Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GUI Software Technology Hardware

Remote Controls On The March 159

Posted by timothy from the most-remotes-are-badly-designed dept.
faxafloi writes "SFGate has an article about how remote controls have proliferated in our world like rabbits. Even their inventor, Robert Adler, is befuddled by them. 'Universal' remotes help some, but are not interoperable with enough devices to drive everything, so we're stuck with multiple remotes. The article then describes the new top of the line models, ranging to (ahem) $1699.00." (Of course, there were remote controls of a sort long before Adler.) For another approach to universal remote control -- using a cell phone as display and controller -- read on below.

An anonymous reader writes "This whitepaper describes Intel's research into innovative and futuristic uses of camera phones. Cell phones are already much more than a communication device. In cities around the world, purchasing a soda out of a vending machine can be as easy as dialing your cell phone. Even parking and toll fees are easily paid through a cell phone, and they are used as debit/credit cards to purchase food, services, and gas. Now, the global proliferation of cell phones with cameras brings more opportunities to use mobile phone devices in different capacities -- and the best part is that these applications require no additional hardware. In Intel's research, camera phones are being used as pointing devices, authentication devices, storage devices, and even as user interfaces for systems that, because of cost and/or form factor, aren't able to accommodate a display of their own."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Remote Controls On The March More

Remote Controls On The March

Comments Filter:

  • 1,699$ Remote (Score:5, Funny)

    by arieswind ( 789699 ) * on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:15PM (#9601191) Homepage
    if I'm going to pay almost 1700$ on a remote, I better be able to drive my car with it like in that one James Bond movie :)
    • Piece of crap, really. Lots of defective units from the factory. Not as easy to use as the earlier Pronto remotes (which I really do like a lot). Surfing the net is slow and hard to use a touchscreen for.

      Lots of promise in this unit, as it does run Linux and does a lot of cool stuff, but it just didn't turn out that well.

      My recomendation : get a Harmony or a Pronto. If you have a Tivo, get a Pronto (because you don't need the guide in the Harmony).
  • subject says it all :-))

    Simon
    • That is a little out of hand, but that is the very top of the line. I was using a 300 dollar remote at my girlfriends, and it definetly adds to the experience.

      I had seen the remote before and thought it was rediculous to spend that much on a universal remote, but when you already have 2500 bucks in equipment you might as well splurge.

      But, it has a touch screen interface, auto programming through ir, back lighting, etc. etc. All in all, if I was gonna invest in a good home theater I would say not to skip

    • Tell me about it..

      At he place I graduated high school they had the ultimate remotes.. these things were capeable of turning on any TV in the school, accessing the bank of VCRs in the library and could schedual an event such as a VCR playing and a TV turning on or off up to two years in advance.

      Each teacher was given one when we all moved into the newly built school.. after four months of TVs being randomly turned on and off by teachers lost in these remotes the teachers all went back to the old TV/vcr on

  • Can't let that happen (Score:5, Funny)

    by ResidntGeek ( 772730 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:16PM (#9601196) Journal
    No, we can't be making any sort of changes to our remote system - not while having 5 remotes confuses the technically inept of the world, to my endless amusement. ("Whaddya mean, I have to switch the input on both the stereo AND the TV?" - my uncle)

  • Consumer A/V devices suck! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MisterP ( 156738 ) * on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:17PM (#9601200)
    The main problem I see with complicated A/V systems is that each device stores its own state and the remote is completely unaware of what state each device is in. If one device is out of sync your 25 step macro button is worthless.

    This is where that Harmony remote shines. It effectively "remembers" what state a device is in. I've had one of these remotes for about a year and it's awesome. It's the first remote that my wife can actually use. No more "we have $4000 worth of electronics and i can't use any of it" conversations. Unfortunately, it still takes some technical prowess to get it working 100%.

    So many of these remote problems could be solved by a simple common serial protocol that all a/v components (of any brand) talk. Ideally, you add device to your system and it autonegotiates with the recevier and the TV so the TV knows what input it's on and the receiver knows what input it is on. It blows me a away that something like this hasn't been done. Infact, there has been ZERO progress in this area since I've started playing with stereos 20 years ago. It's sad.

    The other problem I see with newer devices is the incredibly bad UI in most of the menu screens. In the last 2 years, I've bought 2 Toshiba TV's (one HDTV, one analog set) a Toshiba VCR and a Toshiba DVD player. All the menus on all those devices are completely different. Different "widgets", different methods of accessing sub-menus, different everything.

