I think a lot of people could program an RTI just fine with a short face to face tutorial. How did you learn? Did it get beamed in to your head? If you've ever programmed an MX-3000 you'd see that RTI's software is very logical and easy to use. Not to mention an Intellicontrol...

I think sharp end users could program a URC or an RTI and make it work to their satisfaction. Like David said, some are probably better than we are and can blow us away with photoshop skills.

HOWEVER....

I don't think most END USERS OR PROS would do their best work on the FIRST ONE. In the end-user's case, the only one - so yes, working, in varying degrees, but how well?

After doing a dozen or two of any remote you can look back and see how much you have learned and how much better the experience is getting for your clients.

A "short face to face tutorial"? Maybe it's me, but I can't see that as being adequate for "a lot of people" without significant follow up questions.

YMMV.

I agree 100%. I am always looking for ways to improve my previous GUI designs. I have never sold a design that I didn't feel was near my best at that moment, but that doesn't mean that everyone is using my best work. GUI design needs to evolve from experience. An advanced end-user would be able to program the remote after a day or two of training, but the design would suffer and other people may have problems following your brain path to operate the system. Custom installation professionals meet with numerous clients and have the advantage of being forced to make a remote that will work for anyone.

That's a pretty interesting thing to be worried about. You can see from the box in the upper right just when I signed up, and I put my email address in at that time. I am quite sure I have made some people here fish-flopping irate! There have been a few acrimonious arguments, and I can be a real ass. But I have no spam problems from members here.

Perhaps it's just how you make people angry that matters. When I have an argument about a technical issue, it's not the same as saying that all installers are idiots, which has been said here by others. When I point out that a guy should read his frickin' posts before hitting "send" because he left out the word "not" in his conclusion, making his whole argument look like silly sarcasm, anger ensued but there were no juvenile pranks.

Has anybody who's reading this had email problems from their address being on this site? The characters are munged so that bots can't read them, and only someone with enough ire to be, as I said, juvenile, could cause such a problem.

You know, I've read this whole thread and I've got some stuff to add actually. Oddly, I've come here for a while to get the Mega Code lists and such, but haven't really actively participated until now. I run a small CI, so not only do I do the programming for the most part, but also all the business and PM side. I do completely with the policy. There's lots of precident not only for remotes/controls, but other stuff as well to show how allowing full open access is not a good idea. You just end up with unqualified people doing their own thing, then they jam the tech support because they don't know what they're doing, and then they tell everyone that the product sucks when it's really their shortcomings that are the issue.

We do everything from A/V to security to phone systems, to lighting control. All of which have software that's not available to joe schmoe, but it's the controls that are the only ones people get mad about not being available. You can't even get a dealership with Panasonic for phone systems without being factory certified, much less getting the software. I will say that there have been other systems I've done that the homeowner wanted the software to play with, and I installed it on his computer for him. That being said, it came with a huge caveat that if he screwed something up he would have to pay us to come fix it. That fix is likely to take longer than whatever change he was trying to make in the first place too. I did have to go back once and fix something he messed up, and he hasn't touched the programming since then. I also didn't give him and installable version of the software, merely loaded it on his home desktop computer for him.

There are so many pitfals in an integrated system that it's not even funny, down to purchasing the proper brands and models of equipment so that they can be controlled and automated properly. Let someone feel free to try automating a cheap Wal Mart special Sony LCD TV with any kind of remote and