Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-18 Thread cliveb

ralphpnj;313179 Wrote: 
> Before I try and answer your very valid points, let me just say that
> this thread proves that it is quite possible to have a decent and
> meaningful discussion without any flaming.
Lucky this isn't happening in the Audiophile forum, I guess :-)

ralphpnj;313179 Wrote: 
> I do see your point about Apple having the most successful online model
> but I don't see how that would effect Slim Devices other then if Apple
> could some how make an iPod/iTunes type interface work as the front end
> for a streaming audio system. Plus Itunes would have to be rewritten or
> modified to somehow work as a server, something it does not presently
> do.
As a non Apple user I may have misunderstood, but I got the impression
that the Apple TV is effectively a hardware device that does indeed
allow iTunes to stream music to it. It may be that iTunes isn't a
server in the formal sense, but from a practical usage perspective,
their playback system behaves in a similar way. (Or perhaps I've got
the wrong end of the stick as regards Apple TV. For example, can one
have multiple Apple TVs playing different things at the same time?)

Let's look at this from a different angle. If iTunes does become the
de-facto worldwide personal music organisation system, with iTunes
integration SqueezeCenter still has its role. By all means let Logitech
try and persuade third parties to license their playback technology. But
I remain skeptical that they could pull it off.


-- 
cliveb

Transporter -> ATC SCM100A

cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-18 Thread ralphpnj

cliveb;313168 Wrote: 
> Yes, valid point. I agree wholeheartedly that DRM is a barrier to mass
> acceptance. However...
> 
> 
> (I'm a little more pessimistic about the timeframe in which we'll see
> the demise of DRM. But that's incidental - DRM will have to die sooner
> or later).
> 
> But when it does, you can bet that Apple will embrace the new model.
> They've already made a start with their EMI-sourced content. And that
> means that iTunes will remain the dominant technology. The demise of
> DRM won't change the fact that the playing field will remain far from
> level - the major players are too well entrenched.
> 
> I'm as much a fan of Slim Devices products as anyone, but we have to
> keep a sense of perspective. They are a niche player - nobody is going
> to gain mass market share unless they can hook the big fish as
> partners, and I still see Apple as having the best opportunity to do
> that.

Clive,

Before I try and answer your very valid points, let me just say that
this thread proves that it is quite possible to have a decent and
meaningful discussion without any flaming. Thanks for holding up your
end of things.

On DRM we completely agree. As for some of the other issues, I do see
your point about Apple having the most successful online model but I
don't see how that would effect Slim Devices other then if Apple could
some how make an iPod/iTunes type interface work as the front end for a
streaming audio system. Plus Itunes would have to be rewritten or
modified to somehow work as a server, something it does not presently
do. But even so Slim Devices is already well into that game with it's
Duet system and Squeeze Center, which they keep on refining for ease of
use. 

snarlydwarf;313170 Wrote: 
> Soon, nothing will be able to play anything from MSN Music Store
> 
> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080422-drm-sucks-redux-microsoft-to-nuke-msn-music-drm-keys.html
> 
> But, yeah, I agree other than that part.

Just one more reason why DRM sucks and can't die fast enough (as if we
need any more reasons).


-- 
ralphpnj

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels -> Snatch -> The Transporter ->
Transporter 2

'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)

ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-18 Thread snarlydwarf

ralphpnj;313142 Wrote: 
> The Slim Devices hardware cannot play files with DRM, whether they be
> from the iTunes Music Store or MSN Music Store

Soon, nothing will be able to play anything from MSN Music Store

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080422-drm-sucks-redux-microsoft-to-nuke-msn-music-drm-keys.html

But, yeah, I agree other than that part.


-- 
snarlydwarf

snarlydwarf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1179
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-18 Thread cliveb

ralphpnj;313142 Wrote: 
> The main reason that iTunes (and to a lesser extent, Microsoft) will
> fail to be the dominant player in this emerging field is Apple's (and
> Microsoft's) insistence on proprietary formats, in the form of DRM.
Yes, valid point. I agree wholeheartedly that DRM is a barrier to mass
acceptance. However...

ralphpnj;313142 Wrote: 
> DRM free files will very shortly be the only viable means of selling
> music online. And once everything is DRM free the playing field will be
> much more level and then Slim Devices will be able to gain the mass
> market share it so richly deserves.
(I'm a little more pessimistic about the timeframe in which we'll see
the demise of DRM. But that's incidental - DRM will have to die sooner
or later).