    • Re:Consumer A/V devices suck! (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      >So many of these remote problems could be solved by a simple common serial protocol that all a/v components (of any brand) talk.

      Like JVC AV link, perhaps ?

      That still doesn't solve the issue that your remote is transmit only, so even if it guesses at the state of your devices, it doesn't know that the devices might missed the code.

      May be you wired the remote to this serial interface ?

    • Re:Consumer A/V devices suck! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Amiga Lover ( 708890 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:28PM (#9601259)
      The main problem I see with complicated A/V systems is that each device stores its own state and the remote is completely unaware of what state each device is in. If one device is out of sync your 25 step macro button is worthless.

      I see the problem as not only the remote->device setup sucking, but almost every electronic device's UI sucks too. There's little in the way of standards, and there's too much in the way of trying to compress all 150 functions of say, a VCR, into 5 buttons and one 2-line display, or similar.

      Occasionally a device comes out that stuns the world, like the iPod seems to. How curious that what it takes to be so well regarded in its interface is for it to do little more than a cassette player did more than 30 years ago. The iPod may be easy to use, but its reputation is strengthened all the more by the panoply of horrific interfaces on most other gadgets.
    • Why is this necessary? Can't you use your eyeballs to know what state each device is in? If you can't tell whether or not your TV is turned on, then I think that you've got bigger problems than a remote control.
      • Yes, but your remote doesn't have eyeballs. If you create a macro on your remote that, for example, turns your TV on, VCR on, switches your TV to the VCR input, and plays the videocassette, it is assuming that your TV and VCR are both Off at the time the macro is run. However, if someone manually turned the TV on before the macro was run, then running the macro would cause the TV to turn Off and the VCR on, which is useless. This is because, when you push "Power" on your remote control, the remote simply te
        • Some devices support discrete on/off codes. (i.e. "if it's on don't do anything, if it's off turn on")

          Unfortunately such devices are typically rare and expensive. :(
      • I still haven't figured out why the car stereo I bought a few weeks ago came with a remote control... There isn't one spot from in my car that you can't reach the buttons from.
        • I still haven't figured out why the car stereo I bought a few weeks ago came with a remote control... There isn't one spot from in my car that you can't reach the buttons from.

          My JVC MP3 CD player came with one as well.

          I guess it's for the folks who are using it in a van / RV, or who are into the "sound scene" where they fill the car with speakers and need to stand a bit away.


    • The main problem I see with complicated A/V systems is that each device stores its own state and the remote is completely unaware of what state each device is in

      That's pretty much a correct evaluation.

      I can't find it now, but some design firm in Canada did a study on remote useability.
    • So what we need is a low speed standard for communications between consumer A/V devices. Something along the lines of MIDI with a standardized vocabulary would be very cool. If your TV could tell your stereo to switch to the same input as the tv is tuned to then most of the problems with advanced setups would go away.
    • You can solve the inputs issue by running everything through a common box that has 1 remote; ie, your cable tuner, dish reciever, VCR, DVD, LD, hifi, etc, all send their audio and video to inputs on the one box, which then outputs to your monitors (your TV, your amp, etc) so that you only have to set the where each device sends its signal to and gets its input from once, after that you're just switching modes on the selector. Obviously, you've still got channel selection and power state on the various devic
    • The main problem I see with complicated A/V systems is that each device stores its own state and the remote is completely unaware of what state each device is in.

      Actually, most devices accept "discrete codes" which are separate non-toggle (i.e. ON-only and OFF-only) codes. The problem is that most manufacturer remotes only have toggle buttons, I guess to save space on the remote.

      However, many of the sophisticated remotes allow you to download discrete codes for your equipment. Read a recent post of mine [slashdot.org]

  • It's not as bad as it seems (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rude Turnip ( 49495 ) <valuation&gmail,com> on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:21PM (#9601215)
    Most universal remotes will handle multiple devices for you. A co-worker of mine has a $700 remote with virtual screens, etc. that takes care of his living room. However, when I asked him if his remote can access each device's special menus for things like brightness, contrast and other settings, he said he still needs the original remote controls for such purposes. However, how often do you need to fiddle with such minute settings? Stick the originals in a drawer and forget about them until you need them for very rare, specific purposes.

    Keep in mind that the alternative would be having a control panel of knobs and buttons on all your devices, which only provide more points of failure.

