[slim] New user's experience on SC: Slow, unintuitive, generally not fun

[Jooseppi]

My first weeks have been disappointing with SBR and SC. The software
functions very slowly. One of my ways to enjoy music is to have a
session where I pick songs and create the mix (playlist) on the fly.
Doing this is a dreadful experience with SC. I find SC OK when playing
albums from start to finish or when playing pre-defined playlists.

Question: What steps can be taken in order to make SC snappy,
responsive and D'voidOfLatency?

My gear is modern and SBR connected via LAN.

Thank you


--
Jooseppi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jooseppi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18815
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Jooseppi]

I guess I have to add that there is nothing seriously flawed in my
setup. It is as it should. I functions normally. However, that normal
is below my standards. In my opinion the UI experience should remind
the ease of use and snappiness that of a CD player for example.

List all albums for a genre - click, BANG! - they're there, on the
screen. No waiting. Add a song to playlist - click, BANG! - it's there.
No waiting for the list to reappear with the new song. This is how it
should be.


--
Jooseppi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jooseppi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18815
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Jooseppi]

This is the level of intuition, ease and snappiness I'm craving for:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev7QqN0GvD4 (cue to 1:00), it's the
Sooloos system in action.

And please don't get started with the price. Sooloos is nothing that
can't be achieved on a modern mid-level computer. That's exactly what
it is: a generic computer inside a funky case and with an
audiophile-grade price tag.

The ease and "flow" of use is only a software issue. That's, it seems
to me, where SC has still a lot to accomplish.


--
Jooseppi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jooseppi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18815
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[seanadams]

> That's exactly what it is: a generic computer inside a funky case and
> with an audiophile-grade price tag.

There is a difference between achieving performance on a closed system,
even "just a computer", vs any given customer's existing Windows
installation. In the latter case you have viruses, anti-viruses,
firewalls, background tasks, memory usage, VPN software, and a million
other things you'd never even imagine that can cause problems. That is
the hostile environment we have to contend with.

Anyway... has it finished scanning your music yet? If you have a lot of
tracks that can take a while, and the system will be less responsive
during that time due to the disk activity.


--
seanadams
------------------------------------------------------------------------
seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[iPhone]

Jooseppi;331016 Wrote:
> This is the level of intuition, ease and snappiness I'm craving for:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev7QqN0GvD4 (cue to 1:00), it's the
> Sooloos system in action.
>
> The ease and "flow" of use is only a software issue. That's, it seems
> to me, where SC has still a lot to accomplish.

Welcome to the Forum and the world of Squeezebox. This is not intented
to be a flame and I hope you can understand where this is coming from
because it was you that made the unfair comparison.

Jooseppi;331016 Wrote:
> And please don't get started with the price. Sooloos is nothing that
> can't be achieved on a modern mid-level computer. That's exactly what
> it is: a generic computer inside a funky case and with an
> audiophile-grade price tag.

I am going to say exactly that! The Sooloos is $10,500!!!!! But the
important thing as Sean said in the post right after you posted this
Watermelon to Raisin comparison, is the use of a "dedicated Server".

If you think SC is to slow, then spend another $700 on a "Dedicated SC
Server" running Linux with FireFox web browser and it will fly. You can
speed up using your current XP by installing FireFox3 for Windows and
don’t open any IE sessions while using the SC WebUI (if your PC is
fairly "Clean" this switch will shock you). With a Linux SC Server
there are no viruses, no background tasks, no other open programs, no
VPN, no firewalls, to deal with or cause possible problems; just a
dedicated SC Server just as the Sooloos box is dedicated (but SC is
still an open source system unlike the closed Sooloos). Now for the
nice part, even after buying and building your dedicated SC Server, you
still have spent less then a tenth of what a Sooloos system costs! There
is the added bonus of the pride that you did it, instead of you went out
and bought it at 10 times the price because somebody else did it for
you. Which is basically what the Sooloos, Linn, McIntosh, and other
high dollar audiophile all-in-one NMPs are; somebody doing it for you.
Just insert a CD, repeat, repeat (until all CDs are copied), play
music. Sooloos is a closed system and if one wants multiple music
locations, one has to buy the model five and then run RCA cables pairs
all over the place. For $15000.00 it should be wireless so, No Thank
You!


--
iPhone

*iPhone*
'Last.FM' (http://www.last.fm/user/mephone)
Media Room:
Transporter, VTL TL-6.5 Signature Pre-Amp, Ayre MX-R Mono Blocks,
Vandersteen Quatro, VeraStarr 6.4SE 6-channel Amp, VCC-5 Reference
Center, four VSM-1 Signatures, Runco RS 900 CineWide AutoScope 2.35:1


Living Room:
Duet, ADCOM GTP-870HD, Cinepro 3K6SE III Gold, Vandersteen Model 3A
Signature, Two 2Wq subs, VCC-2, Two VSM-1

Bedroom: SB3, NAD C370, Thiel 2.3
Home Office: SB3, Parasound Vamp v.3, VSM-1 Sigs
Mobile: SB3, Audioengine A5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
iPhone's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13622
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[neu242]

I also find the SqueezeCenter way too slow. I ended up creating my own
UI that remote controls SqueezeCenter -- you can find it at
http://musicbrowser.sf.net/. It's not fantastic and it doesn't do ID3
parsing, but it's faster than SqueezeCenter.


--
neu242
------------------------------------------------------------------------
neu242's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13471
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[bhaagensen]

Jooseppi;331013 Wrote:
>
> List all albums for a genre - click, BANG! - they're there, on the
> screen. No waiting. Add a song to playlist - click, BANG! - it's there.
> No waiting for the list to reappear with the new song. This is how it
> should be.

Thats basically how it works for me... It depends though, on whether
I'm connected over the Internet, the current load on my server, the
current load on my network, whether I'm streaming from local or remote
sources etc. These things are a bit hard to discuss without hard
numbers and specific examples. So perhaps you could say a little bit
more about your hardware specs etc. And also give a few specific
examples of operations, so others can try, that are slow in your setup.
That will make it easier to discuss matters.


--
bhaagensen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Uluen]

Jooseppi;331011 Wrote:
> My gear is modern and SBR connected via LAN.What kind of hardware is your SC running on and what is the host OS?

On my system, when I click the "rock" genre (where I have most albums I
think) it takes 2-3 seconds for the system to come up with the result
(797 albums with 9871 songs by 400 artists).

How long does a similar query take on your system?


--
Uluen

'FOYNLAND.ORG' (HTTP://FOYNLAND.ORG/)
*'Discogs'
(http://www.discogs.com/collection?user=Monkly&sort=artist&order=asc&page=1&folder_id=)*
'LAST.FM' (HTTP://WWW.LAST.FM/USER/ULUEN/)
*'Flickr' (http://www.flickr.com/photos/knasclass/)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uluen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12166
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[damager]

Uluen;331031 Wrote:
> What kind of hardware is your SC running on and what is the host OS?
>
> On my system, when I click the "rock" genre (where I have most albums I
> think) it takes 2-3 seconds for the system to come up with the result
> (797 albums with 9871 songs by 400 artists).
>
> How long does a similar query take on your system?

Just did this same test on mine - I have 39,000 songs and just under
3000 albums. I started my controller, went to "Music Library", then
"Genres", then "Rock". 3-4 seconds later I had my list. I consider
that to be pretty damn good.


--
damager
------------------------------------------------------------------------
damager's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15940
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Nonreality]

damager;331065 Wrote:
> Just did this same test on mine - I have 39,000 songs and just under
> 3000 albums. I started my controller, went to "Music Library", then
> "Genres", then "Rock". 3-4 seconds later I had my list. I consider
> that to be pretty damn good.
Nice speed, its fast sometimes on mine and sometimes it is very slow.
I can understand the OP's frustration. I'm not sure why but sometimes
it's so slow that that it really bugs me and others it's so fast that I
wonder what I was thinking why was I ever upset. Like Sean said there
are so many factors with an open system but I like being able to have
someone create things that benefit me that a closed system can not.
It's so much cooler that the wait can be written off most of the time.
Sometimes it's just a version that happens to run slow and an upgrade
can do the trick. Play around with it as it is fluid not static.
You'll start to understand it the more you play with it I believe.


--
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=51305

[ModelCitizen]

Unless you are using a low-powered PC the help you get here will solve
your "snappiness" problems.

It might be useful for you (as a new user) to supply feedback about why
you found the interface (UI) unituitive, and exactly what you found
intuitive about it.

