Like every other website on the planet, SmallNetBuilder uses cookies. Our cookies track login status, but we only allow admins to log in anyway, so those don't apply to you. Any other cookies you pick up during your visit come from advertisers, which we don't control.
If you continue to use the site, you agree to tolerate our use of cookies. Thank you!

Router Charts

Click for Router Charts

Router Ranker

Click for Router Ranker

NAS Charts

Click for NAS Charts

NAS Ranker

Click for NAS Ranker

More Tools

Click for More Tools

NAS How To

Introduction

From my first exposure to Slim Device's original SliMP3 back in 2003, I was taken with the idea of streaming music throughout my house. I found Slim's approach very interesting; literally giving away an open source media streaming software intended for use on a file server. They then made money by selling a dedicated hardware device to interface the music stream to a traditional stereo system.

Slim Devices Squeezebox

Figure 1: Slim Devices Squeezebox

Slim Devices is now part of Logitech and offers three different devices:

  • Squeezebox Classic - the 3rd generation of the original SliMP3 with a simple remote control and large vacuum fluorescent display (Figure 1)
  • Squeezebox Duet - a variant on the Squeezebox with that trades the fluorescent display for a more elaborate remote control with a color LCD status display
  • Transporter - a beautiful, seriously high-end streaming music interface for those who suffer audiophile tendencies

One of the nicer things about the Squeezebox is that several can be set to play the same music in sync, or set to play entirely different playlists. This can be handy, addressing the needs of both the common dinner party and a multi-faceted Halloween haunted house. At my house, we have accumulated three of the classic Squeezeboxes and are on-plan to purchase two more.

All Slim Devices products source their music streams from the same open source server software. This software, written in Perl, was once known as "Slim Server" but from the release of v7.0 has been renamed "SqueezeCenter." Slim Devices provides releases for Windows, Macintosh and Linux hosts. They also offer a release built specifically for the Netgear (formerly Infrant) ReadyNAS.

The SqueezeCenter Web GUI
Figure 2: The SqueezeCenter Web GUI

The idea to embed the server on a NAS seems ideal; voluminous RAID storage to serve & protect the music just makes sense. It certainly makes more sense than my recent situation, which was keeping a Pentium 4 2.8 GHz PC running 24/7 just to serve music. In contrast, the NAS approach consumes less power, generates less heat and noise and takes less space.

There was only one problem. ReadyNAS would not have been my personal choice of NAS. I prefer a less expensive, more DIY approach. To that end, I have long used FreeNAS around my home office. FreeNAS is open source based on BSD and takes advantage of the GUI framework developed for the m0n0wall router project.

Happily, others share my opinion of FreeNAS. Early in 2007, Michael Herger ported the SqueezeCenter software to create an installable plug-in for FreeNAS.

More NAS

Wi-Fi System Tools
Check out our Wi-Fi System Charts, Ranker and Finder!

Support Us!

If you like what we do and want to thank us, just buy something on Amazon. We'll get a small commission on anything you buy. Thanks!

Over In The Forums

I own an AC86U router and I want UPnP disabled. Unfortunately I've been told UPnP must be enabled for my mates new internet-of-things Phillips Hue lig...
Hi, this is my first post to SNBForums, and its very nice to be here. (if this is posted in the wrong area I apologize) After reading many posts, this...
say, what are people using here ?? Default message log levelLog only messages more urgent thanmy log was full of dhcp, and everything else.what would ...
So, my Asus RT-AC1300UHP has been behaving weirdly lately. This has been happening for the last two days. Suddenly, my connected mobile phones will sh...
I see a difference here in my bridge 192.168.1.15, which in connected to an access point 192.168.1.11Why the difference in transmission rates?View att...

Don't Miss These

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3