Slashdot Mirror
Universal Remote's Days Are Numbered
theodp writes "While the universal remote has served humanity with distinction, its days are numbered, and your smartphone is to blame. Whether you want to control your music, your television or your PowerPoint presentation, there's probably a solution using your phone. Try as it might, the universal remote simply can't navigate the digital world the way the smartphone can — it's a lot easier to put the remote's abilities in the smartphone than vice versa."
But a smart phone has limited "hard" buttons. .. and as nice as touch screens are.. it's hard to operate them lying in bed through one half-open eye.
Personally I`m waiting for voice recognition to become practical. I think that's more the future of how we control our devices.
You can use your BT, IR or Wifi cellphone to remote control your computer/media center, and it uses the phone display too. I haven't used bemused myself (project page is down) but I was told it was another interesting project along this same line.
I feel you, man. It sucks to post these non-stories, but it's slim picking and what you gonna do?
That's it, right?
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
There are a lot of people that won't buy a smart phone to operate all their devices.
I don't know how it works in the US, but in Europe (or at least where I live) there are 348576384756876 different, conflicting coding standards for infrared messages, so the only real place for your Universal Remote is in the trash can.
Not that I condone using phones for remote control...
"We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams [...]."
While the screwdriver has served humanity with distinction, its days are numbered, and your hammer is to blame. Whether you want to control your nails, there's probably a solution using your hammer. Try as it might, the screwdriver simply can't hammer the nails the way the hammer can -- it's a lot easier to put the screwdriver's abilities in the hammer than vice versa.
Maybe some links to, you know, some OSS would be nice? Unless that's what this stuff is, the sites are too crapped up to find out trivially, and with my slashdot attention span that's all I have time for. Personally I've never found a java midlet that was actually useful for anything for my RAZR V3i. The J2ME implementation doesn't include support for the camera (at least, not through the usual API; AFAIK the still and video camera applications are both Java MIDlets) but maybe it has some kind of BT support.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If I want to change the channel on my TV I'm not going to muck around with the 'remote' app on my smartphone. I'm going to pick up an actual remote and press the button.
Smartphones are great for a lot of things, but proper remote controls have a set of fixed, tactile buttons that respond instantly. Versatility isn't worth much if it's a pain to use.
"A week in the lab saves an hour in the library"
If there was a way to mod articles, I'd mod this -1 Troll and -1 Flamebait.
The universal remote has its uses, the smartphone has its own, and, last I checked:
Just because it has less use for presentations doesn't mean that it's dying. If anything, other uses may be found for it, including presentations.
Also, why replace a $20 item (or even less) with a $200 item (or even more) if all you're going to do is watch TV and DVDs with it? If the universal remote is truly dying, then the big phone companies have won the war of overconsumption: sell a product that will be obsolete in two years, make it have tons of uses, and have the buyer depend more and more on it such that s/he deems it absolutely necessary and buys it again and again as newer versions come out with even more feature creep, while making everyone pay the full price for all the features despite many of the buyers not using even an eighth of them.
I'd rather keep that remote, thanks. Mine has lasted around... 10 years now?
Yes, my wife would love it if every time I left the house she was stuck watching Top Gear repeats all day because my phone was the only thing that controlled the TV.
Harmony FTW.
It's all fun and games until a 200' robot dinosaur shows up and trashes Neo-Tokyo... Again
I don't remember having to sign a contract, nor pay a monthly fee to use a universal remote,or better yet a "learning" remote. Those lists of manufacturers + models for your TV set/stereo/etc always seem to list all the models in the world..except the one you bought. Somehow I got lucky with my Advent home entertainment center, where I can use my Comcast remote to move up/down the volume. Felt a small sense of accomplishment since now I can now control everything with that remote, save for the video game consoles + VCR.
Now I'm going to need a $300.00 "smartphone" to turn on my TV, radio etc? One which will be reporting on everything I do and where I do it? (Guess that's what really makes it smart-never mind if they don't now, they will, they will. Fuck this bullcrap. George Orwell must be spinning in his grave at relativistic speeds.
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
Whazawha? Did the new NIN album come out already?
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
If smart phones gain all the abilities of universal remotes, then those phones can be considered universal remotes themselves.
By increasing the amount of universal remotes, how does this related to then end of universal remotes?
This is one of the dumbest things I have ever read. Why would i want to control my TV set with a $100 cell phone? What happens if i want to talk on my cell phone and watch TV at the same time? Do I really want to wear out my cellphones batteries and keypad switching TV channels? NO THANKS. I would rather just use my $10 universal remote instead.
Imagine a day when all devices in your home were BT or something similar. Imagine a remote with blank buttons waiting and ready to display some words, directions, play, stop, pause, on, off, TOAST! at medium damit!. well anyway i personally don't want to constantly be looking for my damn phone all the time or wasting its batts b/c i want to flip channels, so despite this article i refuse to read, i believe there will be a renaissance in universal remotes that will have the power to control everything in your house on a secure magical connection.
Whats that computer recipe, pre-heat oven to 350, now what?, i didn't even leave my chair.
and maybe it can make phone calls, so thus replacing the house phone.....whats a house phone?
My 'dumbphone' and universal remote are perfectly fine for me, thanks. I have absolutely 0.00 need or want for a smartphone.
There's no way a cell phone can replace the simplicity and multi-device support of a good universal remote. These remotes are actually _designed_ for their function, whereas a phone is designed for, you know, taking calls and running a few apps.
- You dont pay a monthly fee to use a remote control
- Who wants to pay for multiple goddamn cell phones that work as remotes, so if you are gone your visitors or spouse can watch tv? Be srsly
- Good remotes are designed to be simple for the technologically inept. You select a simple action like "Watch TV" "Watch DVD" "Play Game" which are customizable and switch everything on or off as needed. If there are errors, the help button will resolve the issues in a simple way your grandma can figure out
This is akin to taking a simple, small tool and trying to replace it with a monolithic "do everything" solution. It would be overly complex and would fail, fail, fail.
How are these terrible articles getting through? Modding queue with a hangover, are we?
for a phone that's smart enough to quit dropping the damn calls. That's the only smart phone I'm interested in owning.
The person who wrote this article has clearly never used a Logitech Harmony remote. Best remote I've ever owned.
"In case of emergency, break glass. Scream. Bleed to death."
Yeah or just get a Harmony Remote. I love mine.
Although their mac client is so awful (leaves files all over the place in your home directory) I have to boot into Windows with VMware to program it.
Phones are for PHONING!!!!! not texting, not taking pictures, nor playing mp3s, nor controlling radio controlled cars or anything else..
I hate having to learn to use my new nokias as it is, without piling in more crap.
Whatever happened to "Do one job and do it well".. Seems nowadays it's lets cram as much crap into something that half works.