The most remarkable thing about the product you have just bought is the
amount of development that that takes place on an ongoing basis.

If you (or any other new users) find the SBC (controller) or the player
(SB1/2/3 Transporter) user interface unintuitive or difficult to use
then you should attempt to decribe the problems you have with it.

User feedback is is very useful for improving any product and
SlimDevices/Logitech listen to feedback and act upon it.

IMHO it would be great if the various SlimDevices were as immediately
obvious to use as something like an iPod.

MC


--
ModelCitizen

On average people have fewer than two feet.

http://www.last.fm/user/ModelCitizen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ModelCitizen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=446
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[pimd]

I agree that the system can be very slow sometimes. To a point where it
is annoying.
I have an album containing about 300 songs (top40 1966). It takes
almost half a minute to display the songs of that album on my SC. The
same when i browse the files using Folder display.
For normal albums with 10-20 tracks the speed is usually ok.
300 songs may not be a problem for a database like MySQL so I believe
that the software is not completely finetuned. At the moment i have 97
albums and about 1500 songs in my collection.


--
pimd
------------------------------------------------------------------------
pimd's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19488
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Nonreality]

pimd;331127 Wrote:
> I agree that the system can be very slow sometimes. To a point where it
> is annoying.
> I have an album containing about 300 songs (top40 1966). It takes
> almost half a minute to display the songs of that album on my SC. The
> same when i browse the files using Folder display.
> For normal albums with 10-20 tracks the speed is usually ok.
> 300 songs may not be a problem for a database like MySQL so I believe
> that the software is not completely finetuned. At the moment i have 97
> albums and about 1500 songs in my collection.It's not the database it's how the network handles the database in my
opinion. I have 17k in songs and like I said it is fast at times and
other times it takes forever. I think it has to be the network and
what ever stage it's in at the time you query. Then again I'm pretty
simple on these things so I'm not totally sure.


--
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=51305

[Uluen]

Nonreality;331136 Wrote:
> It's not the database it's how the network handles the database in my
> opinion. I have 17k in songs and like I said it is fast at times and
> other times it takes forever. I think it has to be the network and
> what ever stage it's in at the time you query. Then again I'm pretty
> simple on these things so I'm not totally sure.What do you mean "network handles the database"? The db queries is done
on the SC host, it doesn't travel the network.

I have 41K+ tracks and getting all albums from the largest genre (rock)
takes less than 3 seconds on the web UI like I said.
Searching for "a" takes 3-4 seconds, pretty impressive in my opinion.

Can you put some numbers behind "takes forever"?


--
Uluen

'FOYNLAND.ORG' (HTTP://FOYNLAND.ORG/)
*'Discogs'
(http://www.discogs.com/collection?user=Monkly&sort=artist&order=asc&page=1&folder_id=)*
'LAST.FM' (HTTP://WWW.LAST.FM/USER/ULUEN/)
*'Flickr' (http://www.flickr.com/photos/knasclass/)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uluen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12166
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Nonreality]

Uluen;331158 Wrote:
> What do you mean "network handles the database"? The db queries is done
> on the SC host, it doesn't travel the network.
>
> I have 41K+ tracks and getting all albums from the largest genre (rock)
> takes less than 3 seconds on the web UI like I said.
> Searching for "a" takes 3-4 seconds, pretty impressive in my opinion.
>
> Can you put some numbers behind "takes forever"?What I'm saying is how the web interface receives the info. It can hang
10 to 15 seconds sometimes and at others 2-3 seconds or less. What I'm
saying is I believe that it accesses the database fast but how the
browser gets the info can be slow. So the info has to travel the
network to get to me on the browser. Maybe I'm explaining it right for
you so sorry to upset you .


--
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=51305

[Jooseppi]

Hello everyone,

And first of all thank you for the many replies and understanding
attitude. Many times if you post something with a negative undertone
("I'm not satisfied") to a dedicated forum, you most often end up with
emotional defensive attacks from them so called fanboys.

Anyway. What I've gathered so far, the lack of that last bit of
snappiness and lightning fast speed is a result of several factors.
Maybe these are some of them?
- Software side is an open system that has to work in conjunction with
who knows how many applications (AV, FW and so forth) and who knows how
badly maintained OS's
- SC software may not be finetuned enough. Some reference to this might
be in the way SC uses memory, which is a lot IMHO. I wouldnt mind the
memory hogging if it resulted in super snappy operation. I can
understand that money dominates business and that modern cheap ram is a
far more economical solution than hiring developers. But isnt there a
line to be drawn somewhere? To be honest, SC is only a simplified
server and an audio streamer. Following this cheap ram stick ideology,
the developers have only some responsibility over software, the rest is
laid upon users.
- The software is web browser based. Why was that decision taken in the
past? I can see it is a globally compatible solution and it helps with
networking but is browser-based really the best way to do it?

Please bare in mind that I do not have deep knowledge over SC or
coding. I may well have wrong ideas on some matters.

What I'm still trying to comprehend is how it can take so long (some
seconds is too much) to display a pre-indexed list of a given number of
albums? Let's say I have 1000 albums. All the crucial metadata has been
indexed during the music library scanning process, right? So now, as I
select to display for example all rock albums, which there are 100 for
example, how can it take some seconds for them to appear on the
display? It would be understandable if the information was gathered
from the actual library directories but no, all the library metadata is
indexed (right?).

pimd's example of a 300-song album is great. Half a minute to display
300 songs! I think that is much too much.

Nonreality, you said "This is on the web interface. The SB3 interface
is very fast". With the latter, are you referring to softsqueeze
interface or hardware interface à la remote control?

Did any of you watch the youtube clip of Sooloos? Isn't that UI just
mind blowing? Aesthetic, ultra snappy, intuitive.. truly a Human
Interface Device.


--
Jooseppi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jooseppi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18815
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Mark Lanctot]

Jooseppi;331176 Wrote:
> - Software side is an open system that has to work in conjunction with
> who knows how many applications (AV, FW and so forth) and who knows how
> badly maintained OS's

Yes. SC has to work under Windows, Mac and Linux. From what I can see
on the forums, in terms of speed and reliability of the software under
these various OSes, it's clear that the fastest is under Linux.
Windows is a mixed bag due to the sheer variability of installations,
and SC under Mac appears to be problematic for some users.

You've never said what OS you're using. I bet it isn't Linux...SC is
snappy for me even using a slow 1.2 GHz Duron chip with 512 MB of RAM
and a library over a network.

This may be due to the fact that SC is coded in perl for such amazing
cross-compatibility. perl in Linux is very efficient, Windows perhaps
not so much. That said, I ran the older SlimServer on Windows XP and
it was just as fast for me.

The protocol for communicating with the players is open and documented
and anyone could write a server. Many have proposed this over the
years but amazingly no one has come up with anything...Perhaps SC is
more than a 'simplified server and audio streamer'? If you're on
Windows, you may want to try Moose. It should be noted this still
relies on SC as a backend but it's written as a native Windows app.

> - The software is web browser based. Why was that decision taken in the
> past?

- easy cross-platform compatibility

- easy network control (any device with a web browser can control SC,
even over the Internet)

- no installation necessary on devices other than the server

- well-documented methods common to web development


--
Mark Lanctot
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[kesey]

Jooseppi;331176 Wrote:
>
>
> Did any of you watch the youtube clip of Sooloos? Isn't that UI just
> mind blowing? Aesthetic, ultra snappy, intuitive.. truly a Human
> Interface Device.

Jooseppi, may I suggest that you use Squeezecenter on your computer for
a while. For instance on the "Home" screen click on "Albums". Now you
have a list of albums gazing politely at you, waiting for you to make a
selection. What could be prettier, snappy or more intuitive? Now, select
a different letter from the alpha index to bring up the relevant albums.
How long did that screen take to fill? In my mind there is plenty of fun
to be had here.

I'll agree the Controller is taking a wee while to get to perfect. I've
been used to the Squeezebox 3 (wired network) for some time now, and it
reacts a bit quicker than does the Controller - but then it is pretty
fully formed as of now, not under daily evolution as is the
Controller/Reciever. There's as bit of growing in the Duet yet, but I
can wait and see how the development goes. I like what's there now - it
can be finnicky but that's computers for you. The Controller is in a
state of development, but it a fine thing as it is.

Would I prefer that it was finalised first and then sold? Absolutely
not. I've been downloading beta stuff for years. I want what is
available now. Boys and their toys etc. I'll cope with a bit of a
hiccup here and there.

