Review of Squeezebox MP3 Player 270
The Squeezebox has no local storage. It is entirely reliant upon some other PC in your house to store your data. Now I have used a great many devices with internal storage, and external storage, and what it comes down to is that this is the best of breed for streaming devices. You install a tiny server application, and go. The server app itself is written in perl, and has been ported to Linux, Windows, and OS X. For this review I tested by running the server on an iMac so I could try out the iTunes integration.
The server installed in seconds. The only real setting required of me was to choose the source of my music in a freshly installed prefPane. You can choose either iTunes, or an arbitrary directory. Setting up the Squeezebox was just as easy. Plug it in, turn it on, and answer a few questions. In my case, the only question I had to enter was the password key for my wireless network: DHCP takes care of the networking, and the client detected the server running on my iMac through Rendezvous without any action on my part.
The unit itself is incredibly minimal. Of course there is a power jack. Next, your input options are a standard network jack, and an antenna for 802.11b wireless networking. And finally for output, you can choose between a standard set of RCA analog outputs, an optical digital port, and a coaxial digital port. You plug the thing into your stereo, and you're ready to go.
So after barely a minute, I'm ready to listen to music. First, you can use the included remote control to choose artists, albums, or playlists. You can play. Shuffle. Skip. All the usual things that you want from your remote. But that's only scratching the surface of the power behind this device.
The Squeezebox makes use of the new 5.0 version of the fabulous SlimServer. I am not exaggerating when I tell you that this is the best web interface available for playing MP3s... and as a little secret, the player will work with any shoutcast capable client. I used an earlier version in my house to stream to laptops before daapd and iTunes 4 made that unnecessary. But I still use it to stream occasionally if I want 2 locations to be playing the same music.
The web interface provides you with an extensive roster of tools for manipulating playlists, viewing cover art (available from thumbnails, or from ID3 tags). The web interface makes dealing with larger MP3 collections quite simple. And since it announces itself via Rendezvous, you don't even need to remember the IP of the device. As if that isn't enough, the interface is tremendously flexible: almost everything can be changed, from the contents of the menu, to the skin of the HTML.
As if thats not enough, the device is capable of playing AACs (not the encrypted variety tho!) or OGGs if that happens to be your format of choice. Things will sound about as good as can be expected for MP3s. If you have a decent stereo and use one of the digital outputs, you wiil really want to start ripping your tracks at much higher bit rates.
The Squeezebox has done great things to integrate with iTunes, but it could go a few steps further. The only major thing lacking from the interface is the concept of track rating, and I would love to see that available to me at least from the web interface, and possibly let me use the remote to add or remove stars- I think this is the only really substantial thing lacking from this system. Besides the rating system, it would be great if iTunes & the Slim Server shared values for things like when I last played a track, or the total number of times I've played a given track. Then my numbers would add up no matter where in the house I was listening to my music. Lastly, it would be nice if the playlists in iTunes and Slim Server were truly shared. As it stands, iTunes playlists are read only to Slim, and Slim playlists are non existent to iTunes. I'd love to have a single unified interface for tracking my playlists.
It's also worth noting that the Slimdevices folks continue to develop their web interface. There are frequent updates, and they are constantly adding new features. And of course, since the whole thing is perl, I guess I could hack all of this in myself if I wasn't such a lazy bum.
Now it's time for me to cover the one and only downside to this great little device: The cost. Yes, we're talking $300... and you still need an external machine to host the actual songs. But you are not limited by disk space that way. And with the 802.11b, you can plug this in anywhere in your home... even those pesky rooms that didn't come with cat-5 already wired in. So yeah, it's a bit steep of a price to pay, but this device is really your best bet for getting your large MP3 collection to any location in the house you desire. The elegant web interface, the amazing customizability, the simplicity of installation, and the flexibility of server applications really make this a no brainer.
illegal transmission? (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyone who is a frequent reader of these pages knows of my obsession
I'm sure they're both aware, yes.
anyhow.. 802.11b MP3 players? Very cool, however the product page doesn't mention encryption, does this leave the product open to lawsuits by RIAA for transmitting the music where a neighbour could potentially snag it?