Without intending any disrespect, your grandma has a much shorter life expectancy than the bulk of the population. This translates to a relatively small economic impact when it comes to device sales. True, she may be more the "Jitterbug" type (shudder), but that's okay.
I think this isn't as much about the universal remote's days being numbered as it is about how pervasive smart(er) phone are becoming. Hell, I can hardly buy *any* phone now that doesn't come with a camera (many with video capabilities, crappy as the result may be in some cases), bluetooth, and built-in mobile browsing of some kind. The phone itself is simply becoming the new universal remote, except it's interactive now.
512 MB RAM, 20 GB disk, 200 GB transfer, five datacenters. $19.95/month.
I remember when a phone was a phone,and it did one thing, and did it reasonably well, make and receive calls.
Now phones try to be universal devices, doing many things, and generally doing all of them poorly.
As to their core function, they do it poorly as well.
If a friend is at your house, are you going to loan them your phone to control the TV?
Are you going to get every child in your household a phone, just to control the TV? Even if they're 3 or 4 years old?
Alternately, are you going to buy a phone, just to leave it sitting around where it can control the TV?
Are you going to burn through your phone's battery (from using its backlight) much faster than normal, or use a device that chews through a couple cheap batteries a couple times a year and doesn't let you miss important calls because your phone is dead?
Are there issues with answering the phone and then pausing/muting the sound so you can actually talk to someone?
For some people, many of these issues won't matter. For everyone else, smartphone apps are not the answer.
I'm using my phone/out of the house and someone else (sat the 13 year old kid) wants to watch a DVD?
Or does everyone need a smart phone as opposed to one $20 remote on the coffee table?
I have an iPAQ Pocket PC that is perfectly capable of acting as a true universal remote (of the sort represented by the Logitech Harmony series), and software to enable that on pretty much any ARM-powered device has existed for years now. Of course it can't replace RF remotes, but how many of those are there?
I wonder if infrared will continue to be the remote transmission medium of choice, though.
The PS3 may be a nice BlueRay player but it does not nicely work together with the rest of appliances: it's remote is bluetooth.
Is there a universal remote which includes a bluetooth module for the PS3?
Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
I'm putting all my devices on the national do not call registry.
Problem solved!
THAT is the future. No faffing about with smartphonesâ"one remote controls one machine.
Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
Whoever wrote that has not set up a TV for a relative (or themselves in the future ) in an "Assisted living Facility".
Channel change, on/off and volume are at the edge (and sometimes beyound ) the capabilities of these people.
These are people who have trouble telling if it's 3:00 pm or am (the phone calls in the night tell me that).
Days of the week and date are nebulous concepts.
Something as complicated as a cell phone is just a paper weight.
NB: Small remotes also disappear. They don't remember where they put them.
I was going to argue with the article BUT think those dismissing it are going too far.
Cellphones are becoming universal. They aren't often absolutely mandatory needed but they are getting closer to it. I've been to meetups where the only to get into a building with a phone.
It seems ridiculous to have to use a phone for something trivial but it won't when phones are universal and **as the number of things needing specific gadgets multiplies out of hand**. Don't mind carrying a couple gadgets to do your stuff? Try having to carry five or six. Then the phone solution will be imposed by this.
Smart phones will have to become a commodity for all this to happen.
10 years ago we would have said "that is a cool hack".
Yes, smartphones are capable devices, but they don't do everything. They weren't designed to do everything. I have already seen Iphone apps(audio spectrum analyzer/oscilloscope) which attempt to replace dedicated hardware used in my line of work. It is neat to have a portable something that does it all, but if it doesn't do it as well or better than the original device I fail to see the point beyond the cool, small factor.
And believe it or not, not everyone has a smartphone.
There was a reason that the tricorder and communicator where not combined into 1 device.
With projects like the JP1 forum turning universal remotes into the Swiss army knife of the 21st century I hardly think the will meet their technological demise any time soon. I would rather bet my $0.02 that the killer device control app for smartphones will be remote interaction at an arbitrary distance, much like the remote DVR control applications now entering the market.
I think they are missing the point in saying that the universal remote's days are numbered. Smartphones just allow another way to do the same thing, and not always better. Currently, I use my desktop when im sitting at the pc, an ir remote when not, and an ipaq when roaming around the house. All three have different situation where they are better than others so to say one will hail the death of the other is missing the point that more options are available in general. I use linuxMCE for all my home AV needs and it allows me to use all three with the same interface. If anything I think the end result of smartphones being used more and more is less lost remotes.
-those people who tell you not to take chances, they are all missing what lifes' all about-
Why is it so common to recycle old ideas and call it the best new thing since sliced bread? My old Palm as a remote was cool for a while but I still went back to a real remote for the hard buttons.
Is it this "technology as fads and hype" thing that is to blame?
I don't do it, but don't a lot of people TURN OFF THEIR CELL PHONES when they watch TV? so they aren't disturbed? Also, don't cell phones need to be recharged sometimes? I keep my phone plugged in when I'm at home, and I don't keep my charger in the same room as the tv. A universal remote cost like 20 bucks or less for a cheapy. I don't think they are going anywhere.
Don't take this the wrong way, but she'll die. This alone helps change and progression. Imagine how stagnant our culture would be if the same crusty old people stayed around forever, never learning or changing anything.
Sounds great until I want to leave the house and someone else wants to watch TV... oh wait... you mean I need to buy a smart phone for everyone in the family?
ummm, no.
yes, the days are numbered if you can count in thousands. The benefit of universal remote control is the size, shape, buttons optimized for remote operation. Smartphones totally handicapped at remote control operation. First, you need large buttons and large size because you need to operate remote in dark without looking at it. Most smartphone keys require microscope to see and some don't even have keys. Since there are no dedicated buttons, you have to rely to on on screen menu in smartphones and that means you have to look at the remote while changing channels on TV instead of looking at the TV.
This article just doesn't understand how normal people respond to a user interface. If it's not simple and self-evident it will meet very real, and genuine, resistance - and for very valid reasons. Learn why your remote is so good - because you can see exactly what's available in one glance, not through multiple, inconsistent and poorly designed menus. Now go and make a phone (smart of otherwise) that has one button per function. It'll be bigger, but perhaps then the designers will then only include the functions people actually want.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
Why can't I click a button on the TV to make my remote beep when I can't find it. Maybe I should patent that.
The universe remote will never die. It costs at least $200 for a "smart phone" like an iPhone or a Google android, and those smart phones not as good for TV surfing as the $15 remote you get from Walmart. The buttons on the remote are the product of 30 years of evolutionary design, the user interfaces on set top boxes are not -that- bad, and you don't have to worry about hackers. By the time you jizz your finger into getting your smart appliance into channel changing mode, I can reach down from the couch, onto the floor, pick the remote up and change the channel.