What would I really like? Maybe a version of a tablet PC to run
Squeezecenter on. iPeng is probably not too far off there, but I'm not
inclined to get another iPod. The iPhone is too darn expensive to
operate where I live, and I prefer the Blackberry email facility for
the moment. A development of the iRex Iliad/Kindle/Sony PRS 505 able to
handle Squeezecenter would be cool. What do you think Slim
Devices/Logitech? :-)


--
kesey
------------------------------------------------------------------------
kesey's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10786
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Jooseppi]

Hi,

I'll answer some unanswered questions.

I don't have the Controller at all. I bought only the Receiver and set
it up with net-UDAP. I'm on XP SP3 and a well resourced computer (X2
5000+, 2GB 800, 7200rpm).

I can later on, when I have more time, take some measurements of the
exact times it takes for certain tasks. However, I dont see so much
relevance in exact numbers of seconds. To me, if it takes more than two
seconds, it's too much. Am I being unreasonable? I dont think so. So far
I've ripped to FLAC about 500 albums, so the database isn't huge. And,
if Sooloos can do it, SD should get close to it.

Have any of you experimented with SSDs? You can DIY a very fast small
SSD reletively cheap. Just get an ultra fast CF card (around 45MB/s,
UDMA) and put in a PATA adapter and hoot up to computer. Those things
are fast. The adapters cost under 10 dollars and 4GB cards some tens of
dollars. The seek times on flash drives are mind blowingly little. Maybe
flash could be a way to increase the so called snap factor?

Have any of you found comprehensive data on Sooloos' specifications? It
would be interesting to learn more about it's technicalities. Maybe SD
could learn something from it even though it is as a whole a different
approach (closed).


--
Jooseppi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jooseppi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18815
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Siduhe]

I should start by saying that I think these threads are interesting and
the discussions worth having - there are enough people who have this
immediate reaction that it's clearly an issue for some. However, it's
very different from my own experience.

I run SC on an old Windows PC (XP SP3) but it's pretty much a dedicated
server (I also use it to rip and store my music and photos/videos, so
there's attendant software for those things too) as well as ESET
Security software. Doesn't have a high end spec, but has 1gb of RAM so
it's not exactly underpowered.

SC is blistering fast on my setup despite a library of 10,000k+ tracks
- the reaction from the web interface is easily sub one second unless
I'm doing a MusicIP mix which probably takes about two.

I always put it down to the fact that:

a)I don't use the box SC is installed on for anything else;

b)I have stripped out some of the XP bells and whistles (graphics and
animated menus for example);

c) My Squeezeboxes are wireless, but the SC box is wired to my router
(only one wireless hop);

d) I have the server priority set to above average in SC so even if I'm
doing something else on the box, SC should take priority.

None of which necessarily answers the points made in the OP's original
post, but may give him some ideas how to improve your experience given
the current software. Also, if you're running XP, have you looked at
the Moose front end for Windows - lots of people who have problems with
the web interface say it runs a lot faster for them. Search for Dr
Lovegrove and Moose in the search engine of your choice.


--
Siduhe

Who am I on 'LAST.FM' (http://www.last.fm/user/siduhe)?
"-Siduhe Loved Tracks radio got the thumbs up. Feedback included: yeah,
it's good... got the odd dodgy track tho...-" (c) 'ModelCitizen'
(http://www.last.fm/user/Modelcitizen)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Siduhe's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=723
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Nonreality]

Siduhe;331239 Wrote:
> I should start by saying that I think these threads are interesting and
> the discussions worth having - there are enough people who have this
> immediate reaction that it's clearly an issue for some. However, it's
> very different from my own experience.
>
> I run SC on an old Windows PC (XP SP3) but it's pretty much a dedicated
> server (I also use it to rip and store my music and photos/videos, so
> there's attendant software for those things too) as well as ESET
> Security software. Doesn't have a high end spec, but has 1gb of RAM so
> it's not exactly underpowered.
>
> SC is blistering fast on my setup despite a library of 10,000k+ tracks
> - the reaction from the web interface is easily sub one second unless
> I'm doing a MusicIP mix which probably takes about two.
>
> I always put it down to the fact that:
>
> a)I don't use the box SC is installed on for anything else;
>
> b)I have stripped out some of the XP bells and whistles (graphics and
> animated menus for example);
>
> c) My Squeezeboxes are wireless, but the SC box is wired to my router
> (only one wireless hop);
>
> d) I have the server priority set to above average in SC so even if I'm
> doing something else on the box, SC should take priority.
>
> None of which necessarily answers the points made in the OP's original
> post, but may give him some ideas how to improve your experience given
> the current software. Also, if you're running XP, have you looked at
> the Moose front end for Windows - lots of people who have problems with
> the web interface say it runs a lot faster for them. Search for Dr
> Lovegrove and Moose in the search engine of your choice.

Nice post Siduhe.


--
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=51305

[Jooseppi]

Many responses here have followed this structure: "If one wants
Sooloos-like operability one goes and buys it. Can't afford? Boohoo,
don't complain."

I can understand this argument only to some degree. Mostly I don't. Why
should we see things so categorically? As if there were no options or
alternatives. "Slim Devices know what they're doing, they have provided
a finalized product here to our hands and they don't have to follow the
competition". What good could follow from that kind of encouragement?

The (technical) competition being in a tenfold price category will not
restrain from reaching or getting close to it, only one's lack of
ambition or dare will. We don't know where the Sooloos' high premium
goes to. How much goes to marketing, design or taking back initial
funding? Only a small fraction might go to technical R&D. And since SD
operates in an open ideology, a whole lot of priceless equity is tied
to SD development. Overall I see it as lack of imagination and courage
to disregard a product simply for its price tag.

And if one is satisfied and happy with one's current SD setup, why not
be just that, happy and satisfied, instead of implying there isn't
space or right to investigate for something more?


--
Jooseppi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jooseppi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18815
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[cparker]

Is this thread actually going anywhere or is it just flamebait? :s


--
cparker

www.spicefly.com - Visit for an enhanced Interface for MusicIP and
integration tips and tricks, Plugin coding tips and Spicefly SugarCube
the MIP AutoDJ plugin!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cparker's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2083
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Pale Blue Ego]

The OP is unusual in that the WebUI is the ONLY way he can control the
player (SBR). He's using the absolute cheapest Squeezebox solution
possible, the $149 Receiver without a Controller.

Yeah, it might be a leeetle bit unfair to expect it to perform as
snappily as the $10k+ Sooloos system.

But still, there are things he can try. Moose and SlimRemote are
Windows programs that may perform better than the WebUI. Firefox or
Opera might be quicker than IE at rendering the web pages. A different
OS on the server, more RAM, etc. might help the performance.

The performance is much quicker using the Controller or the SB3 + IR
remote. The WebUI can be slow, depending on a lot of different
factors, but since it isn't the standard way most people control the
player, the issue is much less relevant for them.

Anyway, good luck!


--
Pale Blue Ego
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pale Blue Ego's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=110
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[lanierb]

Pale Blue Ego;331520 Wrote:
> The OP is unusual in that the WebUI is the ONLY way he can control the
> player (SBR). He's using the absolute cheapest Squeezebox solution
> possible, the $149 Receiver without a Controller.
>
> Yeah, it might be a leeetle bit unfair to expect it to perform as
> snappily as the $10k+ Sooloos system.
>
> But still, there are things he can try. Moose and SlimRemote are
> Windows programs that may perform better than the WebUI. Firefox or
> Opera might be quicker than IE at rendering the web pages. A different
> OS on the server, more RAM, etc. might help the performance.
>

Good post. I also think people (including the OP) have been too quick
to rule out some kind of individual specific software interference as
well, such as anti-virus, that is causing the OP to have more delay
than the rest of us.

That said, if I wanted to make a playlist on the fly choosing
individual songs, I'm not sure I would choose SC to do it with. I
would use the SB or controller directly, but that's not an option here
since the OP doesn't have a controller. An alternative suggestion
would be to use something else for that purpose. You can use iTunes or
winamp or foobar2k or whatever suits your fancy. Heck, you can even use
softsqueeze. Make the playlist there and play it in squeezecenter.
Not too big a cost given the choice to forgo the normal hardware
solution.