Re:illegal transmission? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:illegal transmission? (Score:5, Interesting)
Arguably, it's no different than any other shared stream, but in this case, the program functionality has nothing to do with sharing files, so the user can't really be held culpable for copyright infringement.
Re:illegal transmission? (Score:2, Informative)
from the review:
In my case, the only question I had to enter was the password key for my wireless network
and also from their products page (http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_specs.html):
Supports 64 and 128-bit WEP encryption
Re:illegal transmission? (Score:3, Funny)
Pretty clear it is using encryption.....
Re:illegal transmission? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow. First rated post, and already the legal talk is on. Has this world really turned so litigious that everything must be looked at from that angle all the time? No offense I hope, but sometimes it seems like this turned into News for Lawyers, Frivolism that matters.
Re:illegal transmission? (Score:2)
It's about as illegal as using a cell phone in earshot of a cd player.
Re:illegal transmission? (Score:2)
Try again in one hour. I had to turn off downloads temporarily because we only have a 10Mbps connection.
You haven't really (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:You haven't really (Score:4, Insightful)
External Storage (Score:5, Informative)
As the previous poster said, this is a home audio device, not a portable player, so it's a different approach and a different feature set. Better in absolute terms? I dunno, maybe. Better for the home-audio environment it was designed for? Almost certainly.
Audiotron also uses external storage (Score:2)
SLiMP3 and AudioTron are the only two (out of about half a dozen) makes of these devices that have made the vital realization that it is stupid to try to store the files locally on a hard drive.
Re:You haven't really (Score:3, Informative)
And that's just off the top of my head. Besides, you don't say which one you have now, so we can't properly rip it to shreds.
sync multiple devices (Score:2)
You can sync or desync multiple devices around the house. Play the same playlist in sync at multiple points around a large house. With any remote, browse the library or change the music everywhere at any device. From any PC in the house, browse the library or change the music everywhere.
These things are thin terminals and the "server" box can remain in one out-of-sight location to serve files.
One poster said yo
meh (Score:5, Insightful)
My Mother has one of these... (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, I know what the song really means; that's why I posted AC
Hah, Call yourself a geek (Score:4, Funny)
Simon
bah (Score:2)
Man receives expensive mp3 player for review
Man likes it, of course, it's really nice
Man posts good review of it on his website, guaranteeing he'll receive further units for evaluation in the future
Circle of life completes, wheel in the sky keeps on turnin', etc
Re:bah (Score:2)
It's like Bob Vila on "This O
What about crossfading? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What about crossfading? (Score:3, Insightful)
The new device is supposed to have a little bit more power, and supports wave file streaming, so at worst you could add a crossfading MP3 decoder on the server and stream wave data to it. I don't know if this is supported yet, but if not I am sure someone will i
Theoreticaly possible (Score:2, Insightful)
I looked at the older non-Wifi SLIMP3 before deciding it was rather expensive, but the device itself is INCREDIBLY simple and all the work is done in the server software. That means that there's no fundamental reason why you (or Slim) couldn't add cross-fading to the server. But they haven't done this.
By the way, does anyone know any decent MP3 players that do crossfading on Linux. All the Windows ones seem to be getting all sorts of clever auto-mixing capability but Linux stuff just plays 1 song then the
Re:Theoreticaly possible (Score:2, Informative)
Excellent! (Score:2)
Re:Excellent! (Score:2)
It does. The server is a perl script running from the console.
Re:Excellent! (Score:2)
Expensive (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Expensive (Score:3, Informative)
- Xbox - $179 new
- Mod Chip - $50
- Hard Drive - $40-$100 depending on size. Not needed for streaming from a PC.
- DVD Remote Control - $30 - not needed but using the controller in the media player is lame.
- Xbox 802.11b adapter - $??? - not needed but convenient.
- Samsung DVD drive - $50 - Xbox comes with one of 3 different DVD drives.
Re:Expensive (Score:2)
TiVo is expensive (Score:2, Informative)
A TiVo unit with lifetime subscription is $600, and I've read that the media player function is tied to the TV listing subscription.
