Hi vova, I am a lifetime member and for me this is a sad story.
What if I don’t use my main PC at all and control it via remote access. So in this case, I don’t need the Roon application to start at all and only need the Roon server module. I don’t want to go to my computer everytime to close the Roon app. Please suggest as this is worrying me
can you make an only server module available for download as well? i think this will be very helpful
On your remote machine, you can make the server component not start automatically and you can quit it as needed.
On your server machine, you don’t need to launch the remote more than the first time to get it running and launch at startup.
I don’t know, I like the idea of a stripped down “remote” app, but I also like the idea of a stripped down “core” app. Can’t the two be kept separate, and you just install/run what you need? Too confusing?
You can download the Roon Server variant for Windows from here: Roon - Downloads
As @danny says, if you have the full Roon variant, once up and running you can exit the Roon control screen and it’ll still run the server side.
If you have two computers, but one will only be the Core, download the server there. On the other download the full Roon variant. Once running you’ll be ask to select which Core you wish to use, chose the standalone Core (Roon Server).
Hope this makes it a little clearer.
I do get what you mean though. Just a Roon Remote download option.
It’s just one download that includes the server and GUI. Just shut down Roon GUI if you don’t need it. Or, as Danny said, evidently there is a way to not start the server part if you don’t need it.
Well, Not quite true. If you start both, then connect the client install to a ROCK server, you can then independently from the taskbar shut down RoonServer. The first time you do this, it will also close the Roon Client even if it is now attached to a different Server. However, thereafter, when you start Roon, only the client will start connected to the other Server, and the Roon server on that PC will not start.
To get the RoonServer on that PC back, you have to go to Settings, Disconnect from the remote server and then “use this PC” to start that PC’s RoonServer.
If you install Roon (both) then shut down the client, the server will stay running. If you click the option to start on reboot, the server will start without the client. However, if you want to connect your client on that PC to a different server then you will have to do the above.
If you are like me and have two servers, of which, you like to switch servers often,because RoonServer on the PC can interfere with the audio playback of other software, then you have to do the above every time you use Roon.
I have three Roon servers and three Roon subscriptions, so I just leave all three running. It’s simple to switch my Dell laptop client from one to the other. I do it multiple times a day.
Some users (want/need/have to) run Roon Server, and only Roon Server, because the machine doesn’t meet the prerequisites to run the Roon Remote UI (headless machines, machines without or with outdated GPU). What should they do?
yes im one of those users and im sure there are many more like us
You only have to run the remote (GUI) app once to load the server. Then you tell the system to load the server app automatically at startup and the remote app no longer loads.
This seems a bit complex to me. I am afraid the server will run on my windows PC where I just need the remote…
I personally prefer to have two installers with a clear communication about Server (better than Core) and Remote than searching how to stop the server that would start automatically when I don’t need it.
But I wait to see the new installer to see if it is all clear.
Which is one time too much if you can’t? That is the point of what I wrote.
Please, enlighten us with some reasoning behind this change?
Like many others i run my server headless, and for my main server i have chosen Windows, to allow for other server functions along with Roon Server. (You know, the Internet might go tits up? 
)
The decision to force inclusion of the GUI part will likely complicate things for headless installs and perhaps limited graphical capabilities.
I’d rather see a full separation of the three main components, Roon Core (brain), Roon Endpoint (RAAT/Bridge) and Roon Control (Remote). Just be clear that every Roon setup needs an instance of each of these three to function. Simple? All good things are three i’m told…
@Phil_Active_Audio, I have been using B1310 for a few weeks, including moving to a new PC for my “old Core”/“new Roon Server” instance and everything has been smooth; I now run a Roon Server server and it works fine.
B1310 updates on W11 PCs and Macs I use for Remotes have resulted in no issues. Roon Server is installed as separate apps on these computers, but are not running. I run only the Roon app GUI when I use any of these as a Remote.
And Roon Bridge works fine across all devices on which i have it installed.
Is it faster now?
No changes I can see, Roon always has been stable and fast for me.
Nor would one expect any performance changes by different packaging 
I have read the change log, but the claim that people are unable to read/understand the architecture behind Roon is hardly a valid reason to make it impossible to accomplish an optimal setup in a common scenario?
Which is in contradiction with the blurb in the change log… Thats why i’d like some reasoning behind this change.
But people obviously doesn’t read or understand text online nowadays…