But when it does, you can bet that Apple will embrace the new model.
They've already made a start with their EMI-sourced content. And that
means that iTunes will remain the dominant technology. The demise of
DRM won't change the fact that the playing field will remain far from
level - the major players are too well entrenched.

I'm as much a fan of Slim Devices products as anyone, but we have to
keep a sense of perspective. They are a niche player - nobody is going
to gain mass market share unless they can hook the big fish as
partners, and I still see Apple as having the best opportunity to do
that.


-- 
cliveb

Transporter -> ATC SCM100A

cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-18 Thread ralphpnj

cliveb;313131 Wrote: 
> iTunes is precisely such a mechanism. People can buy stuff from ITMS and
> it just appears in iTunes. Additionally they can rip their own CDs with
> iTunes and the music appears, ready to go. This is precisely the model
> that is needed. The problem here though is that (apart from listening
> via the computer itself) you're restricted to using Apple hardware to
> actually play your music. Unless some enterprising third parties decide
> to integrate with iTunes - third parties like Slim Devices, for example.

The main reason that iTunes (and to a lesser extent, Microsoft) will
fail to be the dominant player in this emerging field is Apple's (and
Microsoft's) insistence on proprietary formats, in the form of DRM.
Apple's (and Microsoft's) DRM isn't about protecting the rights of the
copyright holder but in protecting it's own hardware and software. The
Slim Devices hardware cannot play files with DRM, whether they be from
the iTunes Music Store or MSN Music Store, since neither Apple nor
Microsoft will release the necessary software hooks to properly decode
their DRMed files. DRM free files will very shortly be the only viable
means of selling music online. And once everything is DRM free the
playing field will be much more level and then Slim Devices will be
able to gain the mass market share it so richly deserves.


-- 
ralphpnj

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels -> Snatch -> The Transporter ->
Transporter 2

'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)

ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-18 Thread cliveb

ralphpnj;313117 Wrote: 
> Once again you bring up some very valid points but once again you fail
> to take into account what that annoying little device, the iPod, as
> shown us about people's willingness to learn about how to work with
> digital music files.
The iPod has indeed demonstrated a model that works for the mainstream,
and because it's so dominant, it points towards the likely future.
Remember what I said previously?:
> What's needed is a mechanism whereby they go online, buy the music they
> want, and it appears in their audio playback system ready to go. That
> will require an industry agreement as to how music will be delivered
> electronically.
iTunes is precisely such a mechanism. People can buy stuff from ITMS
and it just appears in iTunes. Additionally they can rip their own CDs
with iTunes and the music appears, ready to go. This is precisely the
model that is needed. The problem here though is that (apart from
listening via the computer itself) you're restricted to using Apple
hardware to actually play your music. Unless some enterprising third
parties decide to integrate with iTunes - third parties like Slim
Devices, for example.

You see where this is going? If there's ever going to be a universal
technology for non-physical music distribution and playback, then due
to its dominant market position Apple is on the brink on making iTunes
that technology. By integrating with iTunes, third parties like Slim
Devices are merely strengthening Apple's position. Of course the fact
that other systems like SqueezeCenter *are* integrated with iTunes
means that the consumer at least has a choice of playback hardware. But
quite frankly if they are already running iTunes and just want a
convenient playback device, aren't they more likely to just buy an
Airport Express or Apple TV? If anyone is in a strong position to
license their playback technology to third parties, it's Apple.

ralphpnj;313117 Wrote: 
> Perhaps the greater issue will not be file format but rather file tags
> since tags are at the heart of every software based digital music
> system, especially Squeeze Center.
I never mentioned file formats. The codecs and containers used are
secondary. The crucial issue here is the protocols used to deliver and
play music content. (And as you rightly point out, tagging must be a
central part of that protocol). The Slim Devices protocol is one such
candidate (although it only addresses the playback side of the
equation, and is somewhat hostage to the tagging quality of the files
it's pointed at). iTunes is another, and has the advantage of being
beautifully integrated with the largest digital music distribution
system around.

So instead of the industry arriving at an agreed mechanism based on
technical excellence, it will drift into one based on commercial
muscle. It only needs a Sony, Panasonic or similar hardware vendor to
get into bed with Apple and it'll be done and dusted. I can't see how
Slim Devices can realistically hope to influence this process.