Re:Expensive (Score:2)
This or an Audrey? (Score:3, Informative)
In the mean time, I purchased an audrey [audreymadness.com] from ebay and set that up. The audrey is on the network, and offers touch-screen browsing of music and playlists right at the machine, instead of having to build your playlists on a computer through a web browser.
Man, tough choice though, they're both seriously cool.
Some comparisons, please (Score:5, Interesting)
So what makes this thing worth all that extra money ?
And what do people here think about wireless multimedia devices anyways ? I've had enough problems trying to get my laptop to even talk to my wireless router through a few walls when they're less than 100 ft away... it seems to me that trying to stream multimedia over the same sort of link isn't going to be that reliable if you have a larger home and/or less than ideal geometry. It's exactly this concern that prompted me to spend the money to retrofit my house with CAT6 throughout.
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:2)
- Unlimited storage (on the server PC). Some folks have more than 20GB of music (legitimately purchased even)
- Ability to stream MP3s to multiple Squeezeboxes from a single server, centralizing your music collection
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:3, Informative)
Unlimited storage (on the server PC). Some folks have more than 20GB of music (legitimately purchased even)
The Rio Receiver is exactly the same class of product as the Squeezebox - it's a diskless thin client that streams music stored on a server. The only space limit is the size of the hard disk(s) in your PC.
Ability to stream MP3s to multiple Squeezeboxes from a single ser
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:3, Informative)
The poster specifically asked what the difference was to his $55 Rio Receiver. Both points you attempted to make have no relevance to the Rio Receiver -- they're true for it just as much as the SqueezeBox.
The SB has a smaller form factor, is completely open source, plays a wider variety of music sources, and has wifi built in. That's about it. It's lacking an integrated amp, which the Rio Receiver has (very useful for putting units into bedrooms, kitchens, and other areas that might not have an
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:2)
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:2)
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:2)
I'm planning on rewriting it in the next few weeks; I plan on posting the changes to the developers list at that time.
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:3, Interesting)
The bright, big, green display? Digital output? The firmware source code? Steaming WAV support? (with the digital output this means that there's no sound degradation when you store your music as WAV or FLAC, if you're that picky about sound quality.)
If you don't care about any of those things, then you shouldn't get a squeezebox.
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:2)
That's pretty much it. Those VFDs are around $100 all by themselves. Nowadays you can get OLED displays that look almost as vivid for a fraction of the price, or you could go with a cheaper LCD with a good EL backlight. They made a couple of questionable hardware design decisions that definitely negatively impacted the price.
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:2)
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:2)
And a nice display it is. But it would have been equally nice to also offer a cheaper unit with a lesser display.
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:5, Informative)
The reason: The interface. The Rio screen and UI suck. The SliMP3 has a beautiful screen and the closest thing to a perfect interface that I've ever used. There is no comparison.
Oh, the server software is great too. No Rio project comes close.
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:5, Informative)
a) community. The user and developer mailing lists are thriving and busy with hardware hacks, software mods, new plugins, and friendly troubleshooting.
b) community. The company owners are part of those mailing lists, contribute frequently, and are incredibly helpful.
c) community. Because of a and b, the product is shaped by its users rather than by Rio's marketing department. Check the user group archives and you'll find requests for every feature in the squeezebox.
d) ease of use. Out of the box, it just works.
Re:Some comparisons, please (Score:2)
Which the Rio has in spades as well. Admittedly, it's a different community than SliMP3's -- the developer is defunct, but the Rio hardware/software interface is so freaking simple that everything short of the ROM has been replaced now. And before Rio went bankrupt and was sold (both twice) they were fairly open about mods to the box as well.
the product is shaped by its users rather than by Rio's marketing department
I can pretty well assure you that the Rio Receiver is no longer shaped by the
Re:$55? Where'd you get it? (Score:2)
Notice what the Squeezebox is playing... (Score:3, Funny)
I guess, to avoid ALL possible snarling from the RIAA, they made it be playing something nobody could ever find on Kazaa.
Another downside for iTMS users (Score:2)
The fact that it cannot play encrypted AAC mean that it would not be able to play the songs you purchased on iTMS. So long for iTunes integration.
Sure you can burn your playlist and convert it to MP3 but it would be better if that step would not be required.