--
lanierb
------------------------------------------------------------------------
lanierb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5566
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Peter]

Pale Blue Ego wrote:
> The OP is unusual in that the WebUI is the ONLY way he can control the
> player (SBR). He's using the absolute cheapest Squeezebox solution
> possible, the $149 Receiver without a Controller.
>

That's probably the reason he's suffering so much.
> Yeah, it might be a leeetle bit unfair to expect it to perform as
> snappily as the $10k+ Sooloos system.
>

Not really. As you already said something like Moose (which is not a
very good program in many respects, like the horrible installation
'procedure') showas that a much snappier smart client can be made. If
this is what sets SC apart from the $10.000 competition, I'd say, go for
it. Perhaps the software version of the controller (Jive) will fill this
need, I haven't bothered compiling it to check it out...

> The performance is much quicker using the Controller or the SB3 + IR
> remote. The WebUI can be slow, depending on a lot of different
> factors, but since it isn't the standard way most people control the
> player, the issue is much less relevant for them.
>

Very true.

Regards,
Peter

[Mnyb]

More suggestions, try a different skin classic is faster.

A client server solution !

running the "server" SC AND the "Client" Firefox (don't use IE for SC,
no don't ;-) ) on the same machine slow things down.

Put a lightweight Linux distro (no graphic interface ) on any old PC,
run this as a headless server (or build an silent energy efficient
machine as many have done)you can do this on surprisingly old and
tattered slow hardware and still get a god system as it is only doing
one thing SC on a very ligthwiegth OS Linux without GUI.

Control Playback trough the WEB UI on any OTHER machine on your
network, preferred browser would be Firefox, you can have both browser
on your PC nothing would brake if you install that, and FF is aviable
on all platforms that SC can run on so that makes it the standard
solution.


--
Mnyb
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Peter]

Mnyb wrote:
> More suggestions, try a different skin classic is faster.
>
> A client server solution !
>
> running the "server" SC AND the "Client" Firefox (don't use IE for SC,
> no don't ;-) ) on the same machine slow things down.
>
> Put a lightweight Linux distro (no graphic interface ) on any old PC,
> run this as a headless server (or build an silent energy efficient
> machine as many have done)you can do this on surprisingly old and
> tattered slow hardware and still get a god system as it is only doing
> one thing SC on a very ligthwiegth OS Linux without GUI.
>
> Control Playback trough the WEB UI on any OTHER machine on your
> network, preferred browser would be Firefox, you can have both browser
> on your PC nothing would brake if you install that, and FF is aviable
> on all platforms that SC can run on so that makes it the standard
> solution.
>

I do all that (except I have a fast, noisy and energy inefficient server
with lots of RAM), but I still feel a more snappy and impressive client
would be a strong advantage.

Regards,
Peter

[Mnyb]

We probably bang at inherent limitations of an web UI, there was a tread
on how to tweak FF to make more connections ? or something
simultaneously, but this could be perceived as abusive by some
websites, i have to search that one ? and try to see what happens.


--
Mnyb
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Gizmologic]

Hi fellas,

I have recently aquired a Ready NAS NV+ with extra internal memory and
4 x 1TB discs. Transferred all the music to it and it is dead slow. I
am running transporter.
What bugs me much more is the navigation, when i enter into a music
folder, and chose an artist, and start playing the album, then the
silly SC does not stay in that folder, but goes out, and forces me to
choose music folder and making it load for ages. On my friends SB3 it
stays in the folder, and you can continue to browse and scroll the
artists in the specific folder, without the SC going out of the whole
enchillada.
Is this a matter of set up, or is it apparatus dependent?

Your suggestions and help is welcome.
I have at present 2750 albums that are in FLAC mostly. These are
divided in 4 folders.

Thanks for your help!

regards

Gizmo


--
Gizmologic
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gizmologic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19517
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Michael Herger]

> What bugs me much more is the navigation, when i enter into a music
> folder, and chose an artist, and start playing the album, then the
> silly SC does not stay in that folder, but goes out, and forces me to
> choose music folder and making it load for ages.

Choose the "Now Playing (jump on wake)" or similar screensaver. This behaviour is due to the default screensaver, which will jump out of where you left it. Subject to changes, due to some recent discussion of the confusing nature of this topic. But you can have the same behaviour as your friend by changing that preference already.

--

Michael

[Mark Lanctot]

Gizmologic;331676 Wrote:
> I have at present 2750 albums that are in FLAC mostly. These are divided
> in 4 folders.

Putting that many items into such a small number of folders is bound to
slow any system down.

You'd be much better organizing it as recommended:

http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Beginners_Guide_To_Organising

using something like Mp3tag:

http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Mp3tagGuide#Naming_Files_Based_On_Tags_and_Making_Directories_Based_On_Tags

which can reorganize your library in a minute or two.


--
Mark Lanctot

"Make it so it doesn't suck" is a good design target, but hard to
implement - Michael Herger
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Nonreality]

peter;331655 Wrote:
> Pale Blue Ego wrote:
> > The OP is unusual in that the WebUI is the ONLY way he can control
> the
> > player (SBR). He's using the absolute cheapest Squeezebox solution
> > possible, the $149 Receiver without a Controller.
> >
>
> That's probably the reason he's suffering so much.
> > Yeah, it might be a leeetle bit unfair to expect it to perform as
> > snappily as the $10k+ Sooloos system.
> >
>
> Not really. As you already said something like Moose (which is not a
> very good program in many respects, like the horrible installation
> 'procedure') showas that a much snappier smart client can be made. If
> this is what sets SC apart from the $10.000 competition, I'd say, go
> for
> it. Perhaps the software version of the controller (Jive) will fill
> this
> need, I haven't bothered compiling it to check it out...
>
> > The performance is much quicker using the Controller or the SB3 + IR
> > remote. The WebUI can be slow, depending on a lot of different
> > factors, but since it isn't the standard way most people control the
> > player, the issue is much less relevant for them.
> >
>
> Very true.
>
> Regards,
> Peter

Moose is not a good program and has horrible installation procedure????
Did I miss the joke? You put it in a folder of your choice and run it.
You are joking right?


--
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=51305

[Phil Leigh]

I have to agree - Moose is about as easy to install as it gets! -
literally one click to extract that zip file - and it's done.


--
Phil Leigh

You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...SB3+Stontronics PSU - Altmann
JISCO/UPCI - TACT RCS 2.2X with Good Vibrations S/W - MF X-DAC
V3/X-PSU/X-10 buffer (Audiocomm full mods)- Linn 5103 - Linn Aktiv 5.1
system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend
Supertweeters, Kimber & Chord cables
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Peter]

Phil Leigh wrote:
> I have to agree - Moose is about as easy to install as it gets! -
> literally one click to extract that zip file - and it's done.

Last time I tried (a while ago, I admit) I had to install a mysql
library first and jump thru hoops to get it to connect to the mysql
server IIRC (my SC/mysql server's on a different machine as it should
be). Shipping windows programs in zip files is of course horribly
primitive. Wrap the thing in Inno Setup (
http://www.jrsoftware.org/isinfo.php ) to save your users the trouble
and to do things the way they were intended on Windows (with a proper
uninstall option).

Regards,
Peter

[Nonreality]

peter;331927 Wrote:
> Phil Leigh wrote:
> > I have to agree - Moose is about as easy to install as it gets! -
> > literally one click to extract that zip file - and it's done.
>
> Last time I tried (a while ago, I admit) I had to install a mysql
> library first and jump thru hoops to get it to connect to the mysql
> server IIRC (my SC/mysql server's on a different machine as it should
> be). Shipping windows programs in zip files is of course horribly
> primitive. Wrap the thing in Inno Setup (
> http://www.jrsoftware.org/isinfo.php ) to save your users the trouble
> and to do things the way they were intended on Windows (with a proper
> uninstall option).
>
> Regards,
> Peter

Totally disagree. Moose is one file without an installer. It doesn't
do anyting that you don't see (adding things to your windows system
directory etc). It's like the old dos days. You want to get rid of it,
you just delete the folder that you put it in. Zip is primative?
Simple maybe and most anyone is familiar with it. I like programs that
don't add files everywhere and that you know what is what. Unless you
have trouble making a folder it's much simpler. Make a folder called
Moose. Unzip to that folder. Run moose.exe. Simple. It then makes
it's own database file in that folder to speed things up. The newest
version is very good. It's not perfect but just very good. I run it
on my laptop and my library is on an external hd connected to my
desktop. It has never been a problem. You probably need to try it
again. It has changed quite a bit from the first one I tried.


