all,
Your all missing the point. There is a difference between the people who are using their ueic remotes with JP-1 on a regular basis, vs. the MX-500 owners who are just using JP-1 to get one function. Included in with the MX-500 users are those with ueic remotes and DON'T have any intentions of actually using JP-1.
That difference is the "real" JP-1 users actually TRY to understand the PROCESS of JP-1. The majority of the MX-500 & Non-JP-1 UEIC users DON'T want to understand the process at all, they want the shortest, easiest, and quickest way to get that one function that they just gotta have.
So, those MX-500 (also please read non-JP-1 ueic users) DON'T bother to take the time and effort to read the readme's, do file searches, do thread searches, etc. to UNDERSTAND the process, they typically just want someone to HAND them (in a post with a direct link to the file they need, and the SHORT instructions for the INSTALL all directed specifically TO THEM. SO they clutter the message board with a question that was 1. thoroughly covered in the documentation posted, 2. answered 1000 times in posts in the past. It's the laziness I detest.
How many times has a person with a learning ueic remote asked if there's a device code for xxx device? Many times they say they have a learner but learning from their oem's is their "last resort". Gee whiz, the tools were developed and the documentation posted where this should be a 1st resort, not the last. Asking questions should be THE LAST resort, and only after doing as thorough a search as possible.
How many times has someone asked for a certain discrete code? thousands!!!!. How many times have I had to sit and type:
1. Check the pronto files for your device in a ccf file. If it's listed there, you can use ccf2efc to convert the file to ueic format.
2. check the device setup code files at www.hifi-remote.com, click on the advance codes link found at the bottom ov every page to navigate there.
3. check the files area here and see if someone has written a device upgrade for your device, and the file includes the ones you want.
4. You can try the search method: set your remote the device button and setup code that works most of the functions for your device. Press P-E-F-C where EFC is from 000-255 and see if the function you want works. If you find one (and/or others you want), either make a device upgrade including them with KM, Copy and paste the resultant device upgrade code and/or protocol upgrade (if KM posts one) into the appropriate areas in IR, change the device button to the new upgrade device setup code assignment you made in KM, and "Upload to Remote". Alternatively, use the Keymove function in IR to assign the found efc values to buttons as you'd like. If it's a combo code, be shure to enter the 2-Byte commands that KM reports on the functions tab when you entered the efc there into IR and select "Hx cmd" radio button.

Now, just how many times should I or anyone else have to sit here and type those same instructions when they've already been typed 1000 times by me, rob, jon, John, Mark, etc.? The sad part is they're covered in the readme's already; and the poster was just TOO LAZY to bother taking 1/2 hour to read them.

Since the MX-500 guy typically only wants ONE or just a couple functions, he's especially notorious for asking questions without reading the readmes and other documentation provided. What the heck, he doesn't NEED to understand the JP-1 process, he just needs the uiec remote to issue one stinkin command for his remote to learn; then it gets stuffed in a drawer, given away, or sold on ebay. IF he manages to get someone to HAND him a really simple process to get his ueic remote and learned to his MX-500; and 6 months down the road he buys another device and needs yet another command to teach to the MX-500, He'll then go back to JP-1 and ask for the quick, easy, NO-WORK method again, and re-ask how to use it because he didn't bother to LEARN the JP-1 process the first time around. Now we're answereing his exact same questions a second time.
It's one thing to ask questions because you just simply don't understand---IF the questions are designed to INCREASE your knowledge of the process. It's entirely different if it's just to suck the answers to SAVE YOU the time and effort of READING and DIGESTING the process for the quick and easy fix for one simple command. I don't mind helping someone UNDERSTAND something that's unclear to them. I DO mind trying to help someone who was simply TOO LAZY to bother understanding and reading the documentation provided.
MANY people took the TIME and EXERTED the effort to sit down and PROVIDE the documentation, the tools, etc. for the group's benefit. WHY should they, or anyone else, have to be bothered with questions that were already well covered in the documents, PURELY because some clown with a MX-500 is TOO LAZY to read them, NDERSTAND the process, and just answer questions to CLARIFY a confusing issue? I think it's a slap in the face to the ones that took that time and exerted the effort to provide them.
Isn't it overall BETTER for the GROUP if our tool builders and experts don't have to take their time from CONSTRUCTION and BUG FIXES to answer questions because someone is too lazy to read the documents already provided? How many people have asked for a certain extender, or protocol, and Jon, Rob, or John are simply so swamped with uneccesary questions that they can't devote time to those more pressing needs?
How many times has John said he'd like to upgrade his 7800 and 1994 extenders to be like his best one for the xxxxx, but he just doesn't have time. I've seen it over and over. Why doesn't he have the time? Because he is FORCED to WASTE too much of his time with RE-answering the same questions over and over again, and ALL of those were covered in the varios documentation posted at the site, and repeatedly re-spelled out 1000 times before to someone else who asked the very same question earlier that day, or yesterday, or last week. One reason I answer so many is an attempt to give John, Jon, and Rob MORE time to devote to more pressing issues. But that still isn't enough because 2 hrs later another lazy "user" comes along and asks the same dang question. Just how long should we put up with that? Just how many times should we "allow" the documenters to be insulted because of LAZY people?
OK, I focused on the MX-500 people and the non-JP-1 but ueic remote users because history has shown that THESE people are particularly the ones that FAIL to read the documentation, or use the TOOLS provided. They just want the quick and easy fix for their problem and want SOMEONE ELSE to do the work FOR THEM. Afterall, they just NEED one particular function.
Does just needing one particular function for a MX-500 JUSTIFY being too lazy to READ and UNDERSTAND the process? Personally, I don't think so.

Jim