Re:Another downside for iTMS users (Score:2)
What can play the encrypted AAC from iTMS? Does it require special licensing, secuirty, or software to play them?
The more open or accepted the format, the more support and choice you will have. If the barrier for entry is high or costly, you will have a limited choice. This is not a new concept.
Re:Another downside for iTMS users (Score:2)
It requires DRM. Except it isn't DRM, because it comes from Steve - so it is really GoodRM, or NiceRM, or TheLeaderHasToldUsToSwallowRM. Either way, we really like it! We never really wanted to control the data in our own computers ourselves anyways, we think it is good that Steve is in charge now.
Next week, we are installing a door to our house that will only let us out when it decides to! It
Re:Another downside for iTMS users (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Another downside for iTMS users (Score:2)
You could, of course, strip out the DRM [slashdot.org]...
(Yes, I've tried it. It's a bit of a pain since you currently have to do each track manually, but it does work. I've had half a thought of writing something to automate it, but haven't gotten around to it yet.)
Data Sharing (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Data Sharing (Score:2, Informative)
That said, not all of the information is in the iTunes XML file is currently used by SlimServer, but it could be if somebody wanted it.
Re:Data Sharing (Score:5, Informative)
What are you talking about? We already do this!
All your itunes music and playlists automagically appear on Squeezebox. Rip a new CD, boom it's there. We pick up changes in the iTunes XML database automatically.
Don't have one of the boxes. (Score:2)
I particularly like the fact that each player can have it's own playlist if that's what you want, so everyone can stream from the same server, but have their own playlists set up so that you don't piss off the person downstairs by skipping the track you don't like.
Re:Don't have one of the boxes. (Score:2)
Wireless Audio Transfer (Score:2)
Re:Wireless Audio Transfer (Score:2)
Yeah, I know -- it looks like it fell out of a bad anime. In fact, two seperate people walked into my apartment and said it looked like a transformer head.
So it looks really weird and I was hesitant to get it because of that, but I'm really glad I did. The sound is truly great.
Oh, and someone else posted something about Sony and DRM -- this box has no DRM in it whatsoever and assuming it does is rather trollish. In fact, the system has
get a pre-hacked xbox for about $100 less (Score:2, Informative)
Slim Devices has made a great product (Score:3, Informative)
I now have access to every CD I have ever owned (ripped at 320kbs) at the push of a button. This reality has literally changed my life. I now watch less tv because getting my slimp3 up and running is easier then turning the tv on and hunting for something to watch.
No, the squeeze box isn't portable but that's not what it was designed for; just as the iPod wasn't designed for stereo integration. The SqueezeBox gives you audiophile quality sound, infinite expansion capabilities, ease of operation, no moving parts, a high quality display, and an open source server that will never leave you high and dry. No other product on the market has this level of flexibilty, adaptability and openness.
P.S. I urge everyone to think about the non-obvious benefits of instant music access. In these trying times music can offer an unexpected shelter from stress and frustration.
key-chain attachable MP3 player / voice recorder (Score:2)
Cyclone Music Key [cdcyclone.com]
Ain't it cool?
It's a lovely device. (Score:3, Informative)
I had been worried that it would be too painful to find music from as large a collection as mine using only the remote control's numeric keypad, and that I'd end up having to use the Web interface to control playlists, which is less convenient. However, the browsing and searching functionality built into the Squeezebox worked much better than I'd expected. Browsing by artist is quick - you zoom down to the right section of the alphabet with a few keypresses on the remote's numeric pad (e.g., press "7" once for P, twice for Q, and so on), then use the up/down buttons to scroll to the right artist. You can then browse the list of albums or tracks. You can also do a search for keywords in the title.
One feature that surprised me, but that I quite like having seen it, is that the indexing software ignores prepositions in artist names. So the list of artists starting with "S" went something like "Sarah McLachlan", "The Seekers", "Severe Tire Damage", ..., "Sting", "The Strawbs", "Sunday's Well". It also handled accented characters without a glitch: "äaut" was treated the same as "a" in terms of sorting and searching. Neither of these features is really appropriate outside the English-speaking world (in Swedish, "äaut" shouldn't sort with "a", but at the end of the alphabet), but they work great for me. (Yes, those should be real a-with-umlaut characters but Slashcode seems to strip them out if I enter them properly. Sigh.)
