Well Marian, thanks for you view but that’s an answer for a 29.99$ product (i mean ARC). But not for 699$ - i expect to get a product which is thoughtful and can not as you say - partially works. Do you know how dangerous fiddeling with the phone is while driving ? This is far away from 699$ → that’s the bar.
It’s also dangerous to fiddle with the head unit while driving. That’s why integrated navigation systems restrict what you can do when the car is moving. You can also get a phone holder. This is not a good argument.
My bar is $120/year.
@Sascha_Afkhampour your contributions are off topic This thread is not for you to air driving safety concerns that arise from using a product that you appear not to be using! Please feel free to start another thread. Or you could tell us your thoughts on Roon 2.0 and internet connectivity from the point of view of a person that doesn’t use Roon and is glad that they’ve not paid for this “money sinking software”.
3 Likes
Hey @Sascha_Afkhampour,
Thanks for your unique feedback. Curiously, most people who complain about regretting having spent $699.00 on a lifetime Roon license have actually spent $699.00 on a lifetime license. You have not. Instead, it looks like you took advantage of our 90 Days of Roon for $1.00 Black Friday offer last year and then let your subscription lapse. Understandable since you never installed the software.
You don’t have an active Roon subscription currently, so I imagine that your experience with Roon ARC has been limited to watching our YouTube promo videos and posting uninformed complaints about a product you don’t actually use.
I don’t know about other folks here, but to me, your supply of useful Roon and Roon ARC feedback is nill. You’ve spent a sum total of $1 not to install the software. Fascinating.
There’s probably something better you can find to do with your time…? 
Why don’t you try doing that, because this nonsense has a rapidly approaching expiration date. Thanks!
23 Likes
There needs to be a 
10X or 100X option… I would really like to see a 
option too or one with a / ie dont love option
2 Likes
That is an excellent idea and it would probably prevent a lot of the pointless “bickering” that permeates some threads 
1 Like
This was the main part I saw reason to comment on.
A high end CD player is a lifestyle product (oh yes, it is) and if it didn’t deliver it’s performance that I expected, not demanded, I wouldn’t have purchased it. Try before you buy my friend…oh you did.
Time to step of the bus and get a taxi.
Unfortunately, you alienated yourself in this thread with two Roon team members calling you out for a silly sausage that you are.
I believe I addressed the issue multiple times over. Which issue do you think I missed to address?
1 Like
Well, you could have explained how the software many of us purchased years ago, to organize and play our local library, could be used in a… well… off-line environment…
I know you have put ARC up as a viable alternative, but that doesn’t really cut it, because:
It is too late to download what you want to listen to if you’re offline
And i don’t want to be forced to use the smartphone/tablet as an audio transport, unless it can connect to my RAAT devices on the functional local area network.
2 Likes
I did explain that: Use ARC with pre-downloaded content or use 1.8 Legacy to return to the previous behavior. You may not like the explanation, but that is the explanation.
Also, I’d like to correct some terminology. You subscribed to a service. You did not purchase software. If you were a lifetime subscriber, you just paid upfront for access to the service for the life of the service.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’ve reread the 100 post thread summary, in which 58 different persons indicate that they are puzzled by the design decision to make a permanent internet connection a requirement to properly run Roon 2.0. 200 people have indicated in another thread that they would like Roon to be able to play local content without the requirement of an internet connection. It seems a lot of people came to this forum specifically to voice their opinion that they’re not happy with this change.
The basic answers in these two threads seem to have been ‘advanced search’, ‘architecture’ and ‘it’s a requirement now’, but you’ve not really provided much insight into the underlying reasoning, other than ‘two algorithms’ and ‘attracting more customers’.
I hope you can understand this isn’t really helpful for people who indicate they’ve invested hundreds of dollars in a Roon server, in Roon Ready devices, in a recent lifetime subscription, etc., based on the reasonable assumption that Roon was first and foremost a product to play music across your home network. I think a few of us are still hoping the team will simply acknowledge that some of these complaints are not completely baseless. More than anything, more than answers, I’m hoping you would take the feedback here to heart and at least consider looking for a solution that would make more of us happy.
As far as I can summarize, the open questions are:
• Why is a constant internet connection required for playing local content?
• Why was the decision made to radically reduce the grace period from 30 days to 1 (?) day?