    • Devices SHOULD have front-panel controls (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You're saying that having a proper set of the controls on the device itself - which cannot be lost or run out of batteries, and are generally harder to break or wear out than those awful membrane remote buttons - is LESS robust than the current solution of REQUIRING the remote control for most advanced functions?

      Are you the crack pusher who got the VCR designers hooked in the first place? ;)
      • It's simple economics--- for $400 you can have $375 worth of guts and a $25 UI based on three buttons and a one-line LCD plus a remote, or you can have $250 worth of guts and $150 worth of buttons and knobs.

        Anybody who has worked on these systems knows that usually the components that fail most often are either not on the main PCB board (knobs, connectors, etc) or are directly connected to a component not on the board. Warranty work is of course built into the cost of the unit...
        • The components that fail most often are usually switched power supplies.

          I personally prefer things that have controls on the front panel. Remotes are kludgy, tend to fail, tend to get misplaced or run out of batteries. Is the couple pushbuttons really that much expensive? Material cost is about a dozen cents a piece, and that's the more expensive kind.

          Or if the vendors are THAT MUCH cheap, they could at least offer a set of solder pads on the board and a downloadable schematics for a do-it-yourself pane

    • A co-worker of mine has a $700 remote with virtual screens, etc. that takes care of his living room. However, when I asked him if his remote can access each device's special menus for things like brightness, contrast and other settings, he said he still needs the original remote controls for such purposes. However, how often do you need to fiddle with such minute settings?

      If I'm gonna blow $700 on a remote it better be able to access every feature my equipment has. Spending that much on a remote that c


    • I use Philips universal remote [amazon.com]

      I was able to program all my devices onto it, and it learned the commands for a daewoo 5800 dvd player. I haven't found a need to touch any of my original remotes. Also, you can have it "learn" the special menus. A neat thing you can do is program any key for any device. So if you want to control the amp with the cd player selected, you can program it to. It fits really well in the hand, costs under 20 dollars, and its available at shopko.

      I did a considerable amount of shopp

      • I definitely agree...I love the 8-function version [bestbuy.com]....only $25 and it has Tivo and ReplayTV buttons. Plus it is incredibly light and thin. The only flaw is that the buttons are not backlit or glow-in-the-dark (which should be a minimum requirement for all remotes).

        I used to geek out on my Philips NeoPronto [philips.com], their $200 "low end" progammable remote, until my toddler introduced it to the floor. It was more fun to program than it was to use, though...you don't really care about having 20-step macros and cu

    • your co-workers remote in a word sucks.

      Phillips pronto.

      I can access ALL functions on ALL devices and SCRIPT commands.

      I have one butting that says movietime that will turn on everything and set the inputs right for watching DVD's.

      I suggest your co-worker return his overpriced junk remote and get a phillips pronto. 100% programmable and compatable with every device...

      that one remote made my wife love the home theatre and the home automation system (I have commands for house modes in it!)

      and I only paid

  • Salling Clicker (Score:5, Informative)

    by aclarke ( 307017 ) <spam.clarke@ca> on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:22PM (#9601218) Homepage
    It may not be a UNIVERSAL remote, but for those of us with Apple computers and bluetooth phones, Salling Clicker [mac.com] lets us use our phones as a display and a remote. Works great!

  • Programmable Remotes (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    There was an app for the PocketPC that would read an IR signal sent to it, then you could assign it to a specific button. You could have multiple remotes with multiple buttons that would do different things. The only problem was it used the touchscreen, so it didn't work 'like a remote': you couldn't use it without looking at it.

    Why not make a physical remote like that, that allows you to assign different buttons to a different signal? Then we could customize our remotes for the systems as we see fit.
    • I've got one of those, a Memorex programmable remote from the early 90's. Big sucker, but can be programmed to drive most IR capable stuff.
    • We have the LIRC project. The software is open, there are large sets of existing remote commands there, a way to acquire more of them. Either you can use a PC (which tends to be a bit bulky, though), or write a program for a microcontroller using the sequences, and build your own universal remote, configurable by a PC.

      For better effect, it could be built on an open breadboard, protected and insulated with thick layer of protective varnish. Or the breadboard could be put into a transparent plexiglas case,

  • Too many remotes: (Score:3, Funny)

    by chickens ( 626775 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:25PM (#9601233)
    In my day, we'd change channel with a long pointy stick. Problem solved

  • Remote Central (Score:3, Informative)

    by Flaken2000 ( 260142 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:26PM (#9601235)
    See Remote Central for in-depth info on remotes.

    http://www.remotecentral.com
  • Universal, to me, would mean controlling everything right? I haven't seen a remote control yet that can shut up the neighbor's dog, without, of course, one of those anti-bark collars. THAT, I would pay money for.