The display is bright and easy to read, and if you're too far away, one button press on the remote switches it to double-size characters, which can be read from across the room.
$300 is a little expensive for a toy like this, but it's going to make a huge difference to the way that we listen to music at home. We'd already got a dedicated 24/7 home file server holding the music collection, and the Squeezebox is the perfect complement to that. We're already discussing whether to get a second one for another room.
Interesting name (Score:3, Funny)
Ugh. Not what I thought (Score:2)
What do you need it for? (Score:2)
If you are worried that will feed the sound when you're watching pr0n into the stereo add one more soundcard.
I got a P3-700 sitting under my video, hooked to the stereo and TV. It does PVR, mp3-play, routing, dhcp server, NAT, print-deamon, wireless access point,
The whole thing set me back around $190, one year ago.
Frequent readers also know... (Score:2)
Seems cool, but I don't want to leave a 400W (Score:2)
You seem to know a lot, what would you recommend for a good, wired component with storage to play mp3s?
(I just spent a MONTH running one cat5e cable to my family room and I am going to get the most out of it if it kills me. For future reference, do not assume it will be easy to run a cable up two stories on an external wall (no internal walls) in a half brick (brick = 3 wall layers, not 2, with lots of cross members) half vinyl home an attic that would be a tight sqe
I like this gadget, but . . . (Score:4, Informative)
I went with cd3o's [cd3o.com] $200 wireless media receiver a few months ago, and I've been pretty happy with my decision. Does most of what the Squeezebox does plus a few things that it doesn't do and costs $100 less. It's also a Linux device like the Squeezebox, although their server software isn't currently available for Linux (though others have apparently written a Linux server for it - check their support forums).
I think these gadgets are certainly the wave of the future, though I suspect we'll see their functions rolled into standard receivers / preamps at some point.
Re:I like this gadget, but . . . (Score:2)
>don';t know anything about Squeezebox but you sure do
>like cd30.
Huh? I went to the website and read everything there was to read about the Squeezebox. Please identify some factual errors I made in my analysis - then or now. About the only thing I can recall offhand from the last time this subject came up is the double-size font mode, which I'd missed in the fine print of their brochure. That might make it possible to actually read what's
I must have an uber gadget gene (Score:3, Interesting)
I really appreciate these guys for supporting Mac OS X and iTunes the way they are.
Why do I work 60 hour weeks if I can't splurge once in a while?
ObWho (Score:2)
She wears on her chest
And when Daddy comes home
He never gets no rest
'Cause she's playing all night
And the music's all right
Mama's got a squeeze box
Daddy never sleeps at night
Well the kids don't eat
And the dog can't sleep
There's no escape from the music
In the whole damn street
'Cause she's playing all night
And the music's all right
Mama's got a squeeze box
Daddy never sleeps at night
She goes in and out and in and out and in and out and in and out
She's playing all ni
What no track rating Batman? (Score:2, Funny)
They probably left track rating out, figuring you'd then create mp3-meta-rating, then a karma system, and finally another totalitarian localopoly.
Slot-loading iMac as stereo component instead (Score:2)
Comparison with Tutrle Beach Audiotron (Score:4, Informative)
Because they are trying to keep the price down, both SlimDevices and Turtle Beach used cheap DACs for the D->A conversion. Thus, the analog sound coming from them was pretty bad -- OK for background music but no better. And I'm no audiophile...this quality problem has been oticeable to lots of people.
The AudioTron has always had a digital out, whereas SLiMP3 did not. That means one could use the nice, high-quality DACs in a medium or high end receiver/amp, and get decent sound. That's why I bought two AudioTrons rather than these.
Now, I would probably get these instead. Ignoring the fact that Turtle Beach is due for a new device soon, we have the following differences:
AudioTron:
+ No server software, works with NAS devices
+ Typical audio component form factor
+ HPNA for those without any kind of LAN
Squeezebox
+ Additional flexibility in Perl server
+ Better web interface, integration
+ Both kinds of digital output
+ 802.11b free instead of $50 add-on
What the hell is this? (Score:2)
Re:Ipod is still better (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ipod is still better (Score:2, Informative)
As much as I would like to own an iPod, I have to disagree with the above statement. Check Pricewatch [pricewatch.com]... EIDE 30 Gig disk, as low as $39. Or a firewire 30 gigger for about $54. And a 30 gig iPod goes for upwards of $450 [google.com]. I love the iPod and really want one, but they are darn near the most expensive product in it's class.
