Video Streaming

  • 30 July 2006
  • 42 replies
  • 20566 views


Show first post

42 replies

Why on earth would you NOT want this?
The Sonos system is by far the best and easiest multiroom system, why would you want a separate system? Why??


Because video is not music. Because music can follow you throughout the home, whereas video is anchored to a display. Because there are plenty of video streamers; Blu-ray players, streaming TV's, Roku, Apple TV, etc., etc., on the market already. Because most video streamers require a dedicated server, whereas Sonos does not. Because video requires far more bandwidth than audio, overtaxing the network which can effect reliability and overburden support lines.

Is that enough? I've got more.
I'd prefer them to concentrate on getting the user interface and desktop controller better for music rather than diluting their resources on providing video as well.

I'd also like to see better hardware being brought out with good quality headphone sockets and top quality audio performance for those who want it.

I wouldn't want my Sonos system to be a "jack of all trades and master of none"
Userlevel 2
Because video is not music. Because music can follow you throughout the home, whereas video is anchored to a display. Because there are plenty of video streamers; Blu-ray players, streaming TV's, Roku, Apple TV, etc., etc., on the market already. Because most video streamers require a dedicated server, whereas Sonos does not. Because video requires far more bandwidth than audio, overtaxing the network which can effect reliability and overburden support lines.

Is that enough? I've got more.


I know that there are plenty of systems out there that can do 'something' ... but you want it in 1 system. Who wants all those extra boxes , machines and remotes?
I think it's great when you are watching a movie downstairs and continue in your bedroom! Won't take much of the bandwidth or network nowadays!

If Sonos would bring it together as good as they did with music it would be a fantastic plus!
If you are only interrested in Music, just don't use the video option i'd say... or buy a few new gadgets and lots of wires and do it your way.
I'm sure it is not only what i want, it is as i sais the next logical step!
If Sonos does not do it quick there will be others that have it all soon..
i'll get back about this issue in some time!
There is still a lot of work that they need to do on the music side in my opinion to keep up with the many competitors they now have. I'd rather they concentrate on keeping Sonos at the top of the pile for music systems 🙂
I know that there are plenty of systems out there that can do 'something' ... but you want it in 1 system. Who wants all those extra boxes , machines and remotes?


What extra boxes? I have a TV that streams. Is my TV an extra box for . . . uhhh . . . my TV?


I think it's great when you are watching a movie downstairs and continue in your bedroom! Won't take much of the bandwidth or network nowadays!


Sorry, but if I'm watching a movie, I want to be in front of my 65" HDTV with surround sound, and I'll never continue it on the 32" in the bedroom. That's what I meant by "video is anchored to a display."


If Sonos would bring it together as good as they did with music it would be a fantastic plus!
If you are only interrested in Music, just don't use the video option i'd say... or buy a few new gadgets and lots of wires and do it your way.


What "lots of wires" are you taking about? Both my TV and Blu-ray stream, with no "extra wires." The "extra boxes and wires" would come from having to buy yet another streaming box from Sonos.


I'm sure it is not only what i want, it is as i sais the next logical step!
If Sonos does not do it quick there will be others that have it all soon..


The "next logical step" is determined by Sonos' business plan, not the anecdotal wishes of a few posters in a forum. I'm sure Sonos has a better handle on the market than any of us.


i'll get back about this issue in some time!



Video has been on the "Sound Ideas" wishlist since Sonos was introduced. The CEO himself said it is a non-starter due to the many solutions already on the market. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for it.

If Sonos does not do it quick there will be others that have it all soon.. !


It's been done, many times before, and no-one has made much of an impact.

The reality is, most people consume music differently from the way they consume video and pictures.

A converged device makes a lot of sense in the portable market, but even here I see people using separate iPods and mobile phones, and it's been possible to replace the iPod with a smartphone for years.

In the home, most people's usage is simply too different for a converged device to make sense.

