> Written by David B on 11/29/99 17:49.14
> The most common general question we all seem to ask, is "What remote
> will support ALL my electronic device and with ALL my most used
> features?".
> Lets give ONE4ALL a request list of all the features we'd LOVE to see in
> a <$50 universal remote. Here are my requests...
> 1. It should come with a bag of extra pre-printed button tops, that
> could replace any key on the remote in any position. We could have the
> feature buttons we want wherever we want them to be.
I don't think this is practical. The OFA's use a single rubber
membrane that covers all keys. There is no way to remove a single key,
then. And any "add on" you stick to the top of the key or casing would
eventually come off under use (I believe OFA did use a writable
membrane on one of their customizable models, but anything you have to
manually write on will be unreadable for all practical purposes).
My solution to customized key ID is to simply be able to program an
alphanumeric description of the key (using the channel no. keys), to
be displayed in a blue luminscent LED screen, a la a/v Producer (the
customized key ID pops up when you press the key). Of course, we're no
longer talking $50 bucks here, but we ARE talking about a perfect
remote, aren't we?
> 2. It should have HUGE learning memory. In fact, I wouldn't mind not
> having any preprogrammed codes if it could easily learn every command
> from every device out there.
A lot of people *would* mind not having preprogrammed codes. Most
people are not "techies". However, preprogrammed memory and learning
memory are two separate banks, so I feel in the age of multiple
gigabyte hard drives, the perfect remote should be able to have enough
memory on board to store hundreds of codes, say 30 times the no. of
remotes supported, or as many as you would possibly need, without
having to come up with convoluted ways to save a byte here or a byte
there.
The perfect remote would be based on the overall design of the Cinema
7, because I think this is the best remote I've yet seen (all touch
screen models, no matter how sophisticated, automatically fail to get
a passing grade next to it - the many complaints I've read of people
who have such remotes is a good indication why). I think OFA went the
wrong way with their higher cost remotes that eliminated the learning
function, or the ability to learn/macro/key assign to any key. I think
the reason more call for more memory than changes to the technical
design is because the learning Cin 7 is already a notably great design
to begin with (although I had already imagined the implementation of
such a remote as the Cinema 7 based on the capabilities of an old and
now discontinued $5 Emerson remote I used to use a few years ago). So
more memory would be needed to make the possibility of
learning/macros/key reassignments/device reassignments a truly
powerful feature of the remote.
> 3. The active device button should stay lit or pressed, or somehow
> uniquely identifiable from the non active ones.
The Magnavox uses such a scheme, but even though it is nice to have, I
don't feel this is necessary, since the LED screen on the a/v 8 is
always actively lit (at least I assume it is, I haven't seen one....).
But if the a/v 8 screen isn't always actively lit, then an LCD screen
with a naturally glowing phosphorous background should be used on the
"perfect unit" (such as what is currently available on certain models
of LCD watches - this is a bright green background that displays data
well without the use of a light, and can be backlit, a la Indiglo).
So with the readout screen constantly lit or constantly bright, what
you would see is a display of the active component at all times (this
could be the name of the device, a customized description, or a visual
symbol of the device), unless a key is being pressed or programming is
taking place (again, I presume the a/v 8 already works like this). The
idea here is to minimize battery usage, so you don't have things lit
up all the time if they don't need to be. I think we ALL remember what
Homer Simpson came up with when he was given the responsibility of
desigining his own car, so perhaps there's a lesson there...
If the perfect remote unit is a backlit model, then maybe it would
be feasible for the backlighting color to be selectable by the unit
(in a case where the keys are a transparent color, and they take on
the color of the lighting, a la Magnavox, etc.). This would be
suitable for at least this one purpose: you would have the keys glow
under one color when viewing in low light conditions, but then the
keys would glow another color entirely when in a special "shift" mode,
to indicate that you have put it into this mode by pressing a special
"shift" key.
The purpose of the shift mode is to have every key take on a second
function, thus making your remotes basic functions twice the number of
available keys (eliminating the need to program in some extended
functions for example). The main function is printed on the keycap,
the shifted function is printed beside or above the key. Instead of 7
devices on the Cin 7, you could now have 14, instead of 4 learning
keys, 8, etc. etc.