Of course, if iTunes does become the dominant hard disk music
organisation mechanism, then by being integrated with it the Slim
Devices players remain viable. But only as niche offerings - the man in
the street isn't going to want to bother installing SqueezeCenter if he
can buy some other playback device that is driven directly from
iTunes.

(I'd better just point out that I do not use iTunes or an iPod).


-- 
cliveb

Transporter -> ATC SCM100A

cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-18 Thread ralphpnj

cliveb;313070 Wrote: 
> Interoperability most definitely *is* an issue. At the moment, we
> already have an industry standard for music distribution: the CD. We
> get around lack of interoperability among hard disk based playback
> systems by ripping the CD and populating our hard disks in an
> appropriate manner. But this is a cumbersome process, and the
> mainstream music consumer won't be interested - what they want is to be
> able to buy their music and play it without any kind of messing about.
> 
> What's needed is a mechanism whereby they go online, buy the music they
> want, and it appears in their audio playback system ready to go. That
> will require an industry agreement as to how music will be delivered
> electronically. If you have multiple incompatible systems for playback,
> you'll need multiple delivery systems, and due to inevitable licensing
> complications each artist's material will end up available only on a
> subset of the various systems. What are you going to do when you
> discover a new musician you like, but whose albums are not available on
> the system you've invested in?

Clive,

Once again you bring up some very valid points but once again you fail
to take into account what that annoying little device, the iPod, as
shown us about people's willingness to learn about how to work with
digital music files.

As funkstar so rightly pointed out, most of the problems with digital
music files are due that scourge of all things digital known as DRM.
Add into that the various reports floating around the net that not
everyone's iPod is filled with files purchased from the iTunes store
and one can see that people are more than willing to work with several
different file formats to get the music they want.

Perhaps the greater issue will not be file format but rather file tags
since tags are at the heart of every software based digital music
system, especially Squeeze Center. So, if anything, some kind of
tagging standard will need to be developed to move hard drive based
music systems, whether streamed, like Squeeze Center, or computer
driven, like iTunes, forward into mass market acceptance. But don't kid
yourself because the computer driven systems (by which I mean playing
back one's hard drive based digital music files through one's
computer's audio system) are already well on their way to mass market
acceptance, it's the streaming systems which need to catch up and Slim
Devices is in the driver's seat as far as that is concerned.

Another thing that has not been mentioned thus far are all the iPod
based music playback systems which have been sold. One takes one's iPod
and plugs it into one these iPod based boom boxes and gets an easy way
to play one's digital music files on something other earbuds or a
computer. Placing a Slim Devices "Receiver" into an AV receiver would
serve a similar purpose but without the need for an iPod or any other
hardware besides a computer and properly setup home network, two things
which many households already possess.

Basically I see it as a win-win situation and hopefully someone at Slim
Devices will see it this way as well.


-- 
ralphpnj

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels -> Snatch -> The Transporter ->
Transporter 2

'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)

ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-18 Thread cliveb

JJZolx;312859 Wrote: 
> We're talking about two different things, then.  "Streaming" audio is
> internet radio stations, Rhapsody, Pandora, etc.
Sorry if I used the wrong terminology. I was trying to refer to home
audio reproduction from a hard disk without using a physical medium
such as CD.

JJZolx;312859 Wrote: 
> I don't see an industry standard emerging because there's no need for
> one. Interoperability isn't an issue.
Interoperability most definitely *is* an issue. At the moment, we
already have an industry standard for music distribution: the CD. We
get around lack of interoperability among hard disk based playback
systems by ripping the CD and populating our hard disks in an
appropriate manner. But this is a cumbersome process, and the
mainstream music consumer won't be interested - what they want is to be
able to buy their music and play it without any kind of messing about.

What's needed is a mechanism whereby they go online, buy the music they
want, and it appears in their audio playback system ready to go. That
will require an industry agreement as to how music will be delivered
electronically. If you have multiple incompatible systems for playback,
you'll need multiple delivery systems, and due to inevitable licensing
complications each artist's material will end up available only on a
subset of the various systems. What are you going to do when you
discover a new musician you like, but whose albums are not available on
the system you've invested in?


-- 
cliveb

Transporter -> ATC SCM100A

cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-17 Thread bertbert

I might be bringing the debate down a bit but as a serious user of slim
devices (7 squeezebox/slimp3s in the house) and a frivolous audiophile
with a Naim setup I was looking to see if it is currently possible to
integrate NaimNet (based on NetStreams stuff)/the new Naim HDX with the
slim devices setup.

