There are several issues I have with the software along with several examples. I currently can't recall all of them at present but the one that comes to mind presently is this.

When I try to copy a macro from one LCD button to another (i.e., "CD" push and hold macro to the CD "Power" button) it won't work using the "right click" copy and paste unless the "macro and favorites" window on the target button already has something in that window. However, I can get it to copy if I use the "Ctrl C" and Ctrl V" commands. What the hecks up with that?

Another example is not being able to use the "universal browser" to copy and paste macros from one LCD button to another button as in the example I gave in paragraph two. I seem to be able to drag a learned code and it's macros to any other button but not the "Power" button for a specific device on the LCD screen.

There are other examples which I would be more then willing to post in future threads but there's probably no point unless URC is actually going to make corrections to it's "Cluncky" software.

Maybe it's just me. Being a computer tech I seem to take notice of many of the short commings of various software applications. Especially when trying to support the end user. In this particular case it would be the "custom installers" who are the end users.

So... That being said, what do you custom installers think of the software overall? I have found it to be very cumbersome and non intuitive.

Well, I'm not a computer tech by any means!
I can do everything I need to do without a problem, but I'm still in the 'school of hard knocks'!

I'm fully capable of using the URC software to program a remote that works and provide's alot of 'magic' for my clients.

Is it a pain?(compared to someone that has more experience with software in general?)

I'm not sure.

It does what I need it to do!

Mitch57,

I find the MX-3000 software a bit buggy. One of the most difficult aspects of developing software for a small company... How does it get tested. Having the guy that writes the software test it, and you'll miss plenty of bugs, because he knows he never wrote it to do that! You need a number of people, who have different ideas of how to use it, all testing.

Unfortunately, the Internet is now the excuse for why it's ok to deliver buggy software to customers. No need to hold up your product development, because testing isn't complete. Just get the product out. You can always update for the bugs as users encounter them! Unfortunately this seems to be the prevailing paradigm!

Actually there is a testing protocol. I believe the live updates were put up without a lot of heavy testing at one time, and I don't think it's a secret that there was one liveupdate in particular that went horribly wrong. Shortly after that update a bunch of us started beta testing the updates and reporting before the updates were put up for public availability. I can tell you for sure that there are sometimes 4 or more versions tested before the last one is released. URC really does try to make sure things are fixed and won't cause new problems before they put out an update.

There will always be some bugs, but at least now a few of us put up with most so most put up with a few.

Praise to URC for doing a great job and having excellent response time in fixing the bugs we do report.

Thanks Hank, YJ, Lars, Eric and all the rest at URC!!! and I look forward to seeing some of you at CEDIA.