Sound and Vision magazine had a head on review, for some reason, between the Harmony 880 and URC-300. I don't know what made them think this was an even match up, but that's what they did.

The URC-300, according to S&V, despite it's good features such as a touch screen (which I actually think is a bad feature because nothing beats tactile feedback, but hey, when you don't know any better, touch screens do look cool *sarcastic*), still could not beat the Harmony with all it's great featured including PC programmability.

Can you believe that? They "match up" remotes from different classes and start using those upper end class features as reasons why the Harmony is better. They mentioned a lot more than that, but that bugged me in particular.

Oh well. Don't listen to me. I'm just blowing off steam.

This message was edited by zytrex on 07/18/05 20:40 ET.

Did they mention the space savings of the Harmony remote by making the buttons so small you can hardly find (feel) them, I mean, that's got to be worth something! :)

I'll put my money into URC any day of the week!

the 880 does not have a TS

Sorry Anthony, the second paragraph was supposed to start with "The URC-300" not "The Harmony." I've fixed it.

The point was that even though they were comparing remotes of different classes, they were trying to give the perception of a fair match up by looking at the URC-300's touch screen as a one up over the Harmony. But as most people who use remotes a lot will say (I think), touch screens are bad because you have to look at the screen to figure out what button you're pressing. And so, since the S&V guy used that as an example of one of the URC-300's redeeming features, I'm using his mention of it as an example of how the S&V guy didn't know what he was talking about.

you found the wrong person to agree with you on that, I use remotes a lot and consider TS to be a big plus over PB remotes in general

I like the urc-300, but mine is a dog when it comes to teaching. I think IR pick up is bent, I have to point the other remote at a 90 % angle over the urc-300 to have it learn. Bought it used on ebay for $40. At the time you could only buy it from B & M stores.

I have a Pronto for my media room and a Harmony 880 for my living room - which has more components than my media room. The Harmony is so much easier and quicker to program - amd it remembers the state each component is in. Hands down, the winner.

Ooops! Sorry. I thought I was in the Intermission Forum.

djy for the next week shall we do old skool flaming on any new sensible posts in the intermission just for old times sake?

true, but at least I focused on a small part of it. I could have said that one has MRSP of 200$ the other 250$, that they are both 15 remote devices....... so even though I would not compare a Harmony 880 to a URC-300 I don't think it was that bad of a comparison.


will not argue with that, Harmony has real feature rich remotes at a decent price. And the 880 is their coolest one ever. But like I said in a different thread in a more appropriate forum, there are stuff you can do on a TS that you will never be able to do on PB remote. The URC-300 does not fall in that category as far as I know, but it is blanket statements like "TS is bad" that I consider naive and dumb. The problem is that you will never see anyone that loves their TS remote say PB remotes are bad and anyone that cares for his guests would want a TS remote with intelligible labels, but it looks like every so often you need to get a PB lover say TS is bad because you need to look at the remote 24/7. If TS was bad, then why are there more and more manufacturers building TS remotes? Why has Philips been doing so well with the Pronto line? Why are there so many that have upgraded from one TS to an other as better ones (fancier screen) have been coming along?

My boy, I do believe you've just been slapped. :P

not slapping anyone, and especially not goodnf. It is just one of my pet-peeves. The biggest problem is that the statement "TS is bad and everyone knows it" is usually written by someone that has never tried a decent touch screen remote and does not understand the concept and its reason for being. Even though I agree that generally speaking a TS is created to be more visually appealing and generally speaking you might look at the screen a bit more, I have a Pronto and a Harmony, and several other remotes and the same way that with experience I know where the 0 button is located on the Harmony, I know where the channel icon for most channels is on the screen of my pronto and don't need to look at it. The trick is to not try and put too much on the screen (my estimate is <12 -preferably <9 on the old Prontos and <16 on the new ones.) at that many buttons they can be big enough and spaced enough to use without looking. On the other hand with a touch screen a guest does not need to ask "what does that do?" unless you have something like the Sony 2000, (or its siblings) where you are not given full control to relable. But on a push button that is much more likely to happen, for instance on my Harmony 768 I turned the 12 button keypad + zap into channel macros in guide mode so that way I have the equivalent of my channel icons on the Pronto. But let's be honest, those 13 channel jumps are useful for me, but what if someone else uses the remote?

Hehe, wow. I had no idea my thread was going to get so much attention. Let me get a few things straight...

I posted this in Intermission because I wasn't talking about remotes as much as I was talking about a review.... and by talking I of course mean ranting.

Second, my statement about touch screens, looking back at it now, should have been more specific. Touch screens like those on the Prontos, where you can make all sorts of buttons and pretty much design the layout of the remote, I think are awesome. What I was trying to say was that the reviewer pointing out that the URC-300 having a touch screen was a one-up on the 880 was not really a one-up at all. The URC-300's touch screen is nothing like the Prontos or other more advanced touch screens.

The 300 TS is pretty much the same as the LCD on all the MX models except for the 1000 and 3000. They all just provide a line to type the name of the button, then on the side is the hard button associated with that name. I like that design because I can name the button anything I want but once I get used to where it is, I can find it in the dark. The URC-300 just takes off the hard buttons next to the LCD labels and makes it a TS. You cannot design/shape/move around the buttons or anything like that so I don't see any benefit. That is why I disagree with the reviewer when he said that the 300's touch screen is one of its redeeming features. I realize my statement about touch screens was written in a general way and could be applied to all remotes, but I was thinking about the URC-300 when I wrote it, and I did mention what remotes I was talking about when I created this thread.

Here is the URC-200 [Link: universalremote.com]) and URC-300 ([Link: universalremote.com]). The only difference in how the screen works is with one you can feel the buttons in the dark and with the other you cannot. I've always disliked this type of touch screen because it has no real benefit over hard buttons associated with LCD labels. The only "benefit" is the "ooh la la" of having a touch screen.

Anyway, the touch screen was really only a small part of my original post. I was just trying to say that matching up the URC-300 with the Harmony 880 was unfair. The remotes are in different classes, especialy since the Harmony can be programmed by the computer and the URC-300 cannot. That's why the prices are so different. The URC-300 was destined to lose in that match up, and being a URC fan, I felt Sound & Vision magazine could have put a little more thought into that.

I would think a better review would be of remotes with the same or very similar features which discussed which remotes used their features better. Or maybe a review of remotes of the same price which discussed which had more bang for the buck.

This message was edited by zytrex on 07/21/05 03:12 ET.

As it looks like they're breeding, yes please.

well this section is for none remotely remote related topics. If you wanted people to agree with you, you could have posted in the URC/HTM forum, if you wanted people to disagree there is the Harmony forum and if you did not know what you wanted there is the general remote forum but tends to have less activity then the other two