Locuth;505866 Wrote:
Why does Apple limit Wifi functionality ?
Because they don't want to find their user in a situation where an App
connects the WiFi network to whatever and you can't get back to your own
network.
I can also imagine quite a few quite severe security issues if you can
do
pippin;498894 Wrote:
I'm trying.
But I'm not sure Apple will let me do the WiFi setup logic since I have
to use stuff that is not allowed on App Store for that.
It also means shutting down all other communication so it's a bit of a
difficult thing to do from a program logic POV.
So maybe
aubuti;499642 Wrote:
The poster referred to volume control on the SBR (Receiver), which of
course has no IR capability. Kind of a non-sequitur in the SB Touch
forum.
Hello aubuti,
I did not learn Latin in high-school so I looked it up in the
dictionairy. I understand that IR remote is not
EddieV;499749 Wrote:
To get a 100-step volume control I now know as options: iPhone/iPeng, SB
Touch and SB controller. The last one is the cheapest and the most
obvious choice. Or does anybody here have alternatives?
Add to that list SB Radio and SB3/Classic.
--
aubuti
pfarrell;498880 Wrote:
I'm not at all sure what this has to do with the Touch, since this is
in
the Touch section of the forum.
The Touch is a full SqueezePlay device and _I_ would really consider it
as a defect if it finally cannot set up a Receiver since it can
otherwise completely
pippin;498883 Wrote:
The Touch is a full SqueezePlay device and _I_ would really consider it
as a defect if it finally cannot set up a Receiver since it can
otherwise completely replace a controller.
But it can't completely replace the Controller anyway, because it's
standing 3 meters from
pippin;498894 Wrote:
I'm trying.
But I'm not sure Apple will let me do the WiFi setup logic since I have
to use stuff that is not allowed on App Store for that.
It also means shutting down all other communication so it's a bit of a
difficult thing to do from a program logic POV.
So maybe
ModelCitizen;495989 Wrote:
I'm not sure I understand why this sort of functionality is left to
third party devolopers. I'm inclined to think a function as crucial as
this should have been implemented and be supported by Logitech.
MC
I couldn't agree more. Why the SBR doesn't stand on its
Mnyb;495567 Wrote:
A fine example of third party developers being very good for this
product line.
I'm not sure I understand why this sort of functionality is left to
third party devolopers. I'm inclined to think a function as crucial as
this should have been implemented and be supported by
Good point - it came out in January almost 2 years ago, so that would
make it Jan 2008.
BTW, I like your sig fcm4711. To their detriment, many companies and
managers never learn that essential skill - saying no!
--
maggior
Rich
-
Setup: 2 SB3s, 3 Booms, 1 duet, 1 receiver. SuSE
You can always configure one SBR with the net udap perl script from a
PC
This is a third party command line tool, it works but it is not the
most user-friendly piece of kit.
It was said that it would develop further to something with graphical
user interface, but it never got that far for some
Hey
My remote has dired for my SB duet, i never use it anyway, as i control
everything from a touch screen, however, it is needed to setup the SB on
the network
When the touch arrives, will i be able to setup my SB Duet reciever on
the touch interface?
Thanks
--
mnichollsuk
Hi mnichollsuk
That is currently not a planned feature for Squeezebox Touch. You will
still need a Controller to setup a Receiver.
However a Touch can control a Receiver (like any other player) if it is
already setup.
Felix
--
fcm4711
Focus means saying no. - Steve Jobs
13 matches
Mail list logo