Anyone looked at this?

Bert


-- 
bertbert

bertbert's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12349
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-17 Thread atrocity

EFP;312922 Wrote: 
> terrestrial over the air already has high definition (video as well as
> audio) available.

But broadcast HDTV has nothing on the disc-based formats.  Broadcast
looks great until too much moves within the frame, at which point it
consistently breaks up into utter garbage.  And, while I have no
complaint with it, the accompanying audio is 5.1, but certainl not
"high definition".

The "HD" in "HD-Radio" is "Hybrid Digital", not "High Definition". 
Oddly enough, I notice more compression artifacts during speech with
HD-Radio than I do with music.  Not sure why.  In my experience, if
reception is excellent, analog FM sounds better than its HD
counterpart.  But where reception is marginal, HD is pretty darned
sweet indeed.


-- 
atrocity

atrocity's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16009
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-17 Thread JJZolx

EFP;312922 Wrote: 
> There's no reason not to expect this bitrate to increase to lossless as
> infrastructure expands.

It's not an infrastructure questin so much as one of cost to the
broadcaster.  I'll have a 15 Mpbs Comcast connection for under $70
before too long, but bandwidth in datacenters isn't going down in price
at anywhere near that pace.  My favorite local radio station just
dropped their 128kbps stream due to the cost of bandwidth.  Now the
best they offer is 32 kbps.


-- 
JJZolx

Jim

JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-17 Thread EFP

JJZolx;312859 Wrote: 
> You don't sell someone a $7k music server so that they can listen to a
> 128kbps music service.

There's no reason not to expect this bitrate to increase to lossless as
infrastructure expands.  Maybe satellite won't be able to get there but
terrestrial over the air already has high definition (video as well as
audio) available.  Throw a fast ethernet link at it and it's a no
brainer - it seems like an oversight to include streaming capability as
an afterthought.  Heck, I bet you could even charge extra for it as a
premium service.

If the entire internets broke then yeah you'd want a local copy but I
think there might be more serious matters than when you will next be
able to listen to your favorite music.


-- 
EFP

EFP's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6651
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-17 Thread Nonreality

Not everyone that turns on their system is going to have to have
"audiophile" quality at all times.  Why do high end receivers and
tuners still have FM on them.  There are times I want the best sound
but at others I'm reading and messing around and I enjoy my 128
streaming stations. I feel that they have improved considerably and
aren't bad at all now. It's more of a convenience factor rather than
quality.  I still want it to sound good but love the fact that I have
access to things I would not usually have.


-- 
Nonreality

-IF THE RULE YOU FOLLOWED BROUGHT YOU TO THIS, OF WHAT USE IS THE RULE.-

HTTP://www.last.fm/user/nonreality

Nonreality's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15723
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-17 Thread JJZolx

cliveb;312803 Wrote: 
> It strikes me that streaming audio is still in its infancy

We're talking about two different things, then.  "Streaming" audio is
internet radio stations, Rhapsody, Pandora, etc.  I guarantee that not
many of those audio companies have any desire to go there.  You don't
sell someone a $7k music server so that they can listen to a 128kbps
music service.  If the device has network connectivity (primary use:
downloading metadata when ripping CDs) then maybe they throw streaming
playback in as an afterthought.

> It'll be some years before an industry standard way of doing things
> emerges. Unfortunately the eventual winner will be dictated by
> commercial muscle rather than technical superiority.

I don't see an industry standard emerging because there's no need for
one.  Interoperability isn't an issue.  If there is a standard to note,
then it's merely the design model that is currently being used - a fully
contained music server and playback system in one.


-- 
JJZolx

Jim

JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-17 Thread ralphpnj

cliveb;312803 Wrote: 
> It strikes me that streaming audio is still in its infancy, and every
> company that's having a go is doing it their own way. It's a bit like
> VHS v. Betamax at the moment. (Or rather, it's actually more like the
> plethora of competing recording technologies that were around at the
> turn of the last century).
> 
> The basic idea of streaming audio cannot become mainstream until the
> dominant method of music distribution becomes integrated with the
> playback technology (ie. in the way that I can buy an audio CD anywhere
> and it'll play on any CD player).
> 
> It'll be some years before an industry standard way of doing things
> emerges. Unfortunately the eventual winner will be dictated by
> commercial muscle rather than technical superiority.
> 
> At this stage, all the pioneers (Slim, Sonos, Roku, McIntosh, Linn,
> etc)  are minnows. When the big fish (Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba et al)
> agree on a format, the rest of the world will just have to like it or
> lump it. Depressing, isn't it?