  • its true (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ErichTheWebGuy ( 745925 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:29PM (#9601261) Homepage
    I have remotes for my: cable box, dvd player, tivo, vcr, tv, cd player, amp, tape deck, and eq.

    If that weren't enough, my fan (yea, fan) has a remote. And, I almost bought a car stereo the other day that has a, you guess it, remote control.
    • I bought a Panasonic boom box for my wife the other day. I take it out of the box and guess what it has. Yup, at tiny little remote.

      I'm ready to throw the little sucker out(the remote), but I first need to ensure that the radio has full functionality without it. I got burned like that once on a Sony receiver/amp. It had features only accessable from the remote....

      wbs.
      • It had features only accessable from the remote....

        My VCR is like that. The Tv/Video button exists only on the remote, which means if the remote ever breaks, the VCR will be entirely useless. There will be no way for me to get picture from the VCR to appear on the TV without that remote.
    • I don't mind having remotes as long as I can control all of the device from the device itself. I have an old VCR that I can't do much of anything with unless I have the remote. I ended up losing the remote after I moved and now all I can do is play, stop, rewind, and fast forward. I can't configure it or change to the line inputs at all.
      • I feel your pain. I have Adelphia digital cable, and their boxes arent good for anything without the remote. It doesn't even have a volume control!! My VCR only has play, ff, and rew. Not even pause (and yes I tried hitting play again).

  • Mobile phone is a great remote for laptop (Score:4, Informative)

    by Uninen ( 746304 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:30PM (#9601268) Homepage

    I've been using Nokia 6600 [nokia.com] with Salling Clicker [mac.com] for a while now and it works great.

    It can control just about every program and SC ships with ready scripts for the most used, like iTunes, Keynote and Powerpoint.

  • get them all to talk Java. then one device can have the right programming and be able to talk to the device over Wifi and download the interface specs from it and from there it can control the unit.
    • Congratulations, you've just been promoted to management/marketing.

      I have a better idea, let's have them use the 802.11 to download new firmware from the web! The websites that host new firmware will never be down! And we can code the software to not allow you to override or ignore the "can't reach firmware host" error message! And we can put big ornate 11" color LCDs on them, so that consumers have to buy new batteries every 30 minutes! And java really is too weak here, maybe we can go with .NET.
      • It's really funny when someone with no clue goes on a rant.

        Check this [jini.org] out before you embarass yourself.

        • And that solves any of our problems, how exactly? If companies just bothered to spend a little more time on the remotes, rather than skimping on them in favor of the tv/stereo, we'd have no need of jini. Matter of fact, we still have no need of it, even now.

          More generic buttons, a learning feature, or hell, maybe industry standard IR codes. Or, we could just overengineer it, put little arm7 cpu's in everything, and release new software versions every 3 weeks, so that nothing you have ever quite interoper
          • You obviously didn't read the link.

            And that solves any of our problems, how exactly?

            Because the device being crontrolled exposes not only its API, but its user interface. Therefore, your universal remote control is really universal, because the UI is being provided by the device being controlled.

            If companies just bothered to spend a little more time on the remotes, rather than skimping on them in favor of the tv/stereo, we'd have no need of jini.

            That isn't the problem. I have no issues with any of

    • get them all to talk Java
      ' Eh? I'm not sure what you mean by "talk Java"...Java is a programming language, not an inter-device interface. I think what would be preferred we be some type of open communications standard.
      Yes, Java runs on a lot of devices, but that doesn't mean that 2 devices running Java will be able to understand eachother....
      • He's referring to Jini [jini.org]

        Using Jini, two devices running Java will be able to understand each other. The idea is that devices that need to be controlled expose not only their API, but their user interface. Thus, if you had a Jini-enabled remote, and it found a stereo on your bluetooth network, it would download the UI for the stereo from the stereo and display it on the remote. Since the UI would be made by the stereo manufacturer, it would allow you to control all its features. Java's security model all

  • Old School Remotes (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MyNameIsFred ( 543994 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:35PM (#9601293)
    When I was a child, TV remotes were uncommon and worked very differently -- they used sound. I vividly remember our remote. It had four metal bars visible thru the grating. Pushing the on/off button caused a hammer to hit one of the bars. The TV reacted to the sound. Very basic functionality: On/Off, volume in steps, and up/down channel changing.

