Why not? If two components have quite the same price but one of them has much more functionalities, it’s very probable that this second item is a compromise: do a lot more but is inferior on some points.
1 Like
So as I said before who needs all of them…any item you need buy the best separately
1 Like
This is perhaps true for hardware components but it is generally false for software components.
Any halfway decent Linux platform for audio applications can support a variety of software component: MPD, HQPlayer, upmpdcli, BubbleUPnP, Squeezelite, RoonBridge, MinimServer, just to make a few examples.
GenTooPlayer, Sonic Orbiter or the Bryson systems are good examples of such dedicated Linux platforms.
This flexibility does not imply any compromise. A component might be available and not even installed. This availability does not compromise the performance of other components in any way.
Many manufacturers purposely cripple down their software systems. Typically this is not done to improve their performance but to restrict their usability. There are many reasons why manufacturers might want to restrict the usability of their software systems.
Often, this pays off in terms of revenues as users are lead to believe that they need to buy more components. But restricting the usability of a system can also pay off in terms of reduced maintenance and licensing costs. Restricting the usability of a system can also have strategic advantages, e.g. lock users into a brand-specific ecosystem.
I have understood that @Meni was referring to software functionalities, hence my remark. Perhaps I was wrong and he meant hardware components. In this case, I stay corrected.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.