your hi-fi rack. The kind of
thing you can stick in the rack with your AV amp and hook up via SPDIF.


-- 
Squirrel

Squirrel's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5785
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-28 Thread your momo

kyleki;157983 Wrote: 
 The original poster wasn't recommending adding a HD to the Transporter. 
 He was simply suggesting *another* way of accessing his music by
 providing extra logic in the device itself so it can browse network
 accessible storage - independent of a server.
 
 It would be nice if you could:
 1) connect network attached storage to LAN
 2) connect Transporter to LAN
 3) browse and play music from NAS without ever needing to install
 slimserver on any PC.
 
 Having this ability shouldn't need to preclude any existing
 functionality of the slim devices, it should be in addition to it. 
 Just as I have the option when powering on my SB2 to connect to my
 slimserver or SqueezeNetwork, why not an additional option to browse a
 network attached hard drive for music?  Would this be such a bad thing?
Thank you a lot be the first that understand the spirit of my proposal
;-)


To move forward, I think AudioTron is a good example of a good techy
product that arrives to early on the market  ...it dies if nobody take
care on it.
When I look on what this product was able to do for $300.- it's a pity
that it becomes discontinued.
http://www.turtle-beach.com/site/products/audiotron/indetail.asp

Now moving back on Transporter, please react to insure it will not
follow the same path, the future is not yet written...


-- 
your momo

your momo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8095
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-28 Thread Mark Lanctot

kyleki;157983 Wrote: 
 The original poster wasn't recommending adding a HD to the Transporter. 
 He was simply suggesting *another* way of accessing his music by
 providing extra logic in the device itself so it can browse network
 accessible storage - independent of a server.
 
 It would be nice if you could:
 1) connect network attached storage to LAN
 2) connect Transporter to LAN
 3) browse and play music from NAS without ever needing to install
 slimserver on any PC.
 
 Having this ability shouldn't need to preclude any existing
 functionality of the slim devices, it should be in addition to it. 
 Just as I have the option when powering on my SB2 to connect to my
 slimserver or SqueezeNetwork, why not an additional option to browse a
 network attached hard drive for music?  Would this be such a bad thing?

I could see how this would be attractive for the new user that suddenly
realizes they need a 24/7 server.  However it does nothing for exising
users that already met and accepted this requirement - it only
increases the cost of a new unit for them.

This is not really all that simple, or cheap.  You'll need a 500 MHz
x86 processor, 128 MB RAM (256 or even 512 would be better) and its own
OS.  The Infrant NASes are the closest to this spec and they're in the
$700 range.

I suppose as long as simple client devices were still available you
wouldn't alienate existing users.  And I suppose Logitech wants more
new users - hopefully not at the expense of the existing user base that
has been with Slim since the beginning.

Still, I guess I don't really understand this request.  I would assume
anyone posting in this thread has a PC at home.  There's some debate on
this, but the general consensus with a PC is to leave it on all the
time.  So if you already have a PC on 24/7, there's your server!

And if you have an older PC gathering dust in a closet that's useless
for anything else, instead of sending it to a landfill, you can put it
to good use by dedicating it for this purpose.  Power consumption will
be minimal for older hardware like this, especially because you can
turn the monitor off most of the time (you don't even need a monitor
with simple, free programs like VNC or a KVM switch).

I'm not saying the request is a dumb idea - it isn't.  I just don't see
the server requirement as terribly onerous as it leverages equipment you
already have.


-- 
Mark Lanctot

Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-28 Thread radish

The audiotron was not great - I had one. Firstly, to clarify, it did
require server software (it needed an SMB server), it's just that said
software is included in many OSs these days. Setting it up correctly,
however, was no easier than setting up slimserver. Creating the correct
shares  setting up permissions so the player could see them caused
plenty of support issues. Navigation, searching and browsing were a
pain IMHO, and to cap it off I think there was a max track limit which
would probably sting a number of people here. Oh and of course no RSS,
no weather or sports scores, no support for many useful formats, not
even basics like gapless playback. Bear in mind you still have to have
a box running with the discs, the ONLY difference is whether you have
to spend 10 minutes installing slimserver. That seems like a small
price to pay for such an improved user experience. Only someone who's
never used an Audiotron could say it's more non-tech user friendly than
a Squeezebox!

 Just as I have the option when powering on my SB2 to connect to my
 slimserver or SqueezeNetwork, why not an additional option to browse a
 network attached hard drive for music? Would this be such a bad thing?
In isolation it wouldn't be a bad thing at all, more choice is (almost)
always better. The problem is, it's not going to exist in isolation.
Firstly there's support - we would now have Slimserver, Squeezenetwork
_and_ this new thing. Each with their own set of functionality and
support issues. Look at the forums, we have enough people getting
confused about the difference between SN and SS as it is, the last
thing we need is another server option. Secondly there's development.
Resources are limited, only so much can be developed at one time - so
if we do this what do we drop?


