Not in my case, no, I wouldn't want/need a "Streamer" in my office, or anywhere else.
I've got PC's everywhere, portable DAC/AMP's, Phone / DAP, Tablets, and not a single Streamer - and I don't feel the need to add a Streamer to my setups.
Why duplicate my setup in the guise of a "Streamer"? My existing setups all have Streamer functionality - all network connected music players with App's to stream music, video, etc.
The PC/Linux/Android eco-systems and wide range of Applications are integral to my enjoyment of Music. I would feel lost without those "features" - by limiting myself to a Streamer with a "fixed" set of applications.
Tidal /AMHD hand off control to whichever device I am currently using to listen to music, while I have many other apps loaded to assist me in my daily activities, while leveraging research of other sources of Music information.
I can see the attraction of a Streamer to a non-PC centric person, the Streamer adds App-like features to their music listening, without the need to "learn" how to install and configure applications themselves.
My suggestion to those that want a Streamer is to figure out what functions they want from a Streamer, and get a PC/Tablet/DAP that can install all the features they want, and take their time to learn and explore the far-ranging possibilities that an open environment offers. They can start small - install a couple of Streaming Apps, and then learn and grow over time at a pace that is enjoyable and never-ending.
A Streamer locks you in to whatever it has from the start, with limited updates and new features. Then when a new device is released that device will get the newer features and you'll need to pay for that upgrade, far more than simply uninstalling old App's and installing new ones.
A PC/Linux/Android offers an open environment that you an grow with over the years, and you can upgrade the audio components as you desire - without needing to throw out a whole stack of functionality every time you are forced to buy a new "Streamer".