Oh, and by the way, the batteries on my remote last way longer than your smart phone batteries.
This is my sig.
its screen so that i can feel the buttons in the dark, i am sticking with my trusty manufactorer supplied remote brick which consists of my tv and satellite reciever remotes duct taped together.
Grandpa has been calling on his remote for years.
You're right but that doesn't mean the old generation isn't growing, rather than shrinking nor does it mean anyone wants something that's more complicated to operate their TV and DVD player or that can be taken out of the house rendering everyone else in the house remoteless and only a tard would pay hundreds for the functionality of an item that can be cheaper than a meal.
Progression includes seeing which new ideas don't work and avoiding them. It's not just a case of taking on something purely because it's new.
Not everyone needs or wants a mobile phone, No more logically Universal remotes will just evolve to include more and more functions...... I even question the mobile phones longevity, More area's are getting free wireless coverage, that'll expand, with the rise of netbooks and VOIP, you'll eventually see a disappearing of mobile phones as well know then.... Even if this secondary point doesn't happen which I do believe is unavoidable, This article is seriously flawed
My phone is stoopid, you insensitive clod!
Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
*waits for confirmation from Netcraft*
You can pick up a low-end iPod touch for $230, which is cheaper than most touch screen universal remotes, so you could potentially use it as a dedicated device. You would still need (and I'm talking post-OS 3.0) a set of bluetooth infrared transmitters.
Having worked with Universal Remote, RTI, and Crestron products, I know what a "high-end" remote should do. These guys make very flexible remotes, but they cost a ton of money.
Logitech's Harmony series remotes come VERY close, for a fraction of the cost. Programming is not very difficult, and I've yet to find a AV component that can not be controlled by these remotes.
If you need to control lighting, HVAC, and other home automation stuff, RTI and Crestron are your best bet (bring your checkbook). But if you only need to control a modest Home Theater system, take a look at the Harmony remotes.
As far as smartphones go - who is going to leave their smartphone home so the babysitter, or kids can watch TV?
-ted
Nope. Sorry - I can't see it.
As soon as you said this (for argument's sake, let's say a 24" iMac.) your argument was blown.
For every "perfect solution" there will always be a competing product or a competing standard and they're not going to play nice. Its not even in the best interests of the electronics companies to provide a one size fits all solution (which is technically feasible now). They need pricing points and upgrade paths to continue generating profit.
They need built in redundancy to ensure an ongoing market. And most consumers (not all, but most) end up with a rag-tag mix of equipment and configurations, based on need and willingness to fork out cash.
Like LAN networks, noone has an identical system when it comes to media solutions in the home - and as a result, there will always be a market for tools that aid in bringing them all together.
i.e. me I have THREE applications on my iphone that can control XMBC. But using either of them is rubbish compared to my universal remote - a logitech harmony one. And why the heck would I want to have to get up and find my phone every time I need to flip channels? Try as you might you will never convince me that one device that does everything is going to be better than a minimal number of specialised devices. That's why I still have a laptop, a desktop, a smartphone...and a universal remote. You'll be prying me harmony one from my cold dead fingers...
only a tard would pay hundreds for the functionality of an item that can be cheaper than a meal.
These devices won't stay at their current prices. Also, there's the old saying that some things are cheap only if your time is worth nothing. A moderate up-front investment in learning how to use a device may save you a bunch of time and aggravation in future. My time is worth money, so this matters to me.
512 MB RAM, 20 GB disk, 200 GB transfer, five datacenters. $19.95/month.
Why would I want my phone to control everything. I'm not interested in walking around with a magic thing in my hand that controls absolutely everything. That's not the better interface. I'll gladly pay $6.00 for the better interface of having a distinct interface.
It's the standard airplane cockpit philosophy. Yes, hundreds of buttons and switches take up more space, are much more difficult to learn, and look ugly. But damn they are way more efficient. If I have to cascade through seven menus in my phone to get down through: keypad_unlock|home_automation|family_room|entertainment|television|cable_box|channel_up that's not faster than picking up the remote that happens to be on the table next to me and hitting the channel up button. There are a dozen televisions in my home, two are in the family room, and each has multiple connected devices.
People seem to have forgotten that a big part of an interface is being able to throw it away when it isn't needed.
Oops, my phone game crashed, I need to reinstall my phone, and reconfigure 12 televisions and 32 devices.
Gee thanks.
I remember back in the days, me, my brother and my father were fighting hard for the remote... hitting each other with the newspaper, throwing the kleenex box... all that because we all wanted a single device...
Now, people are gonna fight over making each other stop using their smartphones... If each person has a smartphone, everyone can change channels and mess with the TV... that can make them anonymous and bring on the anti-zapping software that would scramble all the other "remotes"...
That will be a real technological war instead for control instead of a good old physical fight over it... who's gonna be the Alpha Male with the TV contol? the geeky kid... who gonna get his phone smashed by the real Alpha Male...
Your analysis presumes that television will never die. I find that to be unlikely.
TV will last forever. TV's are the perfect vegetation device. Computers are fun but you have to work to use them. A TV, universal remote and a six pack are about as good as it gets.
This is my sig.
Welcome to the United States Senate!
This next song is very sad. Please clap along. -- Robin Zander
Looking at the youtube videos, there's a different iPhone application for each device (TiVo, Sonos, TV, ...)
So instead of having N remotes on my coffee table to choose from, I only need to download and install N different applications on my iPhone ? How modern and convenient.
Wake me up when there's a UNIVERSAL remote application for a smart phone.
And what if I'm talking on the phone while watching TV? Or at a friend's house and want to use their entertainment system?
Yay, I thought my Sunday afternoon was too free of idiocy, but Timothy has saved it with room to spare.
His pointless, misleading earlier posts today were just warmup to this one!
Yes, the average consumer will love to dig 2-3 levels deep into a phone with a totally non-tactile, non-intuitive UI (that they may have to unlock before using!) just to find the remote control app and turn down the volume on their TV.
The entire premise of this post is garbage... doesn't being an EDITOR imply some amount of DECISION MAKING about worthwhile posts? Or maybe Timothy is in fact an automatic forwarding program that analyzes and posts the most absurd or incorrect stories it receives. That would explain a lot. Either that or the /. management feels too guilty to fire a "mentally challenged" employee.
Universal Remote 20$ upwards
Smartphone at least 200$ upwards
I don't quite think thats a good replacement.
I think we are looking at this the wrong way... Now our tvs will come with smart phones!
Do all new smartphones have to have infrared? A lot of mobile phones these days don't have it, and no infrared = no universal remote
I guarantee you that my parents & grandparents will never use a phone to control their tv/dvd player. It's just not gonna happen. I gave up trying to technologically evangelize them long ago. It's just more frustration than it's worth.