-- 
radish

radish's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=77
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-28 Thread azinck3

your momo;158024 Wrote: 
 Now moving back on Transporter, please react to insure it will not
 follow the same path, the future is not yet written...

I don't follow your logic here: you want Slim Devices to react to avoid
extinction...by changing the design of a successful product
(Transporter/SB) to that of a financially (if not technically) failed
product (Audiotron)?

Regardless, I understand what you're asking for.  It's not beyond my
comprehension to understand why some would find it appealing but it
wouldn't appeal to me.  And the few devices that have followed that
model have gone the way of the dodo (Audiotron, Omnifi DMS1).  It's
hard to say whether or not their failures were due to issues unique to
their implementation, price point, marketing, or what, but whatever the
case, it's obviously not trivial to make this work.  

What you're looking for really does sound a lot like the Olive music
server.  A fine product, I'm sure, but more money than I want to spend
and not as flexible.  To me, that's why the SB is perfect:  it's cheap,
and almost infinitely flexible.  There might be a market out there for
what you want, but you're mostly talking to a self-selected group who
appreciates Slim Devices' streaming device architecture.  The prospect
of a dumb mode doesn't excite me.  I've said it before:  A user isn't
going to use a device in 3 different ways (slimserver, squeezenetwork,
and some dumb network-HD mode).  They're only going to use it in one
way.  Squeezenetwork was added without much change to the design of the
SB, but a network-HD mode would require significant change.  

Perhaps some of the resistance you're meeting from many in this
community stems from the fact that the vast majority of us are excited
by the flexible server architecture of the SB and want to continue to
see more functionality and robustness added to that model rather than
losing development time to adding a network-hd ability that we'll never
use.  It's somewhat akin to walking into a group of hikers and extolling
to them the virtues of driving.  Yes, driving's nice.  Driving's great. 
it's useful.  But we're hikers.  Drivers and hikers can get along.  They
can buy products from the same companies.  But they're not necessarily
going to see the world the same way or agree on priorities.


-- 
azinck3

azinck3's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3967
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-28 Thread your momo

I could see how this would be attractive for the new user that
suddenly realizes they need a 24/7 server. However it does nothing for
exising users that already met and accepted this requirement - it only
increases the cost of a new unit for them.

- I agree my initial proposal basically doesn't add anything for the
people who already are satisfied with SB3  TP performances and
requirements.
However I propose to focus on Transporter only as he could won the most
from this proposal.


I'm not saying the request is a dumb idea - it isn't. I just don't
see the server requirement as terribly onerous as it leverages
equipment you already have.

- I'm not blocking on the price but on usability, I'm looking for a
working fit and forget solution first, without excluding a move on a
server solution in the future.
But server solution must first becomes reliable, stable and user
friendly prior I'm ready to spend money for such HW. 
Today I don't care on possibility to synch n devices together over
network as long my single device is not able to play music every times
I want it.


Bear in mind you still have to have a box running with the discs,
the ONLY difference is whether you have to spend 10 minutes installing
slimserver. That seems like a small price to pay for such an improved
user experience.

- You win, I will do my part of the job and will install SlimServer on
my PC providing a feedback of my 10 minutes experience ...BTW I plane
to install ver.6.5 (the only one that support Transporter) but after I
see the tones of problems reported on ver.6.5, should I better wait
on next release (I run WindowsXP) ? or do you confirm ver.6.5 is ripe
?


I don't follow your logic here: you want Slim Devices to react to
avoid extinction...by changing the design of a successful product
(Transporter/SB) to that of a financially (if not technically) failed
product (Audiotron)?

- I doesn't want to change anything in the SB design, his price point
doesn't allows enough room to play ...and Logitech certainly already
has a good idea for the future of this product. On the other end,
Transporter existence is more questionable, who will buy it ?
-- Many people inside the community who already have an SB3 doubt that
Transporter price premium is worth compare to SB3. They may have right,
functionality is the same (except 2nd display and knob) and for the one
where sound quality is a priority they already have hooked their SB3 on
premium DACs.
-- It remains certainly people who are still waiting on their
Transporter but those are a less and will not be enough to insure a
future to this product. Seriously how many have or are really thinking
to spend $1'999.- for a Transporter ...are those more than one thousand
?
-- Outside the community there is a lot of people who could buy such
product even at this price tag. Unfortunately those who would be ready
to pay the price premium for Transporter sound quality will never
invest in a device not able to play music for sure in stand alone
...I'm here.


What you're looking for really does sound a lot like the Olive
music server. A fine product, I'm sure, but more money than I want to
spend and not as flexible.