Cheers,

Keith
Correct Keith. In addition to my current TV and BD player, I have used several standalone video streamer type devices. Every one of these have the ability to stream audio; via my library, Pandora, Slacker, etc. I couldn't tell you about the quality or user interface because I used the audio portion of these units exactly zero times. Video and audio are that divergent for me, and judging by the sales of Sonos, for a good portion of the rest of the population too.
Userlevel 2
Sure i agree with that. But i think to stay on top they have to keep innovating.
The system works great already. i don't have many wishes audio wise for Sonos.

I would appriciate it though when i am playing music that my controller would suggest a videoclip of that song so i can watch at the same time.
Right now i have Sonos in my livingroom, Kitchen, bathroom and bedroom.
Since i am cooking most of the time i always play music while cooking. In my kitchen i have a LCD tv on the wall, it would be great to have music playing on the TV as well so i can watch a concert or whatever Sonos suggests while choosing a song.

I can imagine many other things too. Like streaming a kids movie on a saturday morning for my daughters in our bedroom.
Or when all TV's are taken just use your pc or Ipad etc to watch a documentary, movie etc.

Or another great thing would be a Sonos Car radio. Just park your car in from of the house, connect with it, put a playlist from the controller to the car radio and listen to music while driving.
Or place a kids movie into the car radio so my kids can watch it in the back of the car while making a long trip.

I think that video can be a magnifier for audio and go hand in hand.
Maybe it is that i don't want any extra cables, boxes and other media players, that i would want it so bad for Sonos to develop it...
Anyway, i really hope Sonos will bring these possibilities.. take care.
Userlevel 2
What extra boxes? I have a TV that streams. Is my TV an extra box for . . . uhhh . . . my TV?

Well... you would end up with at least new remote controls.. especially if you want a system that streams from one TV to the other...

Sorry, but if I'm watching a movie, I want to be in front of my 65" HDTV with surround sound, and I'll never continue it on the 32" in the bedroom. That's what I meant by "video is anchored to a display."

I guess that is just you than... i have 3 60" 3d's hanging so perfect for me, but i would not mind if formats change, if i am watching a music video in the livingroom and have to start cooking it would be nice to continue watching in the kitchen,


What "lots of wires" are you taking about? Both my TV and Blu-ray stream, with no "extra wires." The "extra boxes and wires" would come from having to buy yet another streaming box from Sonos.

Any extra system would ask for new boxes, wires remote's etc. So i'd rather have one more Sonos box and work with the SAME remote and especially the same system that i am used with already!


The "next logical step" is determined by Sonos' business plan, not the anecdotal wishes of a few posters in a forum. I'm sure Sonos has a better handle on the market than any of us.

It is not for nothing that they ask US. And still... the people that voted FOR are outnumbering the 'i don't care' people..
So .. a few posters... no way man..




Video has been on the "Sound Ideas" wishlist since Sonos was introduced. The CEO himself said it is a non-starter due to the many solutions already on the market. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for it.


Won't hold my breath, just wait and see what is comming :)
The rest of your replies are subjective, so I leave them to the Sonos marketing department. But I have to address this:

Any extra system would ask for new boxes, wires remote's etc. So i'd rather have one more Sonos box and work with the SAME remote and especially the same system that i am used with already!


There *IS* no "extra system!" In order to display video, you need a display. Most cases it's a TV. My TV is *ALREADY* equipped for streaming, WITH NO EXTRA BOXES or WIRES! 90% of the TV's coming out are. If I had to add a Sonos video streamer, THAT would be an extra box, with extra wires. Same thing with a DVD/Blu-ray player. Most households are going to have one. Most Blu-ray players made today can stream video. So if we are keeping score, I ALREADY have TWO streaming boxes, and you want me to buy one more in order to eliminate the "extra boxes and wires"?? It doesn't make sense to me and probably not to Sonos. Why would Sonos step into a market which essentially has the competing technology built into the main units?

As to the remotes, my Home Theater is controlled by a Harmony remote control with hard buttons. I can use it in the dark, by feel; alone. The day you make me change that for a Sonos type "have to look down in order to do anything, light up the room" touchscreen is the day you pry the Harmony from my cold dead fingers. I have no qualms with using two remotes for audio vs. video. I have a big problem with having no hard buttons on my video remote so I have to take my attention from the screen in order to do anything.
Userlevel 1
I guess that is just you than... i have 3 60" 3d's hanging so perfect for me,

That would put you in a very small minority then.

