On Tue, 27 May 2008 09:06:04 -0400, "Bill Kearney"
<wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>(pretty useless gadgets if you ask me)
>>>
>>>Why is your thinking a internet radio is a pretty useless gadget?
>>
>> I'm wondering the same thing also. I have a Dell SX260 computah
>> configured mostly for streaming audio and video from the internet.
>I'm not saying streamed audio is the problem, just that most of the
>single-purpose "internet radio" gadgets end up having so many limitations as
>to make them useless compared to using an actual PC.
Yeah, that is a problem. That's why I went with an overkill PC
instead of an "appliance". I had some experience with streaming A/V
in a friends car using both some appliance (I forgot the name) and a
PC. There wasn't that much "typing" of URL's on the remote control.
It came with a pre-loaded set of internet radio stations sorted by
genre that could be edited or updated. It could also scrape
Shoutcast. Not too horrible but also rather limited. There was a
rather long list of things it would NOT do, such as handle more than
one external input.
The PC was much better, especially with a touch screen. My friends
car setup was much the same as what I previously described except that
we added Wi-Fi for downloading and synchronizing media with my home or
office PC and a GPS mapping program. Also Bluetooth. Interestingly,
my friend found himself using it to display PDF files (he's a general
contractor) and is now wanting to add a printer.
<http://www.mp3car.com/wiki/>
>Sure, it's a bit of a
>hassle having a PC setup for the purpose and a "box" might seem easier.
There's also the issue of power consumption. The Dell SX260 (which
incidentally runs off 12 VDC) sucks about 35 watts in standby and 65
watts when playing a DVD. A laptop would be about the same. I wanted
something that could be left on continuously. The few "appliances" I
looked at drew about 30% the power of a PC.
>But
>by the time you torment yourself tring to "type" long URLs into the radio's
>crippled user interface you then find the stream can't be decoded due to an
>ever-upgrading series of new codecs.
Most appliances have external keyboard inputs or you can use an HTML
or telnet interface for programming. Not ideal, but good enough to
avoid typing on the screen. There are also VST plugins for Winamp
that make touchscreen operation easier. I use the ancient Windoze 3.1
"recorder.exe" to automatic and script macros. Plenty of options, but
also plenty of room for improvement.
Incidentally, try:
start -> run -> osk
OSK is "on screen keyboard".
>PC players can download new codecs but
>those "radios" end up needing all new firmware. And since they didn't sell
>well the companies stop updating the old versions, leaving you with an
>orphaned pile of junk. The "idea" of an internet radio seems pretty cool,
>but most implementations stink.
True. Human factors and user interfaces are still being worked out.
I've been watching what little progress there is and am generally
encouraged. I have some ancient experience in IVR (interactive voice
response) and suspect the next bit lurch forward will be in that area.
You can have an animated conversation with your appliance. This is
actually happening with some higher end TV remote controls. Meanwhile,
it's touch screen, keyboard and mouse. Yawn.
--
Jeff Liebermann
jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060
http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Send wireless signal from laptop? 
Linear Mode