- Olive or Hifidelio (in Europa) was also on my list but unfortunately
suffer from an unstable FW, noisy HDD and consumer analog audio ...this
prevent me too sing the bill. 

A user isn't going to use a device in 3 different ways (slimserver,
squeezenetwork, and some dumb network-HD mode). They're only going to
use it in one way. Squeezenetwork was added without much change to the
design of the SB, but a network-HD mode would require significant
change.

- Not a all users will need all three ways, but adding a network HD
mode will secure people who don't can/want dig into server
configuration that they will be able to listen music with the product
they buy. Sorry if my request is not easy going to implement, but I'm
open to trade to find an acceptable outcome...


Perhaps some of the resistance you're meeting from many in this
community stems from the fact that the vast majority of us are excited
by the flexible server architecture of the SB and want to continue to
see more functionality and robustness added to that model rather than
losing development time to adding a network-hd ability that we'll never
use. It's somewhat akin to walking into a group of hikers and extolling
to them the virtues of driving. Yes, driving's nice. Driving's great.
it's useful. But we're hikers. Drivers and hikers can get along. They
can buy products from the same companies. But they're not necessarily
going to see the world the same way or agree on priorities.

- I appreciate your metaphorical approach and better understand why it
can be so hard...
Main reason I'm here is that I still have hope to convince the
community on the benefit of having a stand alone mode implemented in
Transporter  ...otherwise you can convince me that current product is
user friendly and will always play music when I want it.


-- 

[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-28 Thread azinck3

your momo;158136 Wrote: 
 
 - I appreciate your metaphorical approach and better understand why it
 can be so hard...
 Main reason I'm here is that I still have hope to convince the
 community on the benefit of having a stand alone mode implemented in
 Transporter  ...otherwise you can convince me that current product is
 user friendly and will always play music when I want it.

I understand where you're coming from.  The SB/Transporter is not for
everyone.  I would not buy one for my parents, for example.  There are
sometimes problems.  But I'd venture most of the problems folks see are
when they're trying to do many of the advanced things the slimdevices
architecture allows them to do.  And many (most?) of the problems
encountered when doing those things can be put down to external factors
like poor tags (though slimserver's tag handling has room for
improvement), dodgy network hardware, outdated plugins, or similar.  If
you're looking to simply play back one of the device's native formats
(what you're saying you want network HD functionality for) I'd suggest
that you're very unlikely to run into any difficulty.  Download the
server and give it a try.  That's one great thing about this company: 
you can try the product before you buy it to be sure that you don't
have any trouble running the server.


-- 
azinck3

azinck3's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3967
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


Re: [slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-27 Thread Pat Farrell
JJZolx wrote:
 Pat Farrell;157881 Wrote: 
 I can see a niche product about the size of a transporter with some sort
 of built in server. But I can't see who would buy it in volume.
 Same people who buy these:
 
 http://www.olive.us/

yeah, right
Olive|OPUS 400GB ($2,999)

Not a lot of mass market at those levels.

I'm not saying it is never going to sell, but if I was SD, I sure
wouldn't aim to sell a zillion of them.

Besides, Microsoft Media Center is going to take over all of our living
rooms, so it will solve the problem.

-- 
Pat
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-27 Thread your momo

I think I was not clear enough, the goal is to fit the NAS Board inside
Transporter's body not to build a 2nd full box.
HDD must not be located close to Transporter it can be a network drive
hooked behind several meter of LAN cable...

About customer unfilled attempt, Slim's claim on Transporter:
Transporter's sound quality surpasses even the most exotic compact
disc players. Its no-compromise design minimizes jitter and distortion,
so you can enjoy the best your digital music collection has to offer.


Before be able to beat most exotic CD players, Transporter first needs
to be able to start playing music ...I mean always like a $30.- CD
player.
I agree my above statement is not really fair but sometimes I'm loosing
control :-}


-- 
your momo

your momo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8095
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-27 Thread jeffmeh

your momo;157902 Wrote: 
 I think I was not clear enough, the goal is to fit the NAS Board inside
 Transporter's body not to build a 2nd full box..

Your goal may be to do that, but with all due respect I do not share
it.  I would find that to be an inferior solution to what SD already
offers, I certainly would not pay more for it, and I do not see any
significant opportunities for SD to enter that already-served market.

Will the Transporter also have a CD-drive to rip music to the attached
hard disk and ripping/burning software?  Will it have the ability to
download files from the internet?  If so, you are adding functionality,
complexity, and cost to the Transporter.  If not, how will you get music
onto the hard disk?  If the answer is with a computer, then why not
set up SlimServer and be done with it?  It is not a big deal, and you
can even use a crossover capable to connect the computer to the
Transporter, with no other network devices required.