> 4. Computer interface, for custom programming of discrete features not
> learnable from the original remote. And a web sight with a database of
> known codes for downloading. This website should be updated HOURLY, as
> new devices hit the market.
Are we still talking $50 bucks here or what?! Personally, I think a
computer interface is overkill for a remote control. Since you could
duplicate all features on any given remote via IR learning, I don't
see why you'd need to tinker that deeply. Multiply all the "techno
geekazoids" on all the remote control forums on the web by a factor of
100, and I don't think there are enough to keep OFA in business
manufacturing remotes that only a computer programmer would love.
Understandably, remote manufacturers have to at least try to make
their remotes appeal to a broad audience, even those targeted for more
specific usage, because it means higher volume sales. Which is to say,
such features would make the remote and its manual too complicated and
intimidating for most people.
But I do agree a better method of upgrading the remote than sending
your original in and waiting weeks or months to get back (and what if
it gets LOST, gulp?!) is needed. The over-the-phone method used by OFA
seems the best one to me (as long as the number is good at least
across North America!). I don't think there are new devices coming out
every hour on the hour, so a weekly update or so should suffice.
> 5. Upgradeable memory capacity. I thought I'd never fill up 4 gig on
> my current computer. I've got 16 gig full now. Thank God for
> upgradeability.
I'm not sure this is needed if they put enough memory on it to begin
with. The problem with this is that if you need this much memory, it
creates the problem of having too many device buttons on the remote.
That problem can be solved though, with a remote that uses a readout
screen, ie. a/v 8. You have one dedicated button that "pages" through
the components as though you were leafing through a book, with each
component being listed on the screen as you page through, and you just
release your finger once you've hit the component you want, and all
the functions for that component would be available. The only
inconvenience here is having to look at the remote when you're
switching devices, but such a design would eliminate ALL device keys
and the real estate they gobble up, as well as allow you to control an
endless array of products in the context of the most sophisticated
IR-controlled home electronics.
> 6. Nice ergonomic design. Well balanced, one handable. No tiny buttons
> crowded too close together.
I'm a great believer in ergonomics, and this is of utmost importance
to a universal remote. I think the design of the Cinema 7 is a good
beginning (the unique numerically-shaped keys are a nice touch for
tactile identification), but that the ergonomics can be improved upon.
The keys require too much force, for one thing, and it lacks a raised
indent on the "5". Small buttons (like on the C7) are good on this
kind of a remote, because they allow the remote to remain useable with
one hand (but barely so for my small hands!). I think the a/v 8 (and
the super touch screen remotes) is large enough that it is *not*
comfortable to use with one hand, and that's what big buttons and many
buttons will do.
However, I do think the most important buttons, the channel and volume
keys, could have been a bit larger than they are on the Cin 7 (but
were probably not made larger due to aesthetics, as far as I can
tell). They also need to be differentiated from each other, visually
and in tactileness. For these keys, I prefer the rocker switch type of
key used on my Sole Control unit. While we're reshaping the keys, why
not make the larger function keys (pre ch/on-off/swap/move) concave a
bit, to better fit the shape of the human thumb. The other function
keys, the seven round blue keys, could stay in their present
location/configuration (the staggered configuration is a clever
touch), but be made much smaller (even smaller than the display/enter
key), while the lettering identifying them is made larger, given that
there'll be more room. I'm talking small and round-headed (thumbs
prefer this), not flat-headed - like a rubber ball bearing. This
actually makes it easier to find (since one key isn't as close to
another) and press the key (since the area is small and requires less
effort), and the possibility of larger lettering just makes things
even easier.
Another small improvement is to make the arrow/select key arrangement
one large round multi-function key (which you slide your thumb into,
or depress in the centre), that works the same, but makes the key
layout a little less complicated, and can be better shaped to fit your
thumb. The most ergonomic and comfortable remotes in my years of
experience with universal remotes are the slim minimalist ones with
the fewest buttons (and short enough that your hand doesn't have to
'climb' up or down the remote to reach the top functions), so a super
universal should try to come as close to this ideal as possible. I
wonder if the Cinema 7 couldn't be made shorter, by eliminating the
area at the bottom where there are no keys (although God forbid, this
would mean having to shrink the logo and brand name considerably, and
stuff it in a smaller place).
