SlimCenter 7.0 and JIVE remote

bpape · « **Reply #120 on:** 5 Dec 2007, 05:16 am »

So if the remote is controlling the server side and not the hardware, is the extra box shown above part of the solution or does the SB simply pass a signal back to the server with no need for an additional network connection?

Bryan

Nick B · « **Reply #121 on:** 5 Dec 2007, 05:35 am »

Well, I appreciate the info from Logitech and the backward compatibility of the new remote. Right now, I'm living quite happily with my modded SB 2 and Aberdeen PS. If the price is right for the new remote, I'll consider buying it.

As to the issue of improved sound via firmware 83, either ...... a) all my new IC's, power cords and speakers coincidentally broke in at the same time to give me more resolution and better tonality of cymbals, strings etc or
b) an unintended consequence of the firmware change resulted in a sonic improvement
Either way, I really don't care. It sounds great.

I do hope that, at some point, the new 7.0 has a nice, easy to use, search feature as was suggested earlier in this thread.

Turnandcough · « **Reply #122 on:** 5 Dec 2007, 05:35 am »

Quote from: mvalera on 5 Dec 2007, 01:01 am

We don't comment on future/unannounced hardware, ...

What was the "Squeezebox Duet" reported on several websites - the figment of somebody's imagination or did somebody leak some "classified" information?
It's OK, you can tell us, we promise we won't tell anyone

JEaton · « **Reply #123 on:** 5 Dec 2007, 05:36 am »

Quote from: bpape on 5 Dec 2007, 05:16 am

So if the remote is controlling the server side and not the hardware, is the extra box shown above part of the solution or does the SB simply pass a signal back to the server with no need for an additional network connection?

The remote is essentially like a computer with a browser, except not quite as rich of an interface, from what I can see - it has a little screen for output, some buttons and wheels for input and it talks to the server, controlling any Squeezeboxes that are connected to the server.

The other box you see above is just a Squeezebox with no display. Probably no IR input either. Called the "Squeezebox Duet" undoubtedly because, like the Sonos, it's a two piece system. You can't control the box without some kind of visual remote to see what you're doing. Probably makes the box a lot cheaper with no display, making a box+remote combo feasible price-wise and more attractive to the typical mass consumer who thinks the Sonos is the dog's tits.

bpape · « **Reply #124 on:** 5 Dec 2007, 05:40 am »

OK. So then the remote itself has to be able to connect to the network via a wireless connection if it isn't using the SB as a passthrough connection. It would be similar to the Nokia 700 just pointing a 'browser' back to the server - correct?

Bryan

JEaton · « **Reply #125 on:** 5 Dec 2007, 05:56 am »

Quote from: bpape on 5 Dec 2007, 05:40 am

OK. So then the remote itself has to be able to connect to the network via a wireless connection if it isn't using the SB as a passthrough connection. It would be similar to the Nokia 700 just pointing a 'browser' back to the server - correct?

Right. The remote uses 802.11g WIFI to connect to the network, not IR. It's a two way communication stream, unlike IR. A lot of data, including every single pixel that gets painted on the remote's screen, moves over the wireless network. That probably has both its advantages and disadvantages.

Papajin · « **Reply #126 on:** 5 Dec 2007, 12:43 pm »

Quote from: JEaton on 5 Dec 2007, 05:56 am

Quote from: bpape on 5 Dec 2007, 05:40 am
OK. So then the remote itself has to be able to connect to the network via a wireless connection if it isn't using the SB as a passthrough connection. It would be similar to the Nokia 700 just pointing a 'browser' back to the server - correct?

Right. The remote uses 802.11g WIFI to connect to the network, not IR. It's a two way communication stream, unlike IR. A lot of data, including every single pixel that gets painted on the remote's screen, moves over the wireless network. That probably has both its advantages and disadvantages.