It is not for nothing that they ask US.


They haven't asked us.

And still... the people that voted FOR are outnumbering the 'i don't care' people..


Wow, that's an amazing piece of selective blindness there, there are almost as many saying "No" as there are yes, add the "I don't care"s to the "No"s and the yes votes become strongly outnumbered.

Video has been on the "Sound Ideas" wishlist since Sonos was introduced. The CEO himself said it is a non-starter due to the many solutions already on the market. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for it.Won't hold my breath, just wait and see what is comming :)


It's not coming, the CEO said so, you pretty much have to take his word for it, he's the boss.
Userlevel 2
I still think we talk about different things.
If i have a video on my NAS and want to see that on my TV, it is now done by using a media player, right?

If i want to continue watching in another room for whatever reason, my tv does NOT stream this signal from my NAS to that other tv.

If i want to see a youtube music clip on my tv, i can use my media player to browse and watch.
If i go to my other tv, i simply can't...

I don't have a harmony remote and many other people don't have that either.
I agree with hard buttons issue but still...that's different for each user.

I also agree that IF Sonos would produce a Video option i would imagine that this will be a small box like apple TV, which could be plugged or placed at the back of your TV.

This discussion reminds me of my discussion with the owner of Tevue.com. I was in NY for a demonstration to see if their video conferencing box was something for europe.
Eventually we did not continue cause there were better all in one solutions out there that covered the complete thing in a PC.

So my initial post where i asked why someone would NOT want it i still wonder about.
If Sonos was to find a great solution to stream video etc, why would you not want that? I mean, you could just not use it, and use your setup that you have now. It would do you no harm nor would it be a bad inpact to the Sonos system. I believe that this could be a great add for many users and should definitely be developed.
i would buy an extra box for each tv the day it came out.
Have a great weekend!
M
Userlevel 2
That would put you in a very small minority then.

nope, not over here. not all have 60" but mostly all have more than 2 tv's

They haven't asked us.

Well.. i see a poll... so they do ask..eventhough the poll was placed by a moderator.. our opinion is asked..
(maybe they should ask us , all registered users, my mail and find out than...and post the outcome...)

Wow, that's an amazing piece of selective blindness there, there are almost as many saying "No" as there are yes, add the "I don't care"s to the "No"s and the yes votes become strongly outnumbered.

selective? please don't forget the 'would be nice' votes, so still outnumbered..
it just shows that more people are for than against. And the 'i don't care' people you can't count because... they don't care...


It's not coming, the CEO said so, you pretty much have to take his word for it, he's the boss.


If he said so i will take his word for it, np, all i am saying is i cannot understand why someone would not want it...

enough said.. have a nice weekend
M
I still think we talk about different things.
If i have a video on my NAS and want to see that on my TV, it is now done by using a media player, right?


Most Blu-ray players and TV sets have DLNA capabilities equal to and surpassing most media players.


If i want to continue watching in another room for whatever reason, my tv does NOT stream this signal from my NAS to that other tv.


Some TV's can, TiVO can, some VOD services can. But IMHO, this is a non-starter. I'm a member of two of the largest Home Theater sites on the net, and have never heard anyone ask for this feature.


If i want to see a youtube music clip on my tv, i can use my media player to browse and watch.
If i go to my other tv, i simply can't...


I can browse Youtube on my TV, my Blue-ray player, my old media players. I have no need for a Sonos box to do this.


I don't have a harmony remote and many other people don't have that either.
I agree with hard buttons issue but still...that's different for each user.


But it is a keen example of the divergence of video and audio, not the convergence. Many (most) separate the two. I submit that you don't, but I also submit that according to Sonos marketing, your case is a minority.


I also agree that IF Sonos would produce a Video option i would imagine that this will be a small box like apple TV, which could be plugged or placed at the back of your TV.