--
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=51305

[tamanaco]

peter;331927 Wrote:
> Phil Leigh wrote:
> > I have to agree - Moose is about as easy to install as it gets! -
> > literally one click to extract that zip file - and it's done.
>
> Last time I tried (a while ago, I admit) I had to install a mysql
> library first and jump thru hoops to get it to connect to the mysql
> server IIRC (my SC/mysql server's on a different machine as it should
> be). Shipping windows programs in zip files is of course horribly
> primitive. Wrap the thing in Inno Setup (
> http://www.jrsoftware.org/isinfo.php ) to save your users the trouble
> and to do things the way they were intended on Windows (with a proper
> uninstall option).
>
> Regards,
> Peter

With the recent versions of Moose the only "installation" difficulty
that an average user "might" find is to open the default port (9092) in
the firewall of remote server. The days of having to edit the my.tt
file in mysql folder are long gone. Moose does not modify or replace
any the configuration files in the host computer. It is as simple as it
can get. As I mentioned before, there is plenty of room for Moose
enhacements, but installation is not one of them. As far as I can tell,
Moose is a "one-man" show. If Moose was in the hands of a small
development "team", more enhancement could be added in a shorter period
of time.


--
tamanaco
------------------------------------------------------------------------
tamanaco's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4620
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Peter]

tamanaco wrote:
> peter;331927 Wrote:
>
>> Phil Leigh wrote:
>>
>>> I have to agree - Moose is about as easy to install as it gets! -
>>> literally one click to extract that zip file - and it's done.
>>>
>> Last time I tried (a while ago, I admit) I had to install a mysql
>> library first and jump thru hoops to get it to connect to the mysql
>> server IIRC (my SC/mysql server's on a different machine as it should
>> be). Shipping windows programs in zip files is of course horribly
>> primitive. Wrap the thing in Inno Setup (
>> http://www.jrsoftware.org/isinfo.php ) to save your users the trouble
>> and to do things the way they were intended on Windows (with a proper
>> uninstall option).
>>
>>
> With the recent versions of Moose the only "installation" difficulty
> that an average user "might" find is to open the default port (9092) in
> the firewall of remote server. The days of having to edit the my.tt
> file in mysql folder are long gone. Moose does not modify or replace
> any the configuration files in the host computer. It is as simple as it
> can get. As I mentioned before, there is plenty of room for Moose
> enhacements, but installation is not one of them. As far as I can tell,
> Moose is a "one-man" show. If Moose was in the hands of a small
> development "team", more enhancement could be added in a shorter period
> of time.
>

I'll try it again some time and see if I like it this time. Fully agree
with the one man show bit, that's why I think it would be good if there
was an 'official alternative'. (and I still think it should self-install
like any decent app, even putty - once the ultimate one-file-app - has
self installers these days and I use them).

Regards,
Peter

[tamanaco]

peter;332014 Wrote:
> I'll try it again some time and see if I like it this time. Fully agree
> with the one man show bit, that's why I think it would be good if there
> was an 'official alternative'. (and I still think it should self-install
> like any decent app, even putty - once the ultimate one-file-app - has
> self installers these days and I use them).
>
> Regards,
> Peter

I agree that a self installer should be in order, but at this stage of
the game, I rather have that "one" developer fix bugs, add more
features and enhance the client UI. The installer could/should be added
later in the "beta" development cycle.

Cheers


--
tamanaco
------------------------------------------------------------------------
tamanaco's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4620
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Rubble]

Like post #1 in this thread, I'm also a new Squeezebox owner and find
the Squeezecenter web interface frustratingly slow.

The interface via the Squeezebox itself is so fast I'm in awe to those
who created it every time I hold the remote! I am amazed how well it
works, even when the Squeezecenter host PC is loaded with other tasks.

I like exploring my music collection - very rarely do I set-up a
playlist and let it run without the first or second song re-igniting
some memory within - causing me to play a random album/song I'd
forgotten about.

As an analogy, Streetmap/Mapquest etc (server-side html) are good when
you know EXACTLY where you want to go. Google Maps (client-side/AJAX)
tempts you to explore - you find where you want to go, but then you
feel compelled to have a look around, switch to the aerial view, look
at the photo of your house from 1995! It's much more fun. Honestly -
who's looked where they live/work/been on holiday/... on Streetmap???

So... Is it possible to run a client-side/AJAX Squeezecenter web
interface that draws you in?!?!? Or have I missed the point?


--
Rubble
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rubble's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17726
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Michaelwagner]

I think the problem with the client side software is the ajax/java
stuff. I'm guessing some web browsers don't implement it very
efficiently.

I commented on the same thing in the beta period. I'm told IE is the
worst, and some other browsers handle things better.

To compare and contrast, switch for a bit to the "classic" skin. It's
plain and ordinary, but fast. So it's not likely the server side that's
slowing things down, meaning it's probably the client side. It's an
imcomplete answer, to be sure, because the ajax/java stuff in the
default skin could be asking so much that it's overloading the server,
but it's a comparison point.


--
Michaelwagner
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michaelwagner's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=428
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[amcluesent]

>Is it possible to run a client-side/AJAX Squeezecenter web interface
that draws you in?<

Peeps are using Google Chrome for SqueezeCenter, set-up as an
application from Chrome. Very, very fast javascript engine.

Usual caveats that Google will steal your mojo etc.


--
amcluesent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
amcluesent's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10286
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[DanielTheGreat]

I'm fully behind Jooseppi, as indicated in my post some months ago:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=44457

My 3GHz Win2k PC is no slouch, and runs all other applications at the
speed I expect. Maybe the comparison with Sooloos (whatever that is)
is unfair, but what about my previous comparison with Spider Player,
which is free?

In Spider, I can open the same 17,000 track (.m3u) playlist that I feed
to SqueezeCenter, and ask Spider to shuffle it, and in less than 1
second the list is shuffled and I can start playing immediately. But
ask SC to shuffle a new list (of this size) it hasn't previously
shuffled, and it takes 1 or 2 MINUTES on my system. There are many
other examples of SC's slowness, not least the the 50 minutes it takes
to 'scan' my library, a task it shouldn't need to do since I create my
own playlists (in a matter of seconds).

I agree that the interpreted and web-based nature of SC are probably
what kill it, and would like one day to write a 'dedicated' PC
application (in C) that does the few things I want, and fast (like
Spider Player, with which, incidentally, I have no connection - just a
satisfied user).

To this end, Mark, can you point me to the protocol for communicating
with the players, which you say is open and documented.

Daniel


--
DanielTheGreat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DanielTheGreat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13031
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Pale Blue Ego]

DanielTheGreat;331677 Wrote:
> In Spider, I can open the same 17,000 track (.m3u) playlist that I feed
> to SqueezeCenter

Why not just use the Random Song feature? It's a LOT quicker than
loading a huge playlist.


--
Pale Blue Ego
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pale Blue Ego's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=110
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[maggior]

DanielTheGreat;331677 Wrote:
> There are many other examples of SC's slowness, not least the the 50
> minutes it takes to 'scan' my library, a task it shouldn't need to do
> since I create my own playlists (in a matter of seconds).
> Daniel

With a machine like you have, I don't know why it would run that slow.
I have a P4 from 2005 (1.2 GHz? I forget exactly) with 1GB RAM running
SuSE. I have 20,498 songs in my library and my last scan took 25 min.


Perhaps it is because you are using Vista and you use your machine for
other tasks aside from acting as a server.


--
maggior

Rich
---------
Setup: 2 SB3s, 1 duet. SuSE 10.2 Server running SqueezeCenter 7.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
maggior's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9080
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[pablolie]

i have run SC on a variety of machines.

the thing is - that in itself attests to the power of the concept, and
i am surprised this thread doesn't highlight it more. sure, someone
claims they find SC sluggish, for whatever reasons, and that some
specialized $10k box is more responsive. like others said - buy it...
and feel really bad when it goes through the typical obsolescence cycle
of computer-based systems.

the squeezecenter approach allows you to ride all hardware waves
powered by Moore's law. *that* is why i think the approach is unique
and hands-down superior to others - it supports a strategic variety of
target systems and operating systems, and gives you a future proof
approach. come on. combine that with the audiphile merits, and you have
an utter and total *bargain*. really.

sure, the interface isn't always the snappiest, for whatever reasons. i
run it on good hardware, and on most occasions i find it more than
responsive enough (Duet excepted, unfortunately, as far as my personal
experience goes), in fact i find the performance awesome considering
the commitment to universal flexibility built into the design
philosophy.

this approach allows you to take advantage of performance and power
efficiency improvements of each successive hardware wave - good luck
accomplishing that with proprietary systems...

i am not a logitech employee, nor have i ever had a stake in slim
devices. i have just been a user, and on occasion accused of being
overly negative on these forums.