Hmm wonder why they didn't go the route of using the SB as a repeater. Infrared code hits the SB, it relays the command to the server, the server does whatever was requested. Of course the SB probably doesn't have a way to send information back to the remote, so perhaps that's why they didn't go that route. I just worry about the speed and range of a full wireless remote. We'll have to wait and see if this product comes to fruition and how well it works.

As to the remote being like the Nokia as a remote, in theory the remote should or could possibly be faster, as the information being sent back and forth should be streamlined for this specific application. In the case of the Nokia, you're truly looking at a webpage.

mvalera · « **Reply #127 on:** 5 Dec 2007, 08:22 pm »

Actually that's the way that the SB3 works now. Most of the commands are relayed to the server.

On the Jive if it was only IR, it wouldn't function as a multi-room controller. With the Jive's 802.11 you can control what's playing upstairs on the Squeezebox in the bedroom, or the Squeezebox in the kitchen, or the Squeezebox in the living room from anywhere in the house.

Mike

Papajin · « **Reply #128 on:** 5 Dec 2007, 09:16 pm »

Quote from: mvalera on 5 Dec 2007, 08:22 pm

Actually that's the way that the SB3 works now. Most of the commands are relayed to the server.

I realize that fact, but the current remote has no need to receive data back. It's a passive device.

Quote

On the Jive if it was only IR, it wouldn't function as a multi-room controller. With the Jive's 802.11 you can control what's playing upstairs on the Squeezebox in the bedroom, or the Squeezebox in the kitchen, or the Squeezebox in the living room from anywhere in the house.

Actually there's a distinction. What I was describing could control any SB anywhere. The only difference is that with IR, you'd have to be pointing the remote at a SB somewhere. Probably not the best solution, so yes a WiFi setup would certainly be better as you say. Also like I said, there's no way for an SB to send data back to the remote I don't think, once again making my thought impractical. If the SB were capable of UHF, or the SB itself could receive and relay wireless signals (in both directions), we'd have something more akin to what Sonos offers where the players themselves act as relay points thus extending the reach of your wireless connectivity. My personal experience with wireless is that it can be somewhat unreliable at times. It _mostly_ works here.

My biggest worry about the new remote is the amount of power it'll use (i.e. battery life), and how well the wireless connectivity will actually work. Will the unit be reasonably responsive? I hope so, as I feel this remote is something the SB's desperately need!

At any rate, I was mostly just thinking out loud with my original comments. It seems obvious to me after more thought that a fully wifi configuration is pretty much the only way to go.

ctviggen · « **Reply #129 on:** 26 Dec 2007, 02:45 pm »

I had to uninstall Squeeze Center. That thing has way too many bugs. For instance, if I select my upstairs SB (instead of the downstairs SB), then choose a CD to play, the damn Squeeze Center would turn on the downstairs SB and play the CD on it. I simply could not control the upstairs SB using the Squeeze Center. I gave up and uninstalled.

zybar · « **Reply #130 on:** 26 Dec 2007, 02:53 pm »

Quote from: ctviggen on 26 Dec 2007, 02:45 pm

I had to uninstall Squeeze Center. That thing has way too many bugs. For instance, if I select my upstairs SB (instead of the downstairs SB), then choose a CD to play, the damn Squeeze Center would turn on the downstairs SB and play the CD on it. I simply could not control the upstairs SB using the Squeeze Center. I gave up and uninstalled.

Bob,

You just seem to have bad luck.

I have had two and sometimes three SB's going with the Squeeze Center software and have had no issues.

George

ctviggen · « **Reply #131 on:** 26 Dec 2007, 04:25 pm »

Interesting. I wonder if I somehow modified some setting for this? I reinstalled 6.5.2 and it works the way I expect it to, which is that if I select the upstairs SB and select a CD, the upstairs SB begins to play the CD. With the Squeeze Center, the downstairs SB would begin to play the CD.