Other comapnies already offer these. One is called Apple TV. It costs $100. Others cost around $50. Others are built right into common video components like televisions and disc players. The lowest priced Sonos *audio* only box costs $299. Add the cost for video, and do you really think the ability to sync a *visual* medium across several displays is worth paying Sonos prices? Really?


This discussion reminds me of my discussion with the owner of Tevue.com. I was in NY for a demonstration to see if their video conferencing box was something for europe.
Eventually we did not continue cause there were better all in one solutions out there that covered the complete thing in a PC.


Yeah, just like there are better all in one solutions for video streaming built into TV's and Blu-ray players.


So my initial post where i asked why someone would NOT want it i still wonder about.
If Sonos was to find a great solution to stream video etc, why would you not want that? I mean, you could just not use it, and use your setup that you have now. It would do you no harm nor would it be a bad inpact to the Sonos system. I believe that this could be a great add for many users and should definitely be developed.
i would buy an extra box for each tv the day it came out.
Have a great weekend!
M


Why wouldn't I want it, even if I don't use it? Because it would dilute the Sonos brand and divert resources away from what Sonos does best (not to mention something I might actually buy). You see it as a natural evolution. But evolution requires millions of harmful, even deadly mutations, for every positive one seen. I see this as a harmful mutation, and one which can (and should) be avoided. YMMV.
I still think we talk about different things.
If i have a video on my NAS and want to see that on my TV, it is now done by using a media player, right?

Indeed. But for some reason, you're skipping over jgatie's point that media player capability is already built-in to a growing number of HDTV's and BluRay players. In fact, I'm a little surprised that you have displays with 3D capability that apparently don't have built-in networking. My first-generation HDTV has no native networking (it's so old it doesn't even have HDMI or DVI), so I bought a cheap streamer for it, but the other two are less than a year old, and they're able to play video off the NAS with no extra components.

If i want to continue watching in another room for whatever reason, my tv does NOT stream this signal from my NAS to that other tv.

People consume media in different ways, but I really have to question how often this needs to happen. To me, and I suspect quite a few others, a video requires my attention, and I'm not going to sit down to watch a two hour movie unless I can likely do so uninterrupted. As rare as starting on one TV and finishing on another would be for me, I'm pretty sure I can tolerate restarting and skipping back to where I was. There's certainly not much need for me to have two or more video streamers synchronized together.

If i want to see a youtube music clip on my tv, i can use my media player to browse and watch.
If i go to my other tv, i simply can't...
Why not?

If Sonos was to find a great solution to stream video etc, why would you not want that?

Because I don't need it. I needed a way to stream audio -- preferably all over the house, not just where my main stereo rig is -- and fortunately for me, I discovered Sonos before network-capable audio receivers became commonplace. There's a good chance that if my main receiver could play from my NAS, I would have missed out on Sonos, and never realized one of the great advantages of Sonos -- the ability to easily put music almost anywhere in my home. I'm not chained to the main rig anymore. You can listen to music without having to devote your entire attention to it if you want, but that's not really the way video is intended to be used.

i would buy an extra box for each tv the day it came out.
At what price? The streamer on my big screen was $59. My other two TV's have a streamer built-in.

Sonos is fairly expensive, but not when compared to the existing whole house audio solutions. If the alternative is a $59 box, I don't see how Sonos fits in there (and, it appears, neither does Sonos).
Bits and pieces of the dream product are being developed in the margins.

While most current mid range (and up) TV's and Blu-ray players will stream from the Internet and from DLNA servers, the user interface is slow and poorly developed.

Wireless technology for streaming HD video is not quite ready for the mass market, but there has been progress. If you read the fine print about the candidate technologies, their reliable range is limited to about 30 feet -- under excellent conditions.

Technology exists to send video from TV to TV, but it is not truly wireless -- it uses the existing CATV wiring.

An interesting point about the current SONOS system is that the hardware components are generic stuff, there is no ground breaking hardware involved. The SONOS contribution is clever integration.

As these video technologies become generic, assuming that SONOS can develop a slick user interface, I think that there is room for a SONOS product, but at present I don't think that conditions are ripe.

Reply