*i* find the system a lot of fun. it has allowed me to totally access
my music collection. intuitiveness is good enough, it is at iPod level
at least, and has features the iPod world hasn't. as to performance,
heck, ymmv and so on, i find the SB3 and SC7.1 based system great both
on vista64 and ubuntu based SC-servers. not a fan of the Duet
experience yet.


--
pablolie
------------------------------------------------------------------------
pablolie's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3816
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Mark Lanctot]

DanielTheGreat;331677 Wrote:
> To this end, Mark, can you point me to the protocol for communicating
> with the players, which you say is open and documented.

See http://[SqueezeCenter IP]:9000/html/docs/help.html then Technical
Information.


--
Mark Lanctot

"Make it so it doesn't suck" is a good design target, but hard to
implement - Michael Herger
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[bobkoure]

from 'Moose setup' (http://www.rusticrhino.com/drlovegrove/setup.html)
>
> Moo file - This is used by the library window. Rather than rely on
> Slimserver's database, Moose maintains its own small super-fast
> database of music file information. The database is stored in the
> specified '.moo' file.
>
This -sounds- like SQLite, but it might be something bespoke - and I'm
wondering if this approach might benefit the server itself (in the
sense of a super fast pre-built index-index).

I've also been wondering about the best way to at least give the
-appearance- of being fast. For instance, (many) years ago I wrote
editors, which had to run on slow hardware. How not to drive your users
crazy? One partial answer: cache the pages that they can get to with one
key-press (top, bottom, pgup, pgdn) so at least they're not waiting for
the most common thing.
Yes, this uses up memory, but you let the user choose the amount of
memory and then cache the most-probable pages that will fit. Building
cached pages happens when idling, and then it's just a matter of adding
the very simple "page cached? use that - else do make it now".
A lot of this stuff seems to be forgotten now that we're running
machines that make Z80 and 8088 based systems look less than pitiful...


--
bobkoure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
bobkoure's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14646
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Michaelwagner]

bobkoure;332614 Wrote:
> A lot of this stuff seems to be forgotten now that we're running
> machines that make Z80 and 8088 based systems look less than pitiful...
Thank god I'm not the only older person on the forum today. I remember
Z80s like they were only yesterday. Somewhere in a box I think I still
have one ....

In any case, back on topic, I'd like to reinforce the suggestion
someone else made further back. Switch to the classic skin from the
default one. On my machine, no slouch (1.8GHz, 1GB RAM, W2K, IE6), it
made all the difference in the world. I was told something about IE6
and the default skin don't play well together.


--
Michaelwagner
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michaelwagner's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=428
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[DanielTheGreat]

Mark Lanctot;332575 Wrote:
> See http://[SqueezeCenter IP]:9000/html/docs/help.html then Technical
> Information.

Thanks Mark; found it.
Daniel


--
DanielTheGreat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DanielTheGreat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13031
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[kesey]

Jooseppi;331499 Wrote:
>
> I can understand this argument only to some degree. Mostly I don't. Why
> should we see things so categorically? As if there were no options or
> alternatives.

Jooseppi, you have been more than kindly received on this forum. Enough
is enough. Have you nothing to offer but whinges? Telling us all ad
infinitum that we should shoot for the stars might amuse you, but it is
bugger all use - unless perhaps as a trolling device. If your
contributions were the latter, then I trust you enjoyed yourself.


--
kesey
------------------------------------------------------------------------
kesey's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10786
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[tamanaco]

After looking at the Sooloos system I can help, but think of Moose with
an "enhanced" Touch-Screen interface. From what I can see in the video,
Moose appears to have "similar" performance. In addition to supporting a
touch screen, some enhancements to the Cover Chooser to accommodate big
fat fingers is all it needs. Maybe SD/Logitech should "consider"
acquiring Moose as an "alternate" UI. The Web UI (The so called
Universal Client) can still use some performance improvements, but I
have always been somewhat skeptical about using it as the main
"Player". When listening to music... Play, Stop, Skip and
"Select-the-track-album-or-playlist-you-want-to-play is all you really
need. Allowing anyone else access to the Web UI and its power to
reconfigure the whole system is a bit daunting. All the settings and
the distinct configurations that you can get are great, but I would not
let my wife near it. She mostly uses the SB3 remote and I think I caught
her a few times using Moose from my laptop.

Maybe this does not belong here... but before I kill my 13 year old
nephew, I think some of the configuration options that are selectable
via the remote should be pw protected. Whenever I get visitors I have
to remove the Settings Menu from my SB3 via the Web UI for fear that
guests (specially my nephew) will start the "Rescan Music Library"
during family gatherings. He's done that twice already. I forgot to
remove the Settings Menu the last time the little rat got a hold of the
remote. I had to explain "again" to the not-so-technically-inclined
members of my family why digitizing my CDs was a good thing. I still
can hear them asking me&#8230; so what happened to the music? Why does
it take so long to rescan? (Note: I use MusicIP) I see you have a CD
player, is that working? Why not play a CD? All of them with a stupid
grin on their faces&#8230; and my little fffker nephew giggling
uncontrollably in a fetal position in the sofa. Get the picture?


--
tamanaco
------------------------------------------------------------------------
tamanaco's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4620
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Siduhe]

tamanaco;331535 Wrote:
> Maybe this does not belong here... but before I kill my 13 year old
> nephew, I think some of the configuration options that are selectable
> via the remote should be pw protected. Whenever I get visitors I have
> to remove the Settings Menu from my SB3 via the Web UI for fear that
> guests (specially my nephew) will start the "Rescan Music Library"
> during family gatherings.

Does the NoSetup plugin protect the Settings in the Controller as well
if enabled or only via the web interface? I assume it only disables
the web interface, but may be worth looking into.

And spot on with the discussion of Moose - I mentioned a few posts back
as a suggestion, but the OP hasn't responded yet.


--
Siduhe

Who am I on 'LAST.FM' (http://www.last.fm/user/siduhe)?
"-Siduhe Loved Tracks radio got the thumbs up. Feedback included: yeah,
it's good... got the odd dodgy track tho...-" (c) 'ModelCitizen'
(http://www.last.fm/user/Modelcitizen)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Siduhe's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=723
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Nonreality]

tamanaco;331535 Wrote:
> After looking at the Sooloos system I can help, but think of Moose with
> an "enhanced" Touch-Screen interface. From what I can see in the video,
> Moose appears to have "similar" performance. In addition to supporting a
> touch screen, some enhancements to the Cover Chooser to accommodate big
> fat fingers is all it needs. Maybe SD/Logitech should "consider"
> acquiring Moose as an "alternate" UI. The Web UI (The so called
> Universal Client) can still use some performance improvements, but I
> have always been somewhat skeptical about using it as the main
> "Player". When listening to music... Play, Stop, Skip and
> "Select-the-track-album-or-playlist-you-want-to-play is all you really
> need. Allowing anyone else access to the Web UI and its power to
> reconfigure the whole system is a bit daunting. All the settings and
> the distinct configurations that you can get are great, but I would not
> let my wife near it. She mostly uses the SB3 remote and I think I caught
> her a few times using Moose from my laptop.
>
> Maybe this does not belong here... but before I kill my 13 year old
> nephew, I think some of the configuration options that are selectable
> via the remote should be pw protected. Whenever I get visitors I have
> to remove the Settings Menu from my SB3 via the Web UI for fear that
> guests (specially my nephew) will start the "Rescan Music Library"
> during family gatherings. He's done that twice already. I forgot to
> remove the Settings Menu the last time the little rat got a hold of the
> remote. I had to explain "again" to the not-so-technically-inclined
> members of my family why digitizing my CDs was a good thing. I still
> can hear them asking me… so what happened to the music? Why does it
> take so long to rescan? (Note: I use MusicIP) I see you have a CD
> player, is that working? Why not play a CD? All of them with a stupid
> grin on their faces… and my little fffker nephew giggling
> uncontrollably in a fetal position in the sofa. Get the picture?

Maybe a little duct tape is in order. :) For the nephew, not the
remote.


--
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=51305

[Jooseppi]

Hi,

And thank you everyone. As it says in the first post, my goal was to
gather information on how to make SC snappier.