• Would the Roon team consider developing a way to make core functionality (like playing and queueing music) less fault tolerant and provide some reliable way to keep playing local music when the internet connection is unstable or down? Quite a few customers face the scenario of having patchy internet connections. A lot of people indicate that they would even accept doing without the search functionality if you could somehow guarantee basic playback functionality. Few people think that sticking to Roon 1.8 or figuring out a complex workaround are reasonable solutions for this. Few people think that predownloading content to a mobile device is in any way similar to having access to your library on your home network.
• How does this decision align with the Roon philosophy, on basis of which a lot of people here seem to have made their decision to invest in Roon? It seems more people are convinced that this design decision really is a philosophy shift, rather than a misunderstanding on their part.
30 Likes
IMHO irrelevant - if you buy a lemon car, the fact that there is Uber doesn’t make it right.
v
2 Likes
[Rejected Edit: Not to say Roon is a lemon - well, a little bit when it comes to local files! 
, just pointing out the logical weakness of the argument; it is OBVIOUS that spending money on something else is an alternative. Doesn’t take a genius or that people actually say it to figure that out. The point is that shouldn’t have to. ]
v
3 Likes
Maybe Roon doesn’t want to tell you (or me) why. This wouldn’t be mysterious; lots of companies don’t reveal the inner thinking for some change or other. The bump in major version should be a tip-off, I’d think. Roon 2.x is not Roon 1.x. Maybe the whole architecture is being re-thought. After all, the world is different from the way it was in 2015.
And the fact that people came to complain about it means nothing. People in general don’t like change, and do like to complain. Audiophiles in particular seem compelled to cling to “the old ways”; imagine still using tube amps or vinyl records as sources!
2 Likes
Let’s see…
It’s not. The decision was made so we could be unstalled in other areas of the product, including navigation.
It’s not 1 day. It’s zero. Things may work without internet access, but we can not guarantee they will. I’m guessing that you’ve not been affected. Have you?
We already do that. Try pulling your internet and try to play. It’ll probably work fine because we do exactly as you ask. We just won’t guarantee it anymore.
Our philosophy has been to push technical requirements forward. This is in alignment of that. From day 1, we’ve always had complaints of Roon’s technical requirements. But it’s also the thing that makes the product interesting.
2 Likes
Wow, insulting your own users/customers. Roon sure is a class act. So glad I cancelled my service.
2 Likes
I’m sure @jamie wasn’t insulting a customer. The person in question doesn’t have a active account subscription.
The person in questions was trash talking a product with no grounds to do so.
In all honesty, I’m getting very tired of the repeated nonsense by many in this thread. Team Roon have explained, in very plain language, Roon 2.0 and Arc.
Many of us understand this and are extremely happy with the service we subscribe to.
I feel those who are not as happy need to explain in short;
Why - the reason not happy
What - would make them happy
All products tend not to be perfect for everyone, but Roon is almost there for the majority.
If you just use this forum to trash talk a service you subscribe to (or not), the door is over there and please shut it on the way out.
1 Like
Absolutely correct Danny, i did see my mistake, but was unable to edit my post accordingly.
But the service i aquired a license to use, has changed it’s trajectory during the years, to a tool which is both better and in some aspects not what i signed up for.
This being said, i am fortunate to live in an area where online connectivity is both stable and available. And since beginning of may i still haven’t been affected by the online access requirement (afaik) and the Roon experience has been quite pleasing.
Particularly so with ARC which has changed my listening habits and the way i look at Roon (the product)!
Still, i like to be free of dependencies irrelevant to the cause, and hence i have hedged my bets to secure local media playback in a satisfactory manner, even without Roon.
3 Likes
Danny, thanks for answering. I’m afraid we’re going around in circles. The answers provided are statements, not explanations. In conclusion, what I guess you’re saying with “we cannot guarantee” is that the Roon team will no longer be investing in (improving) fault tolerance when it comes internet dependence, and has already made some decisions that will probably make Roon less fault tolerant in this regard. This is what’s perceived as a step back to the people who were using Roon as a “play your local content” product - Roon was sold as such, and the architecture of it is reflected in the Roon Knowledge Base.
People here aren’t (necessarily) demanding that you revert some of the decisions you’ve made. I, for one, would have liked to get a little more insight into your reasoning. This could have made it easier to come to terms with these decisions or make better informed decisions about my future with Roon. It might even have restored my trust entirely. But the clarity I’m looking for, does not seem to be forthcoming. I can accept that and won’t insist any further.
5 Likes