Clive,

While your points are well taken, I still beg to disagree. As a very
fine example of why I do so just take a look at the iPod. While the big
fish stumbled around Apple came forward with a very easy to use device
that literately blow the big fish out of the water and went on to
become the de facto standard for portable music players. I believe that
a similar thing is quite possible in the realm of streaming music
devices and in fact, is not only possible but may actually be happening
with the SqueezeBox and Duet.

As further proof of Slim Devices market leading status just look at the
competition - the audio companies either make poor sounding devices
(MacIntosh), devices with terrible user interfaces (Linn) or devices
which use a proprietary network protocol (Sonos). Only Slim Devices
offers a stable user interface and a flexible device which works with
standard network protocols.

As for the idea of licensing, there are plenty places where the insides
of the "Receiver" can be installed to very good affect. Build a
"Receiver" into a home theater AV receiver and one now has a means of
listening to music via one's iTunes collection (and remember that
almost all iPod owners, except for those of us geeks with RockBox
installed, have a copy of their iPod music sitting on their computer)
or by streaming from the internet and also a very simple way of
obtaining firmware updates for both the "Receiver" and it's host
receiver.

Add to all this the market muscle that Logitech brings to the table and
the idea of licensing becomes a no brainer.


-- 
ralphpnj

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels -> Snatch -> The Transporter ->
Transporter 2

'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)

ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-17 Thread cliveb

It strikes me that streaming audio is still in its infancy, and every
company that's having a go is doing it their own way. It's a bit like
VHS v. Betamax at the moment. (Or rather, it's actually more like the
plethora of competing recording technologies that were around at the
turn of the last century).

The basic idea of streaming audio cannot become mainstream until the
dominant method of music distribution becomes integrated with the
playback technology (ie. in the way that I can buy an audio CD anywhere
and it'll play on any CD player).

It'll be some years before an industry standard way of doing things
emerges. Unfortunately the eventual winner will be dictated by
commercial muscle rather than technical superiority.

At this stage, all the pioneers (Slim, Sonos, Roku, McIntosh, Linn,
etc)  are minnows. When the big fish (Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba et al)
agree on a format, the rest of the world will just have to like it or
lump it. Depressing, isn't it?


-- 
cliveb

Transporter -> ATC SCM100A

cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-17 Thread adamslim

JJZolx;312720 Wrote: 
> One big issue I see with a high-end audio company using the Squeezebox
> and SqueezeServer slim device approach is that it's _way_ too techy. 
> The computer audio products that are currently coming out of the
> industry take a much simpler, more complete approach than the
> client/server Squeeze system.  They're drop-in items to the audio rack.
> They don't go near things like wireless routers and DHCP and WPA-PSK
> and porting software to run on Mac OS X and Linux and Vista and with
> web interfaces and scrolling screen savers and all the millions of
> headaches and customer service issues that go with the Squeeze
> approach.  I'll bet most of those companies have at most two or three
> outsourced programmers working on their software.  That's a fraction of
> the number that Logitech is paying to work on Squeezebox software and
> firmware.

I agree, but I actually see this as an opportunity.  These hifi
companies have established dealers to help with the install, and if
they package up a NAS or silent PC with a wifi system that just plugs
into a router - together with a standard install of SC - then you have
the ease of install and support that is necessary for the consumer.


-- 
adamslim

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have
others

SB+, EAR V20, Living Voice OBX-R2s plus some other stuff
SB3, Charlize, Harbeth HL-P3ES

adamslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7355
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-16 Thread JJZolx

I have a feeling that the foray into the world of audiophilia was a
one-off.  Logitech is a company built on selling 10's of thousands of
$50 products, not selling fifty $10,000 ones.

One big issue I see with a high-end audio company using the Squeezebox
& SqueezeServer slim device approach is that it's _way_ too techy.  The
computer audio products that are currently coming out of the industry
take a much simpler, more complete approach than the client/server
Squeeze system.  They're drop-in items to the audio rack.  They don't
go near things like wireless routers and DHCP and WPA-PSK and porting
software to run on Mac OS X and Linux and Vista and with web interfaces
and scrolling screen savers and all the millions of headaches and
customer service issues that go with the Squeeze approach.  I'll bet
most of those companies have at most two or three outsourced
programmers working on their software.  That's a fraction of the number
that Logitech is paying to work on Squeezebox software and firmware.