Many suggestions on how to make things snappier have been raised:
- Install Moose (it's a great idea to develop it into touch controlled
UI!)
- Use a certain OS
- Use remote control (however this way playlist managing and music
mixing is too tough a task)
- Clean up OS from unnecessary services and applications
- Not yet verified, but I strongly believe that on a fast SSD things
will speed up. Maybe one day I'll buy one.
- Switch to other solutions (foobar, winamp, itunes), of which foobar
seems the best for it's openness and potential for customization.

Pale Blue Ego, it's not logical to separate 149USD SBR and 10+kUSD
Sooloos just like that. Because, what can you do with a SBR? Nothing.
You have to attach a computer, display device and a storage device.
Those cost a lot of dough, especially if you enclose them in those
fancy cases like Sooloos'. Only then you have the form and
functionality somewhat comparable to the Sooloos. One shouldn't get
overwhelmed by a price tag, that should be common sense in the modern
era of branding and marketing. You get what you pay for (like social
status or expensive ads :).


--
Jooseppi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jooseppi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18815
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[sebp]

Jooseppi;331585 Wrote:
> it's not logical to separate 149USD SBR and 10+kUSD Sooloos just like
> that.
If it wasn't, you'd just have bought this 10k+USD toy instead. Dot.

FWIW, I'm running SC7 on top of a NAS whose horsepower wouldn't even
compare to a Pentium machine.
The web UI is too slow to be really usable/enjoyable for browsing my
10k tracks musical collection, but I just don't care since I'm using
Squeezeboxen _official_ human-machine interfaces : IR-based SB remotes
and SB Controller. And they are all snappy enough to my taste, thanks.

Buy yourself a SB Controller (USD300), a dedicated box for running SC
onto (say a USD300 EeePc), and you'll get a <1kUSD system your can
fairly compare to a 10k+USD one.


--
sebp

System : Mac Mini for ripping to FLAC (Max) > SqueezeCenter 7.0.1
running on a ReadyNAS NV+
Living room : Squeezebox 3 > Trends Audio TA10.1 > Celestion F10
Bedroom : Squeezebox 3 > Beresford DAC > NAD C315BEE > KEF iQ3
Kitchen : SB Receiver > Logitech SoundMan X1
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/sebp)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
sebp's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11768
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Mark Lanctot]

Jooseppi;331235 Wrote:
> Have any of you experimented with SSDs? You can DIY a very fast small
> SSD reletively cheap. Just get an ultra fast CF card (around 45MB/s,
> UDMA) and put in a PATA adapter and hoot up to computer. Those things
> are fast. The adapters cost under 10 dollars and 4GB cards some tens of
> dollars. The seek times on flash drives are mind blowingly little. Maybe
> flash could be a way to increase the so called snap factor?

Unfortunately the slowness you're seeing is not due to disk I/O. As I
indicated I have a slower server which accessed the music collection
over my network. Sure rescan times were longer (7 minutes versus 3
minutes locally) but SC operation was almost as fast. I'm comparing a
1.2 GHz AMD Duron with 512 MB of single-channel PC-2100 RAM versus a
2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo E6600 with 2 GB of double-channel PC2-4200 RAM.
That's a huge difference but SC operation was largely unaffected.
However both were running Ubuntu Linux.

It's probably more related to how the OS interacts with perl and MySQL,
which in my uneducated opinion is probably mostly due to the OS itself
and a little bit on memory I/O.


--
Mark Lanctot
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[damager]

Jooseppi;331235 Wrote:
> And, if Sooloos can do it, SD should get close to it.

Just a couple of comments on this statement. First, if you want
EXACTLY what Sooloos is offering, then you should buy it. What? You
don't want to spend that much? Then you shouldn't expect other
products to have the same experience. It's really not a fair
comparison to demand the performance of an open, reasonably priced
product to be just like the performance of a closed, tightly controlled
and outrageously priced product.

Second, the times I reported earlier are for accessing my collection on
a SB Controller. Through the web interface, it's significantly faster.


--
damager
------------------------------------------------------------------------
damager's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15940
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Goodsounds]

I am AMAZED at how magnanimous the postings have been to what were
essentially a set of whingey comments that probably didn't deserve any
response.


--
Goodsounds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goodsounds's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14201
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[mudlark]

My linux system works a treat.

I must admit i find it very sad that there isn't anyone around who
seems to be doing a "dedicated" squeezeserver. The price of computer
parts these days, you could put together a fantastic system for £300.


--
mudlark

SB3>CyrusDACX>PreXvs>ESP-P09B>NAP140+260A>Rhapsody, Avondale and Naim
cable, Kubuntu Hardy Heron server, linkstation for storage.
SB3 Flycatcher 3A linear power supply.
Using SqueezeCentre 7.3 unstable
------------------------------------------------------------------------
mudlark's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7151
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Mnyb]

mudlark;331312 Wrote:
> My linux system works a treat.
>
> I must admit i find it very sad that there isn't anyone around who
> seems to be doing a "dedicated" squeezeserver. The price of computer
> parts these days, you could put together a fantastic system for £300.

You must have missed the ripserver, see tread in 3rd party hardware.
It also rips the CD's and tags them, thats their "special sauce", it's
a nice package, could of course be bettered by some diy efforts(you
have to put in some time and dedication for it thou). But it is
actually a prepacked fanless linux server made for SC.
I also see that some retails are selling nas'es with preinstalled SC.


--
Mnyb
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Jooseppi]

Goodsounds;331297 Wrote:
> I am AMAZED at how magnanimous the postings have been to what were
> essentially a set of whingey comments that probably didn't deserve any
> response.

Well, there will always be evil-spirited and maligned people like you,
so I will stand your non-contribution.

But to answer your amazement, it seems you never think of the option
you might be wrong (well what do you know!). As you can see, several
people agreed to the said frustration. That is some indication, even if
your fanaticism won't allow it.


--
Jooseppi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jooseppi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18815
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Peter]

Jooseppi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'll answer some unanswered questions.
>
> I don't have the Controller at all. I bought only the Receiver and set
> it up with net-UDAP. I'm on XP SP3 and a well resourced computer (X2
> 5000+, 2GB 800, 7200rpm).
>
> I can later on, when I have more time, take some measurements of the
> exact times it takes for certain tasks. However, I dont see so much
> relevance in exact numbers of seconds. To me, if it takes more than two
> seconds, it's too much. Am I being unreasonable? I dont think so. So far
> I've ripped to FLAC about 500 albums, so the database isn't huge. And,
> if Sooloos can do it, SD should get close to it.
>
> Have any of you experimented with SSDs? You can DIY a very fast small
> SSD reletively cheap. Just get an ultra fast CF card (around 45MB/s,
> UDMA) and put in a PATA adapter and hoot up to computer. Those things
> are fast. The adapters cost under 10 dollars and 4GB cards some tens of
> dollars. The seek times on flash drives are mind blowingly little. Maybe
> flash could be a way to increase the so called snap factor?
>
> Have any of you found comprehensive data on Sooloos' specifications? It
> would be interesting to learn more about it's technicalities. Maybe SD
> could learn something from it even though it is as a whole a different
> approach (closed).
>

The difference is probably in the architecture. SC is a client server
system. Don't forget that both the client (web) and server can run on a
wide range of systems. But a web interface is just not that responsive.

I've often thought (and even said) that SD would do well in creating a
smart client in something like Java, that would give users the
flashyness and snappyness that people have come to expect of software.
The web-interface is great IMHO, but something quick and pretty would
please a lot of users.