JEaton · « **Reply #132 on:** 26 Dec 2007, 06:39 pm »

Quote from: ctviggen on 26 Dec 2007, 04:25 pm

Interesting. I wonder if I somehow modified some setting for this? I reinstalled 6.5.2 and it works the way I expect it to, which is that if I select the upstairs SB and select a CD, the upstairs SB begins to play the CD. With the Squeeze Center, the downstairs SB would begin to play the CD.

Probably not anything you did, although you must make sure that JavaScript hasn't been disabled in your browser. This is a farily common bug that I've encountered several times in the past. When changing players, the code within the web page has to change all the links on the page to point to the new player. Sometimes the code fails to "fire" or else it misses some links. The problem is usually found and fixed pretty quickly.

anthony a. · « **Reply #133 on:** 29 Dec 2007, 09:31 pm »

i really hope this makes it out soon. it is exactly what im looking for in a slim remote. what would be even better is for logitech to release a new universal remote (harmony) that does everything harmony's already do but also what this remote can do ... all in one. that would be awesome!!
btw, wheres the power button and why don't slim remotes ever have a stop button?

JEaton · « **Reply #134 on:** 29 Dec 2007, 09:46 pm »

Quote from: anthony a. on 29 Dec 2007, 09:31 pm

btw, wheres the power button and why don't slim remotes ever have a stop button?

A power button on the device would be a little ambiguous. Is it for the remote itselft, or for the Squeezebox being controlled? I imagine there are other ways to power off the Squeezebox through the remote.

Previous remotes have a button labeled "Power" that is used for Stop. Since the Squeezebox is always powered on, this takes it place. I think I read somewhere that they thought it would be less confusing for users. I'd like to meet the genius who reasoned that one. Doesn't make much sense to me. I find their approach to power off/on/idle/playing states - plus what they've taken to calling "screensavers" for anything shown on the screen - to be pretty ******* confusing.

bpape · « **Reply #135 on:** 6 Jan 2008, 04:17 pm »

Quote from: mvalera on 5 Dec 2007, 01:01 am

The Jive Target Hardware Platform works with any of our products. It controls SlimServer not the hardware directly.

We don't comment on future/unannounced hardware, but a SB4 sounds like you all think there is a SB3 replacement on the roadmap. There is not.

To beat this dead... the SB3 will continue unchanged for the foreseeable future. There is no planned replacement for it.

Cheers,

Mike

Michael Valera
Online Communities Manager
Logitech Streaming Media Systems
slimdevices.com

Thanks for the honest answer Michael

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=49296.0

I guess if it's not a REPLACEMENT you're technically correct - but to say there's no SB4 now seems to be a bit disingenuous unless you see this as a parallel product path.

Bryan

TomS · « **Reply #136 on:** 6 Jan 2008, 04:47 pm »

If I understand it correctly, I just see them co-existing nicely. With the SB2/3 there is a display on the device itself, the Duet is displayless or headless requiring a Jive and/or control from a browser somewhere, and the Jive can control all of them through the server (headless or not), including the TP which is "high end". Not a bad way to go if you want all of those options available.

I suppose what they haven't done is lay this out as a clear product line strategy.

If they'd just made that headless Duet with a bit bigger box and a bit more modular, it might be a modder's dream

Tom

yo2tup · « **Reply #137 on:** 6 Jan 2008, 09:46 pm »

Looks like squuezecenter beta has been updated with some bug fixes and firmware v84. Any one try it yet?

PhilNYC · « **Reply #138 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 03:35 pm »

Quote from: yo2tup on 6 Jan 2008, 09:46 pm

Looks like squuezecenter beta has been updated with some bug fixes and firmware v84. Any one try it yet?

I just installed it yesterday (along with a beta Jive remote). Everything seems to work great so far. Am running 3 devices with it (a Transporter, a SB3, and a Duet) and have had no problems...

ted_b · « **Reply #139 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 03:48 pm »

Same (but not with Jive). I've been running the Jan 10th daily, with no problems on the Transporter and an SB3. Simply required a firmware update to both units (hold "brightness", etc.).