I'd take the remote and 'dumb it down' to make it simple for everyone to use. Then have pages for the power user and make them hidden, per se.

I'd also have separate remotes for each system.

don't take the attitude that I'm already in and cannot switch gears. Don't go down the wrong road just because you've started in that direction. Give thought to how you envision using the system and then redesign for the anticipated use. 3 remotes might just be the ticket.

I hear customers, and salespeople, ask for this kind of stuff all the time. Here's the deal -- with very few exceptions, remote controls should *NOT* be used to control multiple rooms. The reasons are:

1. It un-necessarily complicates the programming, and increases the costs.
2. It makes the remote more difficult to use, increasing dis-satisfaction and service calls. The goal (usually) is to make it as simple as possible, right?
3. And here's the big one -- it makes the remote more likely to be lost. How often do remotes get lost in ONE room? Now, imagine having to find every place you could have left it in this room, then another room. Just leave it in one room...

As mentioned previously, there are exceptions, but they should be evaluated on a case by case basis.

I would really like to help you. Please e-mail or call me for information. I'm sure I can help you for far less money and with better results. I have programmed MX-3000s with about 12 individual zones in less than 16 hours.

You can reach me at: damondg at proremotes dot com or (914) 509-5360.



Thank you,
Damon DG
= = = = =
http://www.ProRemotes.com - Authorized Dealer & Remote Programming Services

Now I'm with Tony on this point. Also, nothing worse than walking into one room to do something, only to find the remote was left on the other side of the house.

Several here have suggested that having seperate profiles for seperate users is very difficult. Since I own an MX-3000 and have played with variables a bit, I'd suggest this offers an excellent way to achieve his goal.

The remote could start up in the default state with very simple access, only watch certain TV channels "kid state". With a button on the screen to take the user to adult mode. Adult mode would offer the user a number pad, and ask for a pin number. Plenty of examples on this site how to implement this. Once pin is entered correctly, users would be offered a choice of profiles, power user, wife, etc.

The profile chosen would set a variable. Each button on the remote would examine the variable, and be enabled or disabled, depending on what the variable is. This makes the layout of the remote only necessary once, and keeps you from having problems with running out of memory.

When a user was done with the remote, they would press a button to exit, that then asks if they want to change users or turn the system off. If they choose off, the system goes back to kid mode, other wise they are taken back to the screen just past the pin input.

Doesn't seem like such a hard design, if the system is designed in this manner.

Hi,

I just wanted to add my two cents worth to this thread. I think that the programming time of 33 hours is pretty lean for a system of this complexity. I do think that there is a lot of advantage to having more remotes around the house, but agree with you and other posters that one MX-3000 is perfectly capable of doing it all. Just don't misplace it.

Feel free to call me directly with any questions you have.

Best Regards,

-Eric

I have followed several forums over the years and never commented. This one attracted my interest for two reasons: first it is an all to common occurrence in this and many industries, second the comments have been interesting and progressed predictably.

I would like to ask a few questions of the frustrated owner of the MX-3000 and also make a couple of comments. First I would like to say that I have programmed a few remotes and controls systems over the years including the URC MX-3000. The MX-3000 is a very capable and well-designed remote.

First question, how much time did you spend communicating your needs, wants and desires to the individual or company programming your control?

Second, are you confident that your desired results were clearly communicated and understood?

Third, were there any options discussed with the programming individual or company? What did you do with them?

Fourth, did the scope of the programming change at anytime in this process?

Finally, what level of trust was developed between yourself and the individual or company and has that level of trust been eroded away? If the level of trust does not exist, I suggest cut and run. If not a meeting should be arranged

There have been many good comments in this thread. In particular, I appreciate tweeterguy’s comment and reply; it demonstrates how easily miscommunication can derail plans. With the information provided he was quick to provide his ‘average’ charge to program the control. However, when provided just a little more information he honestly and fairly clarified his statement. It is reasonably to assume that the more information provided about this programming situation would have an affect on the opinions.

There are many variables involved in the area of programming including but not limited to; the equipment used, the availability of discrete codes, how the equipment is hooked together, the desired look and ‘feel’ of the remote, balancing the desires for simplicity with wishes for more features. The process of programming is not a tangible product, only when the desired outcome is achieved does it provide any fundamental value.

It seems to me that there are two lines of thought in this forum. Several remotes would provide more convenience, functionality and flexibility; drawback: additional hardware expense and slightly more programming expense. Programming a multi-system, multi-user single remote provides a high amount of single-location control and equally amount of ‘cool’ factor while saving on hardware cost; drawback; extended programming time issues due to the complexities and reduced user simplicity.

This issue of what is a fair hourly labor rate is another matter. In New Your City, San Francisco and Boston $95 an hour would be a bargain. In many other areas of the country it would be considered very expensive.

I would like to comment concerning programming a MX-3000 to control a 12-zone system. While it is impressive, for many multi-zone systems the actual programming is comparatively simple. Creating the pages and control for the first zone consumes the majority of time. Duplicating these pages for the additional zones, creating a master page and macros is very basic.