-- 
JJZolx

Jim

JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-16 Thread mftech

Maybe Logitech is more interested at selling remote, and they may want
to sell and make compatible the Duet Remote with other music servers,
that will be interesting...


-- 
mftech

Tête à FLAC

mftech's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1586
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-16 Thread radish

adamslim;312650 Wrote: 
> While SC is open source, I can't see a manufacturer using it without a
> licensing deal - they would want to partner up to get some guarantee of
> compatibility long-term.  It certainly makes sense to me - let them do
> the audio and let SD take a cut of each sale, providing a robust
> streaming system.  Everyone wins!

I think it depends on what the mythical third party wants to do. If
they simply want to easily add streaming audio to a device which
doesn't have it (e.g. SBR-in-a-minisystem) then sure, I can understand
them just licensing the whole SBR and throwing it in. On the other if
they already have a streamer, display, CPU, software etc etc I don't
see how any licensing deal would be very useful. Any firmware Logitech
could provide probably wouldn't work on their box without a lot of
modification so why not just implement it yourself and save the fees? I
guess Logitech could develop custom implementations for hire but that's
a long way from just licensing.


-- 
radish

radish's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=77
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-16 Thread adamslim

radish;312549 Wrote: 
> Of course the server interface is GPL so companies could implement SC
> compatibility without any licensing if they wanted. Of course they may
> prefer to buy Logitech's implementations (hardware designs, firmware,
> etc) but other than Roku I've never seen anyone else even look
> interested in implementing slimproto.

While SC is open source, I can't see a manufacturer using it without a
licensing deal - they would want to partner up to get some guarantee of
compatibility long-term.  It certainly makes sense to me - let them do
the audio and let SD take a cut of each sale, providing a robust
streaming system.  Everyone wins!


-- 
adamslim

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have
others

SB+, EAR V20, Living Voice OBX-R2s plus some other stuff
SB3, Charlize, Harbeth HL-P3ES

adamslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7355
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-16 Thread radish

Of course the server interface is GPL so companies could implement SC
compatibility without any licensing if they wanted. Of course they may
prefer to buy Logitech's implementations (hardware designs, firmware,
etc) but other than Roku I've never seen anyone else even look
interested in implementing slimproto.


-- 
radish

radish's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=77
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-16 Thread autopilot

So basically like Roku used to do? There is a lot of logic in what you
are saying. Many of the 'high end' streamers use flaky uPnP  - the
people paying K's for these system would really benefit from the
mature, well developed and feature rich back-end of SqueezeCenter. As
you say, most sound great but are awful to use.


-- 
autopilot

*SlimServer:* 7.0.1 (Windows Vista 64)
*Players:* Squeezebox 3 (main room) / Squeezebox Receiver (bedroom) /
Softsqueeze (home office).
*Amps:* Cambridge Audio 640a (main room) / Trends TA10.1 Class-T /
Logitech 5.1.
*Speakers:* Mission 701's (living room) / Kef Cresta 1's (bedroom) /
Logitech 5.1's.
*Remotes:* Harmony 525 (IR) / 1 Beta SB Controller / 1 Official Sb
Controller. 

'LAST.FM' (http://www.last.fm/user/domrevans/)

autopilot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1763
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-16 Thread andynormancx

Shredder;312507 Wrote: 
> You can listen to the TP for 30 days and if you don't like it, return it
> for full price.

You can if you are in the US and can therefore buy it from the
SlimDevices website. The OP is in the UK though.

In theory in the UK you could buy it online and return it after 7 days
using the Distance Selling Regulations. But that would be putting a lot
of trust in your supplier, as if they decide to pretend they don't know
about the Distance Sellings regs then you are going to have to take
them to court to get the money back.


-- 
andynormancx

Yes, it will. Yes, all of them. Yes, SoftSqueeze as well. What ?
I SAID ALL OF THEM !

andynormancx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17417
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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


Re: [slim] Time for Slim Devices to get partnering up and licensing?

2008-06-16 Thread Shredder

You can listen to the TP for 30 days and if you don't like it, return it
for full price.


-- 
Shredder

Shredder's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11380
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48945

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