Regards,
Peter

[Nonreality]

Jooseppi;331176 Wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> And first of all thank you for the many replies and understanding
> attitude. Many times if you post something with a negative undertone
> ("I'm not satisfied") to a dedicated forum, you most often end up with
> emotional defensive attacks from them so called fanboys.
>
> Anyway. What I've gathered so far, the lack of that last bit of
> snappiness and lightning fast speed is a result of several factors.
> Maybe these are some of them?
> - Software side is an open system that has to work in conjunction with
> who knows how many applications (AV, FW and so forth) and who knows how
> badly maintained OS's
> - SC software may not be finetuned enough. Some reference to this might
> be in the way SC uses memory, which is a lot IMHO. I wouldnt mind the
> memory hogging if it resulted in super snappy operation. I can
> understand that money dominates business and that modern cheap ram is a
> far more economical solution than hiring developers. But isnt there a
> line to be drawn somewhere? To be honest, SC is only a simplified
> server and an audio streamer. Following this cheap ram stick ideology,
> the developers have only some responsibility over software, the rest is
> laid upon users.
> - The software is web browser based. Why was that decision taken in the
> past? I can see it is a globally compatible solution and it helps with
> networking but is browser-based really the best way to do it?
>
> Please bare in mind that I do not have deep knowledge over SC or
> coding. I may well have wrong ideas on some matters.
>
> What I'm still trying to comprehend is how it can take so long (some
> seconds is too much) to display a pre-indexed list of a given number of
> albums? Let's say I have 1000 albums. All the crucial metadata has been
> indexed during the music library scanning process, right? So now, as I
> select to display for example all rock albums, which there are 100 for
> example, how can it take some seconds for them to appear on the
> display? It would be understandable if the information was gathered
> from the actual library directories but no, all the library metadata is
> indexed (right?).
>
> pimd's example of a 300-song album is great. Half a minute to display
> 300 songs! I think that is much too much.
>
> Nonreality, you said "This is on the web interface. The SB3 interface
> is very fast". With the latter, are you referring to softsqueeze
> interface or hardware interface à la remote control?
>
> Did any of you watch the youtube clip of Sooloos? Isn't that UI just
> mind blowing? Aesthetic, ultra snappy, intuitive.. truly a Human
> Interface Device.

The hardware interface with the remote is very fast for me.


--
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=51305

[ds2021]

With a moderate sized collection of 13,000 tracks, in about 1000 albums,
I find performance very snappy. Perhaps it is my reference point:
Instead of imagining a comparison of placing one cd in a player and
pressing play (by which standard I would still say the interface on my
hardware with my network is very fast - even for large albums), I
consider the task of digging through 1000 CDs to find the one that I
want, pulling the CD out, getting up, putting it in the player (do I
need to remove the existing CD and put it back in its place first?),
and pressing play. With this as the reference point, the SC7 interface
is lightning fast.


--
ds2021

All your bass are belong to us.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ds2021's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10078
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Kaizen28]

Hi

I really need to comment here as I'm not always a fan of SC but the
comparison to Sooloos is unfair. There are too many unknowns in that
demo. A head-to-head comparison via browser interfaces running on the
same hardware across the same network would have been more relevant.

While the big screen is cool, you're not going to strap it to your belt
and walk around the house with it. Also, while you may think it looks
good, WAF (wife acceptance factor) is really low if it's in public etc.
etc.

The comment made about the performance of a closed system versus an
open one is also very accurate. I work with applications the run on
Windows and are accessed via a web interface. Even with the most brutal
hardware the performance of the interface is unlikely to meet your
"snappy" requirement.

It really depends on what you want the system to do. The fast, open and
subtle operation of SC wins for me.


--
Kaizen28
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaizen28's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5953
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[CatBus]

I agree that a web browser-based interface is inherently problematic, so
I just use the remote interface, which is much more appealing to me (I
want to listen to music, not use a computer!). I have never run into
any problems with responsiveness.


--
CatBus
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CatBus's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7461
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[ncarver]

Like some have said, if someone wants what the Sooloos provides, then
they should buy it (if they can afford it). I don't have any place to
put that giant control unit where I want to listen to music, but maybe
you do!

I personally prefer the more generic, open, and flexible approach that
SlimDevices takes. I can walk up to any computer in the house and
control any player in the house (or walk around the house with the Duet
controller). The fact that is takes 2 secs to get a list of albums
instead of 1 sec doesn't strike me as a big deal, since I am listening
to music mostly instead of searching and making playlists (and no
operation ever takes more than 2-3 secs from either controller or web
interface, and this is using an oldy P4 as the server). Furthermore,
it works with any OS in the house, as for me, a system that doesn't
work with Linux is totally useless (I am a CS prof and won't use
Windows).

What would be interesting would be a video of someone controlling the
Sooloos via their web interface, called ControlPC. Think that will
really be any faster than SC via a web interface?? I downloaded the
manual for it and found the following:
Control:PC requires a PC running Windows XP or Vista or an Apple
MacIntosh computer with an Intel processor running the Parallels
Desktop or VMWare Fusion. [So completely and utterly useless for me!]
...
Run the setup program, then launch Control:PC. It will search for the
Sooloos system and load after finding it. If Control:PC fails to load,
the most likely reason is a network problem, since the program must
communicate intensively with the Sooloos system in order to function.
Try shutting down everything on the network and rebooting the router.
Restart the Sooloos system and your computer, then launch Control:PC
again. If the problem persists and your computer talks to the router
via WiFi, try making an Ethernet connection instead, since wired
connections are more reliable. If you have an old router, or one
supplied by your internet service provider, replacing it with a new one
may also help.

Sure sounds foolproof, doesn't it? :)


--
ncarver
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ncarver's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15905
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[pimd]

pimd;331127 Wrote:
> I agree that the system can be very slow sometimes. To a point where it
> is annoying.
> I have an album containing about 300 songs (top40 1966). It takes
> almost half a minute to display the songs of that album on my SC. The
> same when i browse the files using Folder display.
> For normal albums with 10-20 tracks the speed is usually ok.
> 300 songs may not be a problem for a database like MySQL so I believe
> that the software is not completely finetuned. At the moment i have 97
> albums and about 1500 songs in my collection.

I have to add that in my case only the Controller is slow. When i use
the webinterface this album displays fast enough. Even on my simple
mobile phone it is quite fast so i don't beleive the problem is on the
server-side or with my network.
The Controller still takes ages. I tested this album again this morning
and again it took about 30 seconds.


--
pimd
------------------------------------------------------------------------
pimd's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19488
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Michael Herger]

> I have to add that in my case only the Controller is slow. When i use

what hardware are you running your SC on? This is a known issue with slower hardware (can literally take minutes on really slow hardware and largish collections):

http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=9069

> the webinterface this album displays fast enough. Even on my simple
> mobile phone it is quite fast so i don't beleive the problem is on the
> server-side or with my network.

It is: when displaying the web UI or (even faster!) the SB3's player UI only a few (or one on the player) item is analyzed at a time. On Controller it's all the items in your folder at a time. In my case the Controller might be around 400x slower to show the first item than the player UI, because I have around 400 folders at the top level.

--

Michael

[pimd]

Thanks, this explains a lot, although i still not quite understand it. I
now understand why Browse Music Folder is slow on the controller, but it
is also slow when i browse the other items like Albums.
Is the UI of the controller different from a Web UI? i always thought
of the Controller as a small linux computer with some sort of
webinterface to the server.

My hardware is indeed quite old /slow. It's a Pentium II 733mhx / 256
MB.


--
pimd
------------------------------------------------------------------------
pimd's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19488
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305

[Michael Herger]

> Thanks, this explains a lot, although i still not quite understand it. I
> now understand why Browse Music Folder is slow on the controller, but it
> is also slow when i browse the other items like Albums.

That's not normal (thus a different issue).

> Is the UI of the controller different from a Web UI? i always thought

Of course it does. And it should be faster than the web UI, as SC doesn't have to prepare the bulky web page.

> of the Controller as a small linux computer with some sort of
> webinterface to the server.

It's not a web interface running on the controller. It's using a much more efficient protocol to talk to the server.

> My hardware is indeed quite old /slow. It's a Pentium II 733mhx / 256

No race horse. I guess it might be a bit short on memory, too. Mine's not that much faster (Via C3/1GHz, 1GB RAM), but using the controller is very snappy.

--

Michael

[happynow]

Popular softwares for your ipod,iphone,zune,psp,Apple tv:
Share : how to rip DVD and convert Video to iPod at
http://www.oursdownload.com/convert-DVD-video-to-iPod-video.html
Share : how to rip DVD and convert Video to iphone at
http://www.oursdownload.com/dvd-to-iphone.html
Share : how to rip DVD and convert Video to Zune at
http://www.oursdownload.com/Zune-Video-Converter,dvd-to-Zune,dvd-to-Zune-converter,Zune-converter.html
Share : how to convert dvd and video to PSP at
http://www.oursdownload.com/PSP-Video-Converter,dvd-to-PSP,dvd-to-PSP-converter,PSP-converter.html
Only one software to convert DVD and video to iPhone,iPod,Zune,PSP at
http://www.oursdownload.com/dvd-video-converter.html
Share : how to convert dvd and video to Apple TV at
http://www.oursdownload.com/dvd-to-apple-tv.html


--
happynow
------------------------------------------------------------------------
happynow's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=19136
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51305