I want my phone to be a phone.
I want my camera to be a camera.
I want my remote to be a remote.
I like things that perform one, and only one, function perfectly. Multi-function devices are always a compromise.
As many others mentioned, the Logitech Harmony is good example of what's to come. I wouldn't be surprised if AV equipment stops shipping remotes and the controller becomes a standard component. Remotes may look more like touchscreen smartphones, but who wants their family grabbing their phone every time they need to change the channel?
http://apps.life-ware.com/iclient/
This is a good place for it, so I'm going to be the shill and plug the new iPhone app my friend helped develop for his company. It interfaces with that company's product line for complete home automation. Lighting control, home theatre control, video & security equipment, climate control, you name it. Their prices place their product in the luxury category, in my opinion, but it's a great start -- and the end result is pretty sweet.
I still stick to my 15 year old X10 equipment, a home theatre PC, and some apps I developed awhile pack, but if you've got the funds, I recommend checking them out. When they were testing their iPhone app, it got a lot of previously uninterested people a lot more interested :-)
A preposition is a terrible thing to end a sentence with.
Your smartphone can't hold a candle to my 880. STFU with you stupid proclamations.
What fuckin' retard wrote this? I'm not going to RTFA, because whoever submitted this should have noticed that mobile phones removing IrDA in place of Bluetooth, and TVs are /not/.
as true as this is, most newer smart phones just don't have IR anymore.
my G1 would greatly benefit from IR.
even then there were no true universal remote apps.
They're using their grammar skills there.
Try muting the TV using your smartphone when you have an incoming call.
'Nuff said.
Bitten Apples are still better than dirty Windows...
User switches to the TV tuner, watches synchronous TV (can also pause it and rewind it for far longer than the 15 minutes feeble PVRs of today, due to the fact that PCs have faster and larger HDDs allowing for speedier buffering).
15 minutes? The one I have (default from the local tv station) can do an hour. And i've had it for 18 months now. You my friend are getting ripped off.
The Universal Remote can be programmed with the signal used in Laser Tag games and is area-effect. This allows you to blast vast areas far more effectively than the pistol they supply you with. The SmartPhone cannot do this, no matter what you do.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
See the A-F keys? Those are called soft-menu keys.
The babysitter will bring her own smartphone and pair it with the TV when she arrives. It'll use bluetooth, so the tv can be set to only listen to certain interfaces, and even restrict the channels depending on who's remote is doing the flipping.
The buttons or gestures on the babysitter's phone will do whatever she programmed them to do (provide the tv has that function and it's enabled by the parents) and they'll be automatically mapped to the proper commands via a quick driver download or model look-up during the pairing process.
Back in elementary school, a friend of mine had a tricked out watch with a calculator and also a IR remote control built in.
I cannot describe how much fun we had changing the channel and turning off the TV during some "educational" movie that we would be watching in class. The teachers never caught on, just kept complaining about how strange it was that all the equipment was malfuntioning.
.... how many people does it take to change a light bulb?
and the answer is.... the more the merrier.... as it helps the economy employ more people, instead of better pay for fewer hours and better vacations time to enjoy the better things in life while you can.
how all this washes out.... I don't know, what cost more 10 people to change a light bulb, or a light bulb that cost ten times more but lasts ten times longer?
Whazawha? Did the new NIN album come out already?
its on bittorrent on their site.
So is mine when I am at work, but while I am home watching TV, nobody is paying me.
It takes at most, 3 seconds to perform most actions on a TV, allowing me to change channels 20 times per minute. The smartphone takes about 1 second to perform an action. Thanks to this, it is now possible watch 3 times less tv in the same amount of time.
types of stories here? This is never going to happen. You know why? Because not everyone has a smart phone. Hell I can count on 1 hand the number of people that have one that I know. And most of the ones that do just have them so they can show them off. I can buy a universal remote anywhere, and I don't have to worry about not being able to use my TV if I drop my service provider for the phone.
Yea, just like the combined TV/VCR took over the world ...
Rocks, until the VCR stops working for whatever reason. Replace the whole thing!
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
This has been possible for years. I remember doing this with a Palm III (or earlier), and deciding then that it was a retardedly stupid idea.
Future? I think not.
I could set you up a system that does all that right now for under $2000 - and make a really nice profit at the same time.
remote-- bought it in 99 or 2000. It worked on EVERYTHING. I could change the channel on TVs in the gym (didn't do it ofter but it found the codes really fast and it worked) When I switched over to the treo 600, I beamed the Sony app to it, and it did not work at all. Turns out that the infrared signal on the treo was a mere fraction of the strength of the clie-- it wouldn't reach a TV a foot away. Anyway, it worked 10 years ago but I don't think it'll catch on again.
When I need the channel changed, I get my imaginary virtual cosplaying internet girlfriend to do it for me.
She ALWAYS pushes the right button and totally listens to me and never argues.
I am not lying dammit!
Sig for hire.
There are so many problems with this I can't count them. But I'll try:
1. Phones lock if not used for a few minutes. Want to type a password to change a channel? Thought not.
2. So set it to never lock. Battery life: 2 hours.
3. The wife calls from home: "Honey, I want to watch Days of Our Lives, but you've got the iPhone. Can you change it to channel 8, please?"
4. You're on the phone and Days of Our Lives comes on. You have to hang up to change the channel. Nice.
5. Your mobile provider's upcharge? $5 month for the first 100 remote control operations, with each operation after that $0.20.
6. Verizon won't let you use the built-in remote function on your new phone, so you have to switch to Sprint, but they have a partnership deal with NBC, so you can't change channels to watch Letterman. You would have gotten AT&T, but their network doesn't reach from your couch to your TV.
7. You don't have an Apple phone, so you have to make 80 button pushes to change from "set channel mode" to "set volume mode".
8. Your $80 universal remote costs less, works 10 times better, and you don't have to recharge it everyday.
Two BIG reasons why a phone will never kill a remote.
Phone: Needs charged every 2-3 days.
Remote: Needs new batteries every 12-18 months.
Phone: People often take phones with them to places like work, thus taking your 'remote'.
Remote: Why on Earth would you take a remote to work?
It would be the usual hack to put the smart receiver right above the screen, with IR LEDs stuck in front of the devices to control, until Sony, etc. build it in.
To err is human. To arr is pirate.
Future? Right now I have an old laptop plugged into my TV. It has a cheap korean DVB-T usb dual tuner dongle plugged into the side. Its running Vista Media Center. For input I have a an MS wireless keyboard from the 7000 series desktop set* (its got a little touchpad mouse thing on the side too), and my old XDA2 (3in touchscreen pda) running as a sideshow device.
1) Well, I don't want to work on my TV, or in the lounge. I guess I could take the laptop, but I have a seperate work machine.