Re:Ipod is still better (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ipod is still better (Score:2, Informative)
Price? (Score:2)
AHHHHH!
Re:Ipod is still better (Score:5, Informative)
I like the idea of a finished, small, and featureful device that uses the music already on your computer on your big stereo. The problem is that this thing costs waaaaay to much. I'd pay a hundred for it, a hundred 125 tops.
Re:Ipod is still better (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Ipod is still better (Score:2, Interesting)
1. You don't need to synch - there's no local memory/storage
2. It's not a portable device
3. It supports both OGG AND AAC
4. See 1 and 2
5. It's the same price as the cheapest IPod (ok, $1 more), but this is pointless because they aren't even competing in the same market!
IPod = Portable digital music player / HDD
Squeezebox = Wireless, digital home audio player
Quit yer bitchin' (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have both LAME and the oggtools installed, SlimServer will automatically convert Ogg files to raw PCM on the fly for playback.
I mean.. this isn't ideal, but it will play them.. so who cares? In some ways, this is even cooler, as it allows you to play anything can be changed into a PCM stream (some hacking may be requird, but if they already have it set up to do one, I can't see it being that hard to have it do others)..
I think it's cool. And to everyone who says it's too expensive, you need to get a real job. I'm sick of all these high school and college kids saying "ooh, it's too expensive.. why would you spend $400 on a video card?" BECAUSE I CAN. Just like I can spend $300 on a streaming music player. I'm not rich, but I make a good living as a software developer and can afford cool toys. I wouldn't want them to dumb this down to make it $150. I want a $300 player with a sweet interface and a nice remote control.
I'm calling you on your classism (Score:3, Insightful)
OK, "Because I can" is fine - it's a free country and you're free to spend as you wish for what you want. I also agree that it's silly to complain that anything like this is "too expensive" - but for a different reason: the company can charge whatever they think will be profitable to them. It
And in any case.... (Score:2)
In my book this is aimed at the intersection of the hardcore audiophile and computerphile crowds -- and I'm not sure how big a market that is, really. A fair number of them would be high school and college students, wouldn't they? Is this the same set of people who'd buy an iPod? Seems a little less mainstream and a little more hard core, to me -- people w
Re: not if you want small and visible (Score:2)
The slimp3 is also 100% opensource (firmware & server software). The squeezebox has an opensource server and they are trying to work out the licensing issues to be able to release its firmware similarly.
Wired readers wouldn't give a shit about that but people reading this sure do...
those facts came right out yr ass (Score:2)
Wired readers wouldn't give a shit about that but people reading this sure do...
Quite the snob & demographic man-about-town today, aren't we
Re:Paid commercial.... (Score:2)
bahhhhhh (Score:2)
You're a marketer's dream (10 out of 15 respondents swear our product is best!!! ).
ms...shudder (Score:2)
Re:TiVo! (Score:2)
Re:TiVo! (Score:2)
But if you want to compare the ability to stream mp3's of one device to the same ability on another device then tivo is way more expensive. Which is what the whole topic of the thread is about anyways, the squeezebox.
Using your reply you could also say that the original slimp3 device doesn't apply either when comparing price as long as someone already owns it.
Re:What about this? (Score:2)
Ordered one in January.... still waiting.
Re:err... (Score:2)
the parent posted "I'm going to wait until I can get a cheap box that will play...", so he obviously didn't "spend a lot of money" on his existing stereo components.
Re:What about the sound quality (Score:2)
That's the nice thing about MP3 streaming. It stays in the original digital format until the analog audio is reconstructed just before the wired outputs to the stereo/amplifier. It's more like a TCP/IP file transfer than some of the half-assed wireless audio links you see at Best Buy.
Doh! (Score:2)
Maybe that is the reason his post's subject was "I'll rather burn CDs"