    Oh the hours of fun. Learning how to change channels by jiggling my Mom's car keys. Or the dog perking up when we hit certain buttons.

    Although it beat by Dad's previous remote. Hey son, go change the channels. Kids today don't know what they're missing.

    • I remember those. They were fun to find things that would change the channel. And yeah, we had a tv that the keys could change if shaken correctly.
    • The one I remember: there was this pachinko-like game we got for christmas that had round slugs/tokens. The tokens all had this 4-loop (think 4-leaf clover) hole cut out of them, and when they rattled together, the channel changed.

      Christmas afternoon, my cousins and I drove the grown-ups crazy. We'd figured this out already, and we discreetly sat off to the side and played our game while they tried to watch football. Every time the channel changed in the middle of a play, someone would let out a shriek

      • We still only have three channels... with anything worth watching, anyway. ;-) Plus hour long commercials (so-called "infomercials", the 24 hour animal sex channel, CNN, and ESPN.

        (No MTV doesn't count as a channel anymore. They're just a longer informercial interrupted by boring RV-trip documentaries.)
      • We had a similar television, though I have no idea what brand/make it was. We found out that the lights in the room could change the channel.

        The lights were floorstanders with a lampshade. The lampshade connected via two prongs that fit into receptables on the base. There were little metal dome covers to sort of lock it into place. We discovered, by accident, that flipping the little metal cover up would change the channel when it hit the base again.

        The light ended up completely replacing the remote f
  • Heh, this reminds me of the situation with dumb terminals, where every piece of hardware has it's own control codes and today we're stuck with a mindbogglingly complex terminfo database.

    It would be nice if manufacturers could agree on some sort of standard protocol. Especially if this standard would work over a LAN as well as a remote control. Then I could replace all my remote controls with a very small shell script.

  • Sure I'll buy a can of soda (Score:5, Funny)

    by MisterSarcastic ( 793770 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:40PM (#9601312)

    "In cities around the world, purchasing a soda out of a vending machine can be as easy as dialing your cell phone."

    Because buying soda from a vending amchine is -so- much more difficult than dialing a cellphone. All that heavy change you have to lug around, when instead you could be reading the number off of the vending machine, entering it into your phone, paying an extra 50 cents or so for the minutes it takes to call, navigate through the menu to choose your soda and Voila! Its all taken care of transparently through the miracle of technology.

    I'm going to try this out the next chance I get.

  • RadioShack 15-1994 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mdwebster ( 158623 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:41PM (#9601316)
    The Radio Shack 15-1994 remote can be had, on sale, for $30.00. If it doesn't have the code for a device, you can have it 'read' the signal from the remote for that device. It will hold up to 20 of those, I believe.

    If you want more, you can build [hifi-remote.com] a serial-interface cable and upload new signatures into the main memory to leave more room for dynamic buttons and macros.
    • Reading the signal isn't good enough, this remote doesn't have any generic buttons. So if RS hasn't thought of the button, too bad, nothing to assign it to. Unless, perhaps, you want to sacrifice the volume buttons for it...
      • It has 4 generic buttons right across the top below the mode switches and 7 mode switches. You can also cross-map volume, say from your stereo system, to overlap the volume controls when in Cable/Sat mode. There are also numerous buttons that a given mode would rarely use that you could map on top of like picture-in-picutre or surround mode or move.

        BTW, After a bit of reading, I believe you can do 50+ custom mappings depending on the signals.
    • Many years ago Radio shack had the perfect remote control. It was programmable for 6 or 8 devices, it had a LCD screen to indicate device selection and status, had a clock, and was scriptable. The scripts could be set to execute at certain times.

      It was a little hard to set up because all the commands had to programmed in from an existing remote. This was bad because this unit would not replace a lost remote, but good because it was expandle to work with all devices. Unfortunately, it broke and I have s

    • The 15-1994 remote happens to be PC-programmable. For more info, go to http://www.hifi-remote.com/ - It is MUCH better to use a proper device "upgrade" loaded into the remote than the learning functionality. You can only learn 20-30 buttons before the remote runs out of memory, but if you program it with a complete remote upgrade, you can have ALL buttons programmed for multiple devices. (I have at least 4 upgrades loaded into my 15-2116 remote via JP1.)

  • Get a JP1 remote, much cheaper (Score:5, Interesting)

    by spideyct ( 250045 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:43PM (#9601328)
    Find a JP1 [hifi-remote.com] capable remote. You can get many great universal remotes for MUCH cheaper ($15), that have better features/compatibility than the expensive (>$100) remotes out there. JP1 capable remotes have a pin connection that lets you program them from your computer using free software developed by an avid community [yahoo.com].

    Since I bought my JP1-enabled One For All Cinema 7 two years ago, it is the only remote I've needed in my living room (with TV, DVD, VCR, Stereo, CD Player, Satellite). I'm serious, all of the other remotes are sitting in a drawer somewhere collecting dust. I think it cost me less than $20.

    • About the cheapest JP1-ready "out of the box" remote is the One For All 8810w (Same as their 8811, just with a different model number for Walmart's price guarantee purposes - Walmart can say they have the lowest price because only they carry that specific model number.) It's $18 plus tax.

      I have an RS 15-2116. I love the feel of it, I love the flexibility, and lots of buttons. A bit more expensive at $30. I'm probably going to get an 8810w soon just as a second remote. (One for downstairs, one for upst
  • It's not just a remote, its a wireless phone!!!

    Well, that was my groups idea for engineering business class. I seriously wonder how well that would actually sell.

  • I've had some luck... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NoMoreNicksLeft ( 516230 ) <john.oyler@noSpAm.comcast.net> on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:51PM (#9601358) Journal
    Details: Tivo, Sony Universal remote that doesn't do Tivo.

    I have the packard bell IR remote reciever connected to my linux server with about 25' of cat5. Custom shell script recieves the input (Sony thinks it is talking to a VCR) and pumps it back out to the Tivo via another serial. Also works for a RCA directv reciever, which the sony remote only partially implements (some menu buttons are gone, etc). Dishnet is a problem, they don't have external serial ports, and even hacking inside doesn't work, seems to be nothing for it in firmware.

    Now I just need a 4way (or better) svideo switch, that speaks serial (since we damn well know that even if I got that $70 remote controlled one, my universal remote can't speak that). Think if I got one of those manual button ones, that I could use a PIC or atmel and a few transistors?

    PS. The trouble with even the learning remotes, is that they don't have enough generic buttons. Waiting for one that has a "tivo" button isn't the solution, put a few "A", "B", "C" buttons on it, for godsake.
    • Now I just need a 4way (or better) svideo switch, that speaks serial (since we damn well know that even if I got that $70 remote controlled one, my universal remote can't speak that).

      Or build it from scratch. It's a few connectors and a handful of small relays. They typically have smaller crosstalk than solid-state chips.

  • The Teleautomaton [mercury.gr] - Another first for Tesla.

    Who else likes alternating current?

  • universal remote (Score:4, Informative)

    by darkain ( 749283 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:56PM (#9601384) Homepage
    Laptop: $500
    ATI RemoteWonder: $50
    IR-Blaster: $50

    ability to use an RF remote to control virutally *any* IR device? priceless.
    • ability to use an RF remote to control virutally *any* IR device? priceless.

      Don't mess around with an IR-Blaster. Get an IR laser diode and reprogram the neighbourhood.

  • Why not a wand remote instead? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AltaMannen ( 568693 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @02:58PM (#9601390)
    I'm getting enough of button pressing when I'm at work so why not change the user interface of the remote to a gesture with a wand?

    It couldn't be that hard to make something like a ps2 eye-toy that interprets motions made using a black stick with a white tip, and voice recognition for the device choice. Just say 'TV' and draw the channel number in the air. Move the stick sideways to increase/decrease volume and juggle the stick for hilarious results!

    Slap a Harry Potter logo on the box and it's bound to sell millions as well!

  • JINI + bluetooth + phone/pda ideal solution (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MCRocker ( 461060 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @03:05PM (#9601426) Homepage
    Surely his is the perfect place for JINI [webopedia.com] technology to really shine.

    All you need is a bluetooth or WiFi enabled Java/JINI phone/pda or some such gadget. As you walk into the room, your device gets updated with the appropriate GUI control software for all of your entertainment boxes and you just select the ones you want to use and interact with them via the user interface provided via JINI.

    No more searching for the correct controller. The too many buttons syndrome could also be overcome because these apps will be able to use rich client interfaces to simplify the huge number of options and even provide help documentation!

    I doubt it'll happen any time soon though.

  • Remote Control Design (Score:4, Insightful)

    by maggeth ( 793549 ) on Saturday July 03, 2004 @03:10PM (#9601439)
    I'm not going to get into all this camera phone business, but I once saw one of those "smart" living room setups where you basically have a PDA to control everything. I can't imagine sitting there fumbling with a stylus to change the channel. If I can't operate it when I'm drunk/tired/etc. it's not simple enough!

    Remember, these are Americans you are designing for!

  • ...Oh, if only I had invented the Finglonger...
  • From the title, I thought maybe the army was equiping units with them for all those gadgets. A saboteur with universal remote could do a lot of damage in that case. "Sarge, the tank is flashing 12:00 again!"

  • $1699 (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It would be $1000, but it uses SCO code.
  • Cool, didn't know cell phones were being used to even allow people to buy gas. That should finally put that damn urban legend to rest.

    The Muthbusters [discovery.com] even visited the myth twice, the second time addressing everyones concerns that wrote in about the first attempt. They went to the extreme of trying to short out the battery after killing the short protection, and still couldn't generate a spark to set off a gas filled chamber, one a human would probably not survive in due to the air mixture.
  • TV, VCR, CD, DVD, Receiver, Digital cable box... and that's in just one room! Other rooms have TV and DVD/VCR, and one is a Receiver/VCR/LCD combination.

    Universal remotes don't work (yes, I have one). Why? Too much context switching - [TV] - power - input - input - [DVD] - power - [Receiver] - Power - Input DVD - [DVD] - Play. Adjust volume? Receiver - Volume. Pause movie? DVD - pause. Not much of an improvement over separate units. Macros won't work either because the remote doesn't know the state of devi

  • Sony AV2100 (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sbaker ( 47485 ) * on Saturday July 03, 2004 @04:57PM (#9602029) Homepage
    We have the Sony AV2100 - it was once considered up-market for a 'learning remote' but not in the thousands of dollars range. I paid a little over $100 - but nowadays you can pick one up on eBay for around $30.

    Ours has replaced every single remote we have in our family room (EIGHT of them!!). It even successfully learned Lego Mindstorms commands.

    It's better than just a regular record/replay learning remote because it can chain together bunches of commands from different remotes and knows things like "when you are controlling the TV, you should still send volume control messages to the home-theatre amplifier". With the chained commands, I can press a single touch-screen button to tell my TV to listen to the DVD player, the DVD player to eject so I can put a disk in, the Amplifier to go to 'Action Movie' mode, the TV to accept wide-format video and the dimmer on the room lighting to go to 10% brightness. Now if I can just get the Lego robot to fetch me a beer, I'll be in business!

    The AV2100 has regular mechanical buttons for common things like channel changing, volume control and switching major modes - but it also has a large LCD panel with a touch screen for everything else. The blue back-light on the LCD is worth having so you can see what you are doing in a darkened room.

    The best thing of all - it's too big to lose between two sofa cushions. Trust me - that's far-and-away it's best feature!

  • As a kid, I was my Dad's remote... (Score:3, Funny)

    by bergeron76 ( 176351 ) * on Saturday July 03, 2004 @07:42PM (#9603027) Homepage
    ... so yes, they did exist (of sorts) before they evolved into what they are today.

    Boy were my legs happy when our Betmax player came with a wired remote!

    Ahh, the memories.

  • Apple is really very good at interface design and making things that just plain work. I've used every computer since the early 80's and Apples stuff continues to amaze me.

    The iPod was the first to place the new Digital Hub into the mainstream retail market. Supporting Windows helps this greatly. I just blew my friends mind with iTunes the other day. He's currently ripping hundreds of CD's on his Dell using iTunes so he can RIP/MIX/BURN his own discs. He'll probably get an iPod mini later on. The Dell
    • At least not if it's as you describe.

      For most users, tactile feedback is a necessary part of the user interface. In an optimal situation, there should be NO need to look at the remote to use it. You should be able to know exactly where to push without having to look.

      Take a guess why the "ancient" IBM Model M keyboard is so popular with people who use keyboards on a regular basis - it gives excellent tactile feedback, so you KNOW that your keypress has registered without any need to look.

      Apple has some
  • Sorry, but my little Philips Pronto [amazon.com] for $180 off EBay does all I need. Fully programmable, though not in color, I can control X10 devices and all my AV gear.

Slashdot Top Deals

"I am, therefore I am." -- Akira

Close