2) So lets say user has finished some torrents. User can then hit the bigass green button on the keyboard to switch to media center. Or, as I often do, grab the XDA and walk off to make a coffee/pour a pint while using the sideshow to browse the media library/tv guide. So I can queue up something, and by the time I get back with my coffee the intro is done.
3) User (hey thats me) can shove in disc, and it plays. Currently theres a Bigpond movie store avaliable in media center by default. Its fairly cool, you can "rent" (drm) movies for about the same cost as the local shops - decent browser, decent range. This is why (despite what the purists would think) you need to have a keyboard plugged in, even a little one - sometimes you just need to jam in text. I used to run the live messenger plugin on MC, but now I just run the shitty PDA version - its not like I want to chat much anyway, and the handwriting recognition is passable.
4) Well.... big hard disk and dual tuners works pretty much as you would expect.
So... um... future? I'm enjoying it now, with a pretty much out-the-box solution. You can buy an equivalent PC with media center and tuner over the counter, pair up an old pda, install sideshow and the MCE sideshot plugin on it, and you are pretty much done.
I'm sure if you like tinkering you can get an equivalent result without sucking gates' dick - but im kinda lazy like that ;)
3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
Old people struggle with technology. My grandma still can't get rid of the blinking "12:00" on her smart phone.
I think voice recognition is more the future of how we control our devices.
Please leave me out of your future. Few things make me more angry than calling a support number and getting a menu where I'm required to speak to the computer.
If I have to deal with a computer, at least give me the choices and let me press a damn button. Don't make me guess the right keyword, especially not in earshot of my officemates.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
Well, I'm 28 and I won't buy a smartphone (or any cell phone) either. Not everybody needs/wants to be attached to a phone.
I call this the Swiss Army Knife Fallacy. It's like thinking that screwdrivers, scissors, and toothpicks are all going to vanish because a swiss army knife can do all of those things.
Just as you might carry a swiss army knife in your pocket, smartphones are handy as a portable solution when you are out and about. But when I'm at home and I need to tighten a screw, I don't dig in my pocket for my swiss army knife; I reach into my toolbox and get a dedicated screwdriver that is designed to do just that one task as well as possible, instead of being adequate at multiple tasks.
When I'm using my entertainment center, I want a remote that is ideally adapted to that one task. I don't need it to browse the web, or answer the phone; I've got devices optimized for those particular uses ready to hand in my home. For example, touch screens are great for general purpose devices that have to serve many functions. But when I want to adjust the volume on my TV set, I want a device with fixed, physical buttons with distinctive shapes that I can feel in the dark.
Standard remotes depend upon IR connections and fairly basic signaling. Imagine a device connected to a serial port of a computer. (Serial port? What's that?). In order to get the device to do a particular task, you send a letter "A" down the serial cable to the device. If you want the device to do another task, you send a letter "B" down the serial cable to the device. That's what it's like controlling our devices with the current crop of remotes.
Smartphones, on the other hand, use WiFi or Bluetooth connectivity and more complex protocols. For example, devices could use drivers to explain to a piece of software how to talk to a particular device. The interaction is much richer and more complex.
For example, I have a cable box connected to my TV with the sound going out to my stereo amplifier. I want to turn on my TV, change the channel, and turn up the sound. With a typical Universal remote, I would have to switch to the TV, turn on, switch to the cable box, change the channel, then switch to my amplifier and turn up the sound.
With a more intelligent system, I would simply say I want to watch channel 13 and crank up the volume, and let the system figure out what components to fiddle with. ...uh... "entertainment system" become more PC like, the ability of a Universal Remotes to work will be limited.
Smartphones can use WiFi and BlueTooth and can use more complex methods of communicating to the device you want to control. As our
I have replaced my TV with a PC runing Mythbuntu and a large 36" monitor. I bought with my system a really cool universal remote at a PC warehouse show. That remote is sitting in a draw because my PC can't use an IR remote to change channels or select whether I'm watching TV or Hulu.
Besides, I know where my smartphone is. I have no idea where I put that blasted remote.
The most likely outcome is that remotes will morph into something like the Apple Front Row remote (a device dedicated to controlling your entertainment center). Then, you'll be able to use both the remote (with its dedicated buttons) or your smartphone (because it's in your pocket and you know where it is).
WTF Doesn't /. tags input show your entered suggestions anymore?
Were that I say, pancakes?
There was nothing wrong with getting off your fat asses and changing the channel.
Hey, I think this article is flaky, too, but what's with all the "I don't want to hand somebody my phone so they can change the channel!" You know what? I bet they *also* have a phone, and they can change the channel themselves. In 2 years just about every mobile phone could be used as a remote -- everyone in the room will have one.
And why complain about how often a phone needs to be charged as compared to a remote? You *already* have to regularly charge your phone! There are no extra tasks that have been added to your life.
That said, I want buttons on my remote, so my phone will stay in my pocket. But the premise of phone remotes isn't ridiculous at all.
I foresee younguns using their smartphones to meddle with the classroom TVs.
Or screwing around with their family TVs while the parents watch their boobtube drivel.
I have one remote for my television, and my computer can be accessed by any SSH-compatible remote control. [Windows computer, Linux computer, PDA that doesn't suck, UMPC that doesn't suck, etc.]
What are these universal remotes and why the hell would I need them?
On the other hand, the cleverly designed remote for my TV/DVD/cable box is set up so that I can literally operate it with my eyes closed. The buttons are configured so that you identify them by feel alone, through a combination of button size, style, and raised markings. As another poster noted, when you're lying in bed, half asleep, and you want to turn on the sleep feature on your set, it's nice to to not have to turn on the light and activate the higher brain functions when you want to drift off to the mellifluous sounds of South Park.
Tiny and smaller may be great for you younguns, but it's not always an improvement as you get older.
What was once true, is no longer so
I geeked out and bought a Harmony 890 universal remote last year and LOVE it. The features and convenience of a device like this, especially if you have the RF extender, overwhelm any reasonable idea of attempting the same with your PDA. Only cost would have make me even think of trying. Sure, you CAN operate your home theater with a smartphone, but you can also haul lumber in your Honda Civic.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
For instance, take the Nevo S70 remote. It has a combination touch screen and real physical buttons, WiFi internet capability (so it can tell you that a show you like is on a certain channel at this moment in time, or control internet accessible devices like certain media centers, etc.), display all the CDs/DVDs/Blu-Ray/MP3/Media that you might have in different archives/devices/changers and at the touch of a finger, play that song/movie/video depending on pre-set preferences from whatever device that it might be coming from. And that is just the start... It can also control lighting effects, HVAC(air conditioning and heating) or any of a number IR, Z-wave, or Wifi accessible devices (which now is just about everything from higher end refrigerators, to window blinds, curtains, heaters/air conditioners, to water pipe valves, and of course TVs, stereos, surround sound, and other home entertainment devices).