Key layout is also important (or being "well-balanced key-wise").
Another area where I think the Cinema 7 could use a bit of
improvement. For one thing, I think all those blue buttons should be
color-coded. They don't have to have a particular significance, but
you will quickly come to learn which color controls which function in
an instant (unless you're color blind...), eliminating the need to
even look at the key ID. I think it also makes the unit more
attractive. I think the RECord key is on the wrong side and needs to
be moved away from the thumb, say where the PAUSE key is. It should
also be recessed. It is not a key one needs to access often, what with
much recording done through programming or timer functions.
The PLAY and STOP keys need a bit better tactile identification than
they have. Finally, I get the impression the transport keys might have
been better placed in the area of the 1-6 channel keys, moving the
channel keys to the bottom. This places important device control keys
right under the thumb, and I feel the use of these keys is more
important than the "7-8-9-0-display-enter" keys you'd have to stretch
your thumb a little to access.
As I wrote somewhere else, I'd also eventually like to see chemical
technology that allows the silkscreening on a key to glow in the dark
without the need to be exposed to light prior. Perhaps making the inks
out of a composite of nuclear waste? A little gigantism or
"mutativeness" isn't a lot to pay for a technology that allows a
remote control's keys to glow in the dark without wasting energy
needlessly.
> 7. Perhaps intechangeable colored case covers. Kinda like Nokia
> CellPhones. Make mine black.
It already is. What more could you ask for?! This feature would be so
far down on my list of priorities, it wouldn't ever make it on it
(although I don't see why they couldn't just have the model available
in several different colors, such as a white remote with grey keys -
OFA, are you listening? Hint, hint! Good tip to reach that female
buyer market here!).
But I would like to see a well *designed* casing too, not just an
attractive one. One that is unbreakable when dropped from a distance
of, say, 8-10 feet onto a hard surface. I'm not sure if "ABS" is good
enough, but I put special rubber surrounds on my remotes, and I think
that at least, the remote should have built-in rubber protectors
(designed so they do not ever come off) at key locations around the
corners/back/face. This would elminate most accidents that end up
breaking battery covers, casings, etc. Spillproof keys, as some
computer keyboards are designed, would also be nice.
> 8. optional volume controllable "beep". Audible verification that a
> button has been pressed.
Personally, I don't feel this is necessary. Usually, when a button has
been pressed, something will happen. If it doesn't, you press the
button again. OFA's and other remotes already have a visual
identification via the red LED, so unless you're blind, I feel this is
adequate.
> 10. Runs on nuclear power. Batteries last 200 years.
Batteries are separate from the remote, and as a geeky nerdy techie,
I'm sure you already know that! I think that OFA's implementation of a
"codesaver" feature that will keep your codes no matter HOW long you
leave it without batteries is just about the next best thing to
everlasting batteries, and a truly brilliant, useful feature.
A few other features on the perfect remote that I'd like to see, not
mentioned in your post:
built-in remote finder (OFA, are you listening?! What a great
marketing gimmick!). Seriously, I've never seen a remote with a
built-in finder, and I think it *would* be attractive to most
consumers who are faced with the occasional problem of not knowing
where they left the remote, and it makes for good packaging blurb.
Implementing this is child's play, and I don't know why it hasn't been
done yet, at least on more feature-prone models. But I do use OFA's
finder on the sides of my remotes, and the problem of an add-on is
that it makes the remote bulkier, heavier (due to the casing), and
harder to handle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response by Paul B on 12/06/99 00:51.02
> 2) And following on, the ability to assign an extended code WITH a
> device code to a key regardless of which device mode you're in.
> (Rather than assign keys elsewhere and then move them)
I could be wrong about this since I've only used the Cinema 7 for two
days now, but I hear that if you assign macros to non-macro keys, it
will work globally, ie. no matter the device mode you're in. So maybe
this feature is already possible on the C7 if you're willing to
program the extended code as a macro (but again, I'm note sure).
> Having seen a number of problems with macros and the time it takes for
> systems to power up and respond to further commmands, indicates that a
> code or key generating a fixed time delay would be quite useful.
> Paul
I agree, this would be a useful feature for those with home theatre.
- cico
|