As others have pointed out, there are devices employing architectures
that better fit your paradigm.  I think you are trying to fit a square
peg into a round hole, but that is your prerogative.


-- 
jeffmeh

jeffmeh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3986
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-27 Thread MelonMonkey

The market for a server + client solution is obviously greater than that
of a client-only solution.  Slim devices already has the software and
I'm sure it's only a matter of time before Logitech puts together the
box to run it.

Note, I think the idea propsed in the first message is way off base. 
Very silly in fact.  Server plus client products yes, making some
frankenstein transporter that uses external storage (only) isn't ideal
to put it mildly.  Transporter should stay the same as it is, as a
client device.

As it stands, even though the Slim product line is very high quality,
it's not a suitable one for a consumer crowd.  Something more plug and
play is needed.

Most people are using portables for digital audio (stuff like the
iPod).  Including plenty of audiophiles.  People who want a two-box
pre-amp aren't audiophiles, they're just folks with too much money and
very little sense.  

Installing your own software onto a machine to turn it into a server
can be thought of as complicating one's life.  Fine for you and me of
course.  The consumer market demands products to simplify life.

The Olive product line is decent.  Quoting $2999 without mentioning the
$899 product is a little unfair.

Anyone who thinks Logitech bought Slim only for its existing customer
base is being very short sighted.  Or for that matter for the
Squeezebox hardware.  I'm willing to bet they spent big bucks on the
acquisition and you'd better believe they plan on making back far more
than they spent in a relatively short time .  I'll mention the Harmony
example again. Logitech have already made back the purchase price
(close to US$30 million) with that operation.

How much income do you think Logitech is going to make selling the
current Squeezebox and Transporter?


-- 
MelonMonkey

Bruno
*'Twisted Melon - Fine Mac OS Software' (http://twistedmelon.com) |
'mira - Personal Control for your Apple Remote'
(http://twistedmelon.com)*

MelonMonkey's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8466
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-27 Thread JJZolx

MelonMonkey;157933 Wrote: 
 People who want a two-box pre-amp aren't audiophiles, they're just folks
 with too much money and very little sense.

Plonk.  Nutball alert.


-- 
JJZolx

Jim

JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-27 Thread richidoo

The home network is becoming ubiquitous and slim is playing on this,
marketing to a growing market of dual personality nerdy computer geeks
/ ultracool music loving dudes. This demographic is becoming 'normal'
in younger age groups and is growing very fast! So, they do not need to
market to other groups, like portable, lo/mid fi, etc. iPod has mostly
what you describe and it fits in your pocket, and plays video for less
then a SB. Use nice earphones or take analog line out of the bottom and
it is a 1/2way (1/4way?) decent source. 

As for there being extra room in the TP for a hard drive and disk
controller, disk bus, two more power supplies and noise shielding,
nope! Space is an important ingredient in high end designs. Distance
attenuates EMI and RF radiation and allows better wiring design. Some
parts inside need to be separated by distance to achieve the very low
S/N of the TP. 

Keep up the futuristic thinking, you will invent the next iPod!


-- 
richidoo

More Prokofiev... please?

richidoo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3097
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


[slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-27 Thread MelonMonkey

I suppose all the other audiophiles I know are also engineers.  So while
a $5-10K prepro is not out of the question, no one I know spends hours
tracing their CDs with green markers nor worrying too much about the
power cable they're using (as long as it's adequate for the current).

While my comment was broad, so too was saying audiophiles care about
preamps with external power supplies.  An audiophile cares about good
sound and music they enjoy.

Creating a server product can cater as much to a high end community as
to a low end one.  Most high end equipment is installed by the CI
(custom installer) community.  Having a product they can easily
sell/install for their clients would move a lot of units.  Not as many
as having a product anyone could buy and install themselves obviously.

Logitech is about mass-market.  Having a high end product doesn't
preclude catering to the mass market.  I've got a meager collection of
remote controls, but if I told any normal individual how much any one
of them cost, they'd likely drop their jaw.  Of course higher priced
remotes are becoming more mainstream now.

Anyway, adding HD to Transporter = bad.
Creating and marketing Slim-branded server = good.


-- 
MelonMonkey

Bruno
*'Twisted Melon - Fine Mac OS Software' (http://twistedmelon.com) |
'mira - Personal Control for your Apple Remote'
(http://twistedmelon.com)*

MelonMonkey's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8466
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30080

___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss


Re: [slim] Re: SlimLite + NAS on board

2006-11-27 Thread Michael Herger

The market for a server + client solution is obviously greater than that
of a client-only solution.


I doubt it: I'm running five clients but only need one server.

--

Michael

-
http://www.herger.net/SlimCD - your SlimServer on a CD
http://www.herger.net/slim - AlbumReview, Biography, MusicInfoSCR
___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss