RE: Re: Logitechs Squeezebox Duet to Crash the Sonos Party?

["Richard" <rich_lists@xxxxxxxxxx>]

They wont divulge how their network is secured. That's a major issue
to me.



I already have spent money and time to deploy wifi around the house, I can
see no reason sonos cannot offer the option of their remote connecting to
that rather then their mesh which I have no need for. I would be
centralizing the players so there is no way that the signal would reach out
of the rack to where the control was needed.



I haven't had any wifi dropout issues to speak of since I made some effort
to get decent coverage in the house with multiple accesspoints, and the
idea
of chucking another wireless network inthere somehow squeezing itself
between all the channels that are used is something that troubles me.
Sometimes I have lag on the laptop when moving between accesspoints, but
that's a non issue for the players since they are fixed in position.



Its not too long ago they didn't even have a standalone meshing Ethernet
bridge option.



I agree that a list on a 2 line display is not idea, But I tend to set
playlists up on a PC and then play those so its not an issue. I will stick
with my current setup of a PC with multiple soundcards for now I think.





From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
mwgardner2000
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 12:12 PM
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: [ukha_d] Re: Logitechs Squeezebox Duet to Crash the Sonos Party?



Hmmm - sounds like you don't Sonos Richard!

I have to speak up in its defence, and take the the opposite
corner :-)

> and since it uses proper wifi not some proprietary hack-job mesh

In my experience the Sonosnet mesh wireless network is far far more
stable and reliable than any wi-fi solution I have ever used (home,
office, commercial). Maybe thats because I have 5 ZPs around the
house, albeit in 3 locations. I have never had a Sonosnet failure. I
have WiFi drop outs at home at least daily - I've tried everything to
reduce them!

> could use the remote house wide without buying overpriced
accesspoints

Expensive - yes. But IMHO a realistic price (especially if you, err,
buy them in the US) for a product that 'just works'. Not exactly
something that can be said about Squeezeboxes (unless they have come
a very long way since the Logitech takeover...)

> that only serve one purpose like with sonos.

Not true - each ZP has a built in ethernet switch into which any
ethernet device can be plugged. This allows reliable extension of a
wired ethernet without the wires.... You could even plug in a 802.11
AP... (Yes, I know there are speed issues....)

> Bit light on info tho. The big shortcoming with squeezebox has
always being
> its dependence on a single machine running its server software, so
playing
> off a NAS was a no-no.

How about the synchonisation? Sonos sync is rock solid. Squeeze sync
starts off ok....

> Also nothing about a track limit or codec support - those are 2
things that
> sonos is weak on again, so if this does flac and the newer wma's,
and

Sonos does flac. It doesn't do lossless WMA, which is often (for some
reason!) requested.

> doesn't freak out at over 50000 tracks it also could be a winner.
>

Hmmm - 50k... yes thats a challenge, but I have approx 90k tracks ALL
available to my Sonos. Where theres a will theres a way ;-) The
thought of scrolling through a two or line Squeezebox display with
more than 50k tracks blows my mind!

Back on topic though the new Logitech Squeezebox remote looks nice -
Sonos are already aware of this as it has been discussed on the Sonos
forum for months. And yes, there are Sonos users, including me, that
would like to see some development in the controller...

Disclaimer - no connections; just a very happy Sonos owner....

--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx <mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>
, "Richard"
<rich_lists@...> wrote:
>
> Looks like the wheel is better placed so it can be used one handed
then a
> certain popular mp3 player. Looks to be a winner if the UI is
snappy fast
> and since it uses proper wifi not some proprietary hack-job mesh
then I
> could use the remote house wide without buying overpriced
accesspoints that
> only serve one purpose like with sonos.
>
>
>
> Bit light on info tho. The big shortcoming with squeezebox has
always being
> its dependence on a single machine running its server software, so
playing
> off a NAS was a no-no. The article says that it lets you do it when
your
> computer is off, so who knows, have they abandoned that flawed
model of
> operation?
>
>
> Also nothing about a track limit or codec support - those are 2
things that
> sonos is weak on again, so if this does flac and the newer wma's,
and
> doesn't freak out at over 50000 tracks it also could be a winner.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx <mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx
<mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>
] On
Behalf Of
> Mark McCall
> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 3:44 AM
> To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx <mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [ukha_d] Logitechs Squeezebox Duet to Crash the Sonos
Party?
>
>
>
> The second release from Logitech today, and one that may not having
Sonos
> celebrating. The Logitech Squeezebox Duet provides a colour wireless
> controller witha 2.4-inch full-color LCD screen and a scroll wheel.
The
> wireless receiver uses 802.11g and multiple receivers round the
house can
> be controlled by one Controller...
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3xraed
>
> M.
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]