Just because it isn't in the big box store doesn't mean it doesn't exist or do the function a billion times better than that smart phone, which oh, by the way, can not communicate with Z-wave devices which is the standard method for home automation devices...
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
There's no need to wait for Apple - that technology exists today.
I finish my work/download my video on my Windows 7 desktop PC
I pick up my Harmony remote and walk to the TV
I hit the "Watch TV" button. Everything powers up and switches to the right input
The videos show up on my mediacenter machine hooked to the TV as it and my desktop PC are both in the same homegroup
I can select a DVD from my firewire-connected DVD changer
I can pause/rewind/watch previously recorded HDTV with my ATI Digital Cable Tuners
You could easily do this with one PC and a Media Center extender too. So $200 for an Xbox 360 + $100 for a Logitech Harmony remote. Available today.
"This is an important point. The evangelists who apparently want us to all own one, omni-purpose device with a changeable touch-screen as the interface need to wake up to the fact that people always have and always will like tangible, physical things with specialised purposes."
Which is why the penis is only good for peeing out of.
Remote and smartphone have completely different power consumption requirements. Remote operates on a couple of AAA batteries for years. Smartphone consume its battery in couple of days, week at most. Using smartphone as remote would eat into it's battery pretty significantly, and kill it faster too.
...and the Beatles will never be successful because music with Guitars is on its way out!
it's a lot easier to put the remote's abilities in the smartphone than vice versa.
Yeah... let me know when I can get a smartphone for $12.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
I can't believe all the people posting here that have no imaginations, and refuse to view a future any different than their current, obviously perfect, remote control setup.
First, you all seem to think that this "smartphone remote app" will be exactly as stupid as your current universal remotes. I've read "How will I mute the TV on a phone call?" or "I have to buy a smart phone for everyone in the house because I'll have the phone at work when my wife wants to watch TV" or "My smartphone buttons aren't going to work right" or "my old remote is just fine" or any one of a dozen repeated complaints about why this will never work.
This could be über-cool, but you guys are completely missing it.
Tomorrow's smart phones could have play, pause, and stop hard buttons on them -- actually, many phones already do today. The smart phone could have two-way communication with the device (just like Bluetooth controls on headphones do) so the smart phone could discover the states of your devices, and control them appropriately. An RF connection wouldn't have to have the same limitations as IR. The smart phone wouldn't have to be the only remote control device in existence - it could supplement an ordinary remote used by others for those times when you're not present. The smart phone could be location aware, and automatically control your main entertainment system differently than your bedroom TV system.
My stupid phone already mutes my car stereo via Bluetooth when an incoming call arrives, so a smart phone could certainly pause my DVR and show the caller ID on the TV screen when a call arrives.
I'm just amazed at the negativity of all the "it'll never work" responses. Jeez, people, either show a little imagination, or get the frak out of the way for people who have it!
John
I used to have a Sony Clie - IR remote control was standard (which was fun in waiting rooms with TVs).
I'd love my phone to have remote control capabilities, but so far, all the ones I've had were only using IR for IRDA, which I've used 10 years ago for the last time..
On the plus side, they are already Bluetooth equipped, which could help with the PS/3. I can appreciate the reason behind the choice, but it's occasionally irritating when you play a movie..
So, if it wasn't for Apple leaving our IR abilities altogether it would have become THE killer app for the iPhone.. Doh!
Insert
If devices do ever converge, it'll be a box provided by your cable/satellite provider, not apple. It'll also need to control your sound system, lighting, games consoles etc. to really eliminate the universal remote.
And I don't know what setup you have where the sofa in the living room is facing the computer. What if someone is using the computer when someone else wants to watch TV?
re #2 - Is Front Row that thing that occasionally pops up when I'm trying to force-quit? It has uses?
re #3 - physical pieces of plastic? no thanks. Bits for me.
re #4 - TV tuner? Why? Just stream it from the interweb, and unless it's something like news just have all the "episodes" of X download via the interweb ready for when I want them.
Anyway, in the world I inhabit (wife, kids), crowding around the 24" mac isn't going to work and there will a screen at the other end of the room. I'll need to control that somehow, remotely...
Not enough stuff is IP aware and there'll always be something under your TV that isn't - well for quite a few more years.
What I wish somebody would do is bring out a hybrid solution.
E.g. I have a Harmony remote, which I just plug into the web and it picks up all the codes, works out what needs to be sent to what for each task (i.e. when I want to play on my 360, turn off my cable box, flick the TV to a certain input, flick the component switch over etc).
I press the button on the remote, it sends RF sigmal to a box in a cupboard, that then emits the right IR triggers to the actual kit.
Configuration of all this is a doddle as Harmony/Logitech have and maintain databases for pretty much everything already.
Whilst I can't make all my stuff IP aware, I can't see a reason why the single RF receiver in the cupboard can't be easily enough. It's not so much that I want to ONLY control using the remote (I like the clicky buttons), just it would be nice if I could use other things as well. If the inputs to my TV/AMP could be looped through a slingbox as well, you'd be able to remote control and watch you're entire system from home - or even just allow you to setup recordings on your PVR from your phone when out and about.
Universal Remote or Smartphone, it doesn't matter. The underlying technology sucks. Infrared doesn't allow any remote control device to know the current state of the machine that you're trying to control. Your remote has no clue whether a device is on or off or which input the TV is switched to, nor has it any idea if the command was received and processed correctly. I can't wait for the day when infrared is replaced with a better technology.
Yes, I have both a phone and a universal remote. I use the phone for telephone calls and the remote for controlling my TV.
Am I just considerably more wealthy than I thought? Neither of these devices was particularly expensive.
"It's new, it's cool; therefore, it must be better."
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
... and I don't see it getting replaced anytime soon.
Why would I want to abuse my mobile phone for something it certainly sucks at doing properly? Unless voice recognition is built-in it will always be a inferior replacement for a dedicated remote control, as it lacks the necessary buttons and proper placement.
Not even thinking about things like battery runtime, using the phone while watching TV, sharing the remote with your partner/family, etc.
Some time back I was staying with relatives on vacation. My retired uncle had fallen asleep in front of the TV when the phone rang. It was cordless and had been left near the TV, so I popped my head in the room to get it. He woke up halfway, put the TV remote to his ear, and said "Hello?" When there was no answer, he looked askance at the remote, pushed the big power button, then put it up to his ear again. "Hello? Anybody there?"
I was laughing so hard I could barely answer the real phone, which was on the shelf.
Clearly, the time has come for universal remotes to answer phone calls too. (Maybe when you can receive video calls on your TV?)
Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
I like the unix philosophy of do one thing and do it well. Universal remotes embody the antithesis of this.
theodp usually posts ill-informed tripe about privacy and patents. It's nice to see he's versatile enough to post ill-informed tripe about suboptimal solutions looking for nonexistent problems. Bravo!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Yeah this article makes me want to get rid of my non-camera pay as you go phone for a smartphone so I can use it as a tv remote.
Most smartphones have dropped IR since everyone uses bluetooth nowadays. My HTC Touch has no IR port and no newer HTC phones I know of have it either.
So until the entire A/V industry adopts bluetooth (and the only mainstream devices I know of that use Bluetooth for remote control are the Wii and PS3), this is a pipe dream.
Damn... I would have had the first post if it hadn't been for trying to navigate in Pocket IE on my smartphone... ;)
Am I saying the phone is too slow? Hmm...
Seriously? The universal remote is a simple, hardware, battery-easy solution to a problem. Phones are already getting too complex, and speed is an issue.
Here's a hint for the article author; I don't ever remember having to reboot my universal remote. Or wait for a page to come up. And no, the iPhone isn't any better; I own one and use my WinMo device because of flexibility... but I'd never use either of them as a remote.
Can you imagine the juggling you'd have to do when a call comes in to (a) answer the phone and (b) mute the telly?
sudo make me a sandwich
Here, FTFY.
You're out four dollars and all you have to show for it is a piece of software that would normally be given away for free. Granted, four dollars is essentially nothing to many people but I would feel ripped off.
of fucked up...when has my universal remote ever navigated the virtual world?? why would it ever need to do this?? the only thing ive ever charged it with doing is cranking the volume up on rammsteins los from across the room.
feels like we're hocking telephones.
Good people go to bed earlier.
With the announcement of iPhone OS 3.0, the iPod Touch will be the device that rules them all. Home entertainment systems will use the iPod Touch for controlling the hardware in the future. This is my opinion, but I really believe it to be true. Read up on the External Accessory Framework and you'll see what I mean.
One of my friends has a 'remote' program on his smartphone. He uses it to change channels on TVs in shop windows, bars etc.
Amusing, for a short while.
Now if they started selling an iWhatever with the ability to change red signals to green...
The problem with remotes is that they don't give the user any context. A smartphone as a remote could solve this very nicely.
Imagine an app that could let you view stills/descriptions/scheduling of all shows on right now on your iPhone. You could scroll through them. Maybe read reviews of them on your phone. Interact with it like you'd interact with any other app. When you are ready, you just press a button and your cable box tunes to it.
Imagine DVDs that could display meta information about what you were watching on your phone while you were watching it. (If that interested you).
Imagine if your TV/movie paused automatically when you got a phone call
One person could watch a show, while the other person see's what else is on without interrupting the display.
What functions do remotes provide anyway? It's pretty much selecting channels, managing volume, selecting devices, managing the DVR and turning it on and off.
As for the lack of physical buttons on touchscreens - the iPhone already has a volume button. Who's to say that it can't someday control the volume of an entertainment system it is synced to. Or have it's power button affect the tv instead of the phone. (Give you two options of things to turn off).
Everything else you do with a TV, a touchscreen would be MUCH better suited for.
Now is the time to stop calling our cell phones "PHONES". They're evolved to be more like the kind of electronic devices you would find on Star Trek. We need a new name for our cell phones since placing phone calls is only a fraction of what they can do. Any ideas?
May be I will have to wait for a smart phone to get a headphone socket. One that works when the TV is mute.
Why do I want one -
- so my daughter can watch TV late without waking me
- so I can hear the TV during loud conversations
- so I can hear when the CD sound track is lousy
Beats long cables.
What about the universal remonster?
http://www.tv.com/episode/264542/summary.html
No. This is a GG Allin song. Get it right.
I've never seen a phone that is anywhere in competition with the Harmony Remotes. I don't think I want a phone that is 6-7 inches long with a crap-ton of buttons. I wont want to scroll through several screens on a smaller phone to have access to all the buttons I like to press on my remote.
No single raindrop believes it is to blame for the flood.
Just my $0.02 worth, but I had a Philips Pronto (fully programmable universal remote with touchscreen). You could build your own graphics for buttons and lay it out any way you wanted, it could have subpages and macros and just did everything. The big problem I had with it: touchscreen didn't allow for easy no-look usage. I got very sick and tired of either having to look between the remote and the tv when I was trying to perform certain operations, or if I was working on a FF/play kind of thing, I'd often miss the second button unless looking where my fingers were.
In short, a really good remote (in my opinion) needs programmable HARDWARE buttons. I use a Home Theater Master that was never sold direct to consumers... had to buy it from a gray market reseller on Ebay, but it was worth every cent.
I've played with a Universal remote app on my smartphone. Yeah, with a little work, I could get it set up as nicely as my old pronto, but I'd still have the physical button issue. For me for everyday use, I need my hardware buttons, but I could indeed see it being useful to have duplicate functionality on my smartphone.
I dunno about anyone else, but when I'm sitting and watching TV, I'm either totally wrapped up in the show (wouldn't want to have some smart device calling for my attention or adding other "enhanced experiences"), or if I AM doing something else, then I've got a laptop in front of me and I'm not really paying attention to the TV anyway.
The Digital Sorceress
How DARE you not fall into line behind the iPhone worshipping masses?
People like you who refuse to worship the Jesus Phone should be shot.
So I'm going to have to pay a $60 mobile phone bill in order to control my entertainment system. I don't think so. I can't be the only person who doesn't have a cellphone.
I really don't want my remote to navigate the digital world. I like to keep mine locked in the dark where I can keep it under control and beaten down rather than let it learn and grow. If they become educated they could overthrow us.
Hum... 5$ device, over 1 year of battery life unbreakable thingny living in the couch's crack
vs
500++$$, 5 hours battery live fragile shinny phone that you carry away (read have a phone for everyone that's using the TV...).
I wonder what it'd be like to have my remote nuked out of space by some cell phone company !!
Phones are cool, but simplicity is unbeatable (oh, and grand'ma... To turn on the T.V., you have to turn on that thing, slide the bar, go to AppStore, download a.... grand'ma ????)
ahahahahahahahahhaha Phone freaks....
I have been using my handheld as a universal remote for the last 8 years. Slashdot is catching up.
More seriously, until smartphones get down to $60 or so, they're not going to be really cost effective "universal remotes".
The functional equivalent of the smartphone remote control has existed for a decade or so. The Phiips Pronto remote control is a touch screen, fully programmable, completely optimize for its job, remote control. It had a GUI editor for configuring the screens, built-in IR emitter, etc.
And yet, other universal remotes have been created and flourished. The touch screen sucks for remote controls. You don't want to look at the device to figure out the context and button layout every time you use it. You just want to feel the button layout and hit what you need.
I replaced me Pronto with a cheap Radio Shack remote control (and some hack-ish software to reprogram it). You can get nearly the same effect for a bit more $$ with the Harmony remote. Although, I think the Radio Shack "JP1" remotes are even better when programmed well - minimal buttons completely optimized for the user's environment.
And how am I supposed to mute the TV or pause the DVD when the phone's ringing if I have to use the phone to do it? This is the dumbest thing I've seen in a while.
How about a truly universal remote where you hit the "program" button on the universal, hit the "eject" button on the DVD, hit whatever button or button combination you want mapped to "eject" on the universal and that button is programmed?
My TV is a 42 inch trinitron, with a widescreen mode that squishes the scan lines together for a higher resolution picture with widescreen DVDs. The drawback is you have to go through a bunch of menu items and button presses to get it to go to widescreen mode. A programmible universal like I just described would be great. And I would be able to map an "eject" and a "tracking" for the VCR with it.
Free Martian Whores!
Yep that's very similar to what I said, but in my case, I replaced it with a Home Theater Master... an even more-expensive-than-my-pronto choice, but I haven't regretted it. Those two were the first (and only) remotes I've ever encountered that truly could replace every single one of the dozen or so remotes I had lying around.
The Digital Sorceress
Until my PDA/smartphone sports an IR emitter, or all of my entertainment equipment (including legacy items I have no need or desire to replace) supports Bluetooth natively or can be cheaply retrofitted, my Harmony 880 is quite safe, thanks. Even then, I'd have a hard time giving up dedicated, touch-distinguishable hard buttons for functions like play/pause and volume control.
SIERRA TANGO FOXTROT UNIFORM
Given that some programmable universal remotes are around $400 and an iPod Touch goes for around $230, I think that while the universal remote may not be dead yet, it is certainly time for a price adjustment.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
So the solution for short-range remote control is to send a signal across the Internet to a remote service that relays that signal back to my local device?
But what if I don't want Echelon to know when I change channel away from glorious leader's press conference to American Idol?
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Wait, wasn't I doing this with my Palm, like 7 years ago? It had craptacular range, but that's hardly a major engineering problem.
Mal-2
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
it's a lot easier to put the remote's abilities in the smartphone than vice versa.
Well, duh: where's the earpiece on the remote?
Dear author of the linked article. I suggest you use your touchscreen smartphone as sphincter enlarging device so as to be able to place your head where it belongs. Then you can write an article how iPhone, with it smooth buttonless surface, is particularly suitable for insertion into body orifice.
This is so stupid, I don't even want to get into the absolute sucktitude of touchscreen remotes.
I can see adding "universal remote" functionality to a smart phone in order to use it as a "spare" remote, but nothing more than that. As a spare remote you can use it while trying to find which chair your cat hid the regular remote under, but consider it to be barely functional enough to turn on Burn Notice, and then you can spend the commercials to search for the *real* remote.
Hasn't anybody noticed that virtually every remote you get now, especially the ones with your cable box, already offer universal remote features.
For about 5yrs now Time Warner's cable remote can control your DVD player, audio setup, VHS, etc.
Activate the GPS portion of your smartphone/remote and you'll never lose track of it again!
i thought there were fundamental differences between IR and IRDA (which phones sometimes have), while IRDA can mimic IR signals the output power of IRDA is often too low to get a decent range.
F*ck the article. With a $40 IR tranceiver, $25 worth of cables/wires, and a $70 router I can turn your $10 remote into a $500 remote and still use my smart phone (computer, tablet, ..., etc.) to control everything. Or I can turn your $10 remote into a $5 remote so your A/V illiterate guests don't f*ck-up any of your sh*t. Everybody, and every thing, you care about wins.
Get your dogma outta my yard!
Well, at the moment, here in wonderful Englandland, the PVRs supplied by the major digital cable and satellite providers can only handle 15 minutes, and are as slow as hell. (One of them even uses two hard drives, for reasons I'm yet to fathom: presumably they couldn't get enough motherboard-to-HDD bandwidth to save both recordings and buffers to the same drive at the same time.)
Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
Yea, just like the combined TV/VCR took over the world ...
Rocks, until the VCR stops working for whatever reason. Replace the whole thing!
Yes. Just like general-purpose computing never caught on.
While a TV/VCR is effectively two components stuck together with Superglue, a modern PC is something designed to do anything that involves maths and a screen. The PC is one device, and is therefore no different to having a hi-fi with a built-in CD player and DAB/digital tuner.
Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
Yeah. I believe that some of Comcast's universal remotes are also JP1 compatible - the one I've seen has the 6 pin connector, though I've never tried to use it.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
Bah. My JP1 remote does all of that, and for far less money than a Harmony. It's also a breeze to program (and more importantly, backup) with the JP1 cable and freely available software.
Use case based? It's called macros. My wife doesn't care what device mode the remote is in. She just presses the appropriate macro button for the "use case" she wants. It all just works.
One button turns on (or off) everything in the home theater. Curiously, it is named Home Theater. Furthermore, that button places the TV and receiver in the appropriate modes to watch the cable DVR - since that's the most common desired state upon turning things on.
Another button changes the TV and receiver to the appropriate inputs for the Wii.
Another one changes them to use the DVD player - and puts the remote in DVD Player mode.
A fourth macro button changes the inputs over to the home theater PC and puts the remote in the mode that uses the learned codes from the Apple remote.
Sensing a pattern here?
In all of the above modes, the volume keys control the receiver volume. If, however, I'm in the bedroom, I can press yet another programmed button that turns on the bedroom TV and places the remote in the cable DVR-controlling mode. Now the volume keys control the TV's volume.
If the system gets out of sync, just use any of the above macro buttons to change to the desired viewing mode, and voila - everything is magically fixed.
Never any fiddling or worrying about different device modes. Just select the use case, err, macro you want, and go. Oh, and by the way - if you ever want or need to control a particular device in a way that doesn't conform to someone's idea of a use case, you can do that too.
Sounds like someone is trying to justify their ridiculously overpriced remote (and I'm a Mac user, lol!).
BluePad turns your cell phone into a remote bluetooth controller with which you can control your computer. It is free software released under GNU GPL license.
http://www.valeriovalerio.org/bluepad/
Its not even worth a discussion. Just like the paperless office never happened and books are still sold on paper, there are some things a catch all technology just can't reproduce. The reasons above are only the beginning.
Sure, smart phones may integrate with some of our home entertainment components, but they will never replace a simple remote control until everyone is mandated to have a smart phone, they automatically authenticate and authorize upon arrival, and every component manufacturer agrees on a standard set of controls and protocols for integration.
Which means never.
No discussion. Just a poor article and a poor suggestion by someone who obviously didn't think about what they were saying.