Wishlist for Sonos Controller Improvements
Userlevel 7
+22
So on the old ask forum wishlist items would get lost. Thought I would post a topic where people could vote their biggest wish for controller software improvements.
This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.
Page 3 / 12
I would like to be able to configure the volume balance between different speakers / connects in 1 room. My connect has to be much louder than the play 1's in my living room. Everytime I change the master volume the balance between the play 1's and the connect is changed. I would like to set the volume of each speaker to a certain percentage of the master volume. So when the master volume is 50%, I want to set the connect to 50% for example and the play 1's to 30%. When I change the master volume to 75% the volume of the connect has to be 75% and the play 1's 45%. The ratio between the different speaker has to be same exactly, no matter which master volume you have. The balance between the different speakers / connect is exactly right at a certain ratio between the speakers, so I want to maintain the same ratio when I change the master volume.
I would really like to be able to see my Library by 'recently added' (maybe only the last 30 albums/tracks) - it was a feature I used a lot with my logitech as I am a binge downloader and its an easy way to find the new music I have bought.
the ability to see which device (e.g Kieran's Laptop) added a song to a queue
when an entire office has access to the sonos, this would finally hold those accountable for what's playing 😃
when an entire office has access to the sonos, this would finally hold those accountable for what's playing 😃
Odd place to ask the question, this is a thread about Sonos controller improvements, but no, none support POE currently.
Are any of the Sonos speakers powered by power over Ethernet or have the ability?
Userlevel 4
More than 30 items in Sonos Favorites. It should be unlimited.
Adding an item today brings up this unfriendly, passive-aggressive error: "Unable to add favorite. You can remove existing favorites to make room" it says.
Who the hell are you kidding?
I really don't have time or interest in deciding what my "top 30" is just because some UI fascist at Sonos decided that should be all I'm allowed. I have 10,000+ albums in my library alone, let alone from streaming services. So it's hardly unusual to have a big list of favourites.
It should be unlimited. If you want to avoid UI scale creep, give me folders.
Adding an item today brings up this unfriendly, passive-aggressive error: "Unable to add favorite. You can remove existing favorites to make room" it says.
Who the hell are you kidding?
I really don't have time or interest in deciding what my "top 30" is just because some UI fascist at Sonos decided that should be all I'm allowed. I have 10,000+ albums in my library alone, let alone from streaming services. So it's hardly unusual to have a big list of favourites.
It should be unlimited. If you want to avoid UI scale creep, give me folders.
On the older version of the controller, all you had to do to add a song to the queue was search it and double click it and it became the next song up. For the last few years, if you do that it replaces the entire queue. Which means adding a song takes more clicks. Still annoying, after all these years...
I apologize for thinking this was a wish-list for Sonos software in general. I thought we were in the software development forum section here. If you only want to focus on the Controller UI and features thereof, great. You may not consider the lack of SMB2+ support a big deal, no worries. The snarky responses are not particularly helpful.
Anyhow, do consider that the controller is rather useless without the software/hardware combination of the ZP actually playing the music. The ability of ZP's to independently access and play NAS content is one of Sonos' differentiators vs. its competition. Cheers.
Anyhow, do consider that the controller is rather useless without the software/hardware combination of the ZP actually playing the music. The ability of ZP's to independently access and play NAS content is one of Sonos' differentiators vs. its competition. Cheers.
maybe be able to listen to whats playing on the TV through the headphone jack on the phone ??
Convert the Win32 Windows app to a Windows 10 app with the Desktop Bridge (https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/bridges/desktop)
That will help with people getting Windows 10 S machines later in the year.
That will help with people getting Windows 10 S machines later in the year.
Userlevel 7
+22
... because this is a suggestion on how to improve the software running the controller? Isn't that the section we're in? Some fellow forum users wanted more background on why I thought this was important - is that bad thing? You may not consider this a pressing issue; we can agree to disagree. Cheers.
As others have pointed out this is completely fallacious. The controller doesn't communicate with the share. Given you've posted the exact complaints in other threads rather than starting your own it is clear what your Modus Operandi is
Exactly. Controller specific improvements would be assumed to be Controller or UI specific. Though if that were the case, one couldn't shoehorn their pet peeve issue into a sticky thread in order to garner more exposure. 😉
The controller fetches library info from/via the Associated ZP. It doesn't talk SMB to the share directly.
Sigh.
"Why on God's green Earth there's an SMB security debate in a thread about improvements in the Sonos controller..."
... because this is a suggestion on how to improve the software running the controller? Isn't that the section we're in? Some fellow forum users wanted more background on why I thought this was important - is that bad thing? You may not consider this a pressing issue; we can agree to disagree. Cheers.
... because this is a suggestion on how to improve the software running the controller? Isn't that the section we're in? Some fellow forum users wanted more background on why I thought this was important - is that bad thing? You may not consider this a pressing issue; we can agree to disagree. Cheers.
YouTube doesn't allow streaming over Sonos, or any other direct streamers like Google Chromecast.
It would be nice to be able to stream music from websites easier...youtube, cdbaby....ways to discover musicians without the huge label support.
Why on God's green Earth there's an SMB security debate in a thread about improvements in the Sonos controller is yet another curious question about the nature of online fora. You'd think someone with such desperate concerns would place them in a more effective thread, rather than bury them in this one. :8
Damn I was looking for a "album shuffle" mode but I can't see it in the list, there's quite a few forum threads about that though...
And then global keyboard shortcuts to allow you to start/stop (or go to next albums 🙂 ) from any program. Just like in Foobar actually.
And then global keyboard shortcuts to allow you to start/stop (or go to next albums 🙂 ) from any program. Just like in Foobar actually.
Since Sonos has not committed itself to even supporting SMB2+, the easiest solution may be to create a burner file server just for the Sonos. That way, if Sonos' credentials are compromised, all you lose is the content on the burner file server. Many access points support NAS functionality (Apple Airport Extreme, among others) and the only downside (besides having any SMB1 access at all on your network) is the additional power consumption of the attached drive and the likely greater latency accessing said data.
This is an issue related to the protocol that your file server has to support in order to play nicely with the Sonos. Sonos cannot connect to any file server that doesn't support SMB1. Thus, you may have to dumb down the file server to allow SMB1 transactions. This is the equivalent of having a thick bank safe door (SMB3 has strong encryption and password protection) and then propping the safe door open with a wedge. So, yes, you have a thick safe door but the wedge disables that security feature!
Known SMB1 insecurity is perhaps not an issue for people who just store some music (for which they hopefully have backups). So what if the data is lost, it's easily replaced. Evicting the ransomware that may affect the file server may be a big headache, however. Especially if they're using a file server running an MS OS.
For anyone who is also backing up other data to the file server / NAS, SMB1 insecurity is potentially a bigger issue. The problem for file server incarnations I am familiar with is that you can't simply segment file server shares by protocol (i.e. allow SMB1 for a burner partition and SMB3+ for everything else). Thus, you potentially put the whole file server at risk when authentication protocols can be broken easily. That's why NTLM v.1 authentication (used in SMB1) is now regularly turned off by default and has to be manually enabled by the file server user.
Bottom line, using a Sonos as intended should not be an invitation to be hacked. The company should commit itself to the data security of ifs customers by not being years out of data re: best practices. It really makes me wonder what other potential issues there may be if the network stack is this out of date.
Known SMB1 insecurity is perhaps not an issue for people who just store some music (for which they hopefully have backups). So what if the data is lost, it's easily replaced. Evicting the ransomware that may affect the file server may be a big headache, however. Especially if they're using a file server running an MS OS.
For anyone who is also backing up other data to the file server / NAS, SMB1 insecurity is potentially a bigger issue. The problem for file server incarnations I am familiar with is that you can't simply segment file server shares by protocol (i.e. allow SMB1 for a burner partition and SMB3+ for everything else). Thus, you potentially put the whole file server at risk when authentication protocols can be broken easily. That's why NTLM v.1 authentication (used in SMB1) is now regularly turned off by default and has to be manually enabled by the file server user.
Bottom line, using a Sonos as intended should not be an invitation to be hacked. The company should commit itself to the data security of ifs customers by not being years out of data re: best practices. It really makes me wonder what other potential issues there may be if the network stack is this out of date.
Is this a general issue, or one which has arisen because I have put my music in the shared music folder on the NAS via a copy/paste action? If it is general, what has Sonos to do with it? If not general, what is the consequence to my Mac in general and to music files on the NAS in specific?
SMB1 provides opportunities for Man-In-The-Middle attacks, see https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2016/09/16/stop-using-smb1/ The Time Capsule has only one password, no multiple user classes. etc. so the entire share is potentially affected.
Here's the problem: If you want to use a NAS as a file repository for your music collection, Sonos forces you by default to use a unsafe protocol to access said music.
I use a WD MyCloud that was added to my Apple Time Capsule founded Wifi network when I bought and set up the WD. All my music is copy/pasted from a computer HDD into a folder on the WD, that Sonos uses after indexing.
Where is the security hole?
I too have no clue about this; but is it the concern that in the present state a virus can be injected into my Sonos kit when it is streaming music from my Apple music subscription, as an example? Or, into my Mac because of sharing the broadband pipe?
Neither, if I understand your question. correctly. No, my security upgrade request is for users who still use a local file server (NAS, computer, etc.) to supply music to the Sonos (for example, with a shared iTunes library). IIRC, this was one of the original methods for using a Sonos, predating streaming support.
If this topic interests you, simply google "SMB1 Microsoft". The first entry is from a blog at Microsoft that details why SMB1 should not be used. How it is unsafe, how it cannot be made safe. Etc. It's starting paragraph is likely a good summary of the rest of the page:
code:
Hi folks, Ned here again and today’s topic is short and sweet:
Stop using SMB1. Stop using SMB1. STOP USING SMB1!
Earlier this week we released MS16-114, a security update that prevents denial of service and remote code execution. If you need this security patch, you already have a much bigger problem: you are still running SMB1.
This, from one the principals at Microsoft that deal with SMB every day, Ned Pyle.
Here's the problem: If you want to use a NAS as a file repository for your music collection, Sonos forces you by default to use a unsafe protocol to access said music. Yes, there are kludgy workarounds, but the principal issue remains, i.e. Sonos has not even announced that they're working on SMB2+ support.
The libraries for Linux are out there (i.e. SMB 2-3.11 for server and client), so the libraries are not the issue. That some NAS' still only ship with SMB1 support is also no reason to lag behind. SMB1 support by Sonos could be a opt-in function with the relevant warnings to let users know what they're letting themselves into. That's the responsible way to support options that potentially undermine the data of your customers.
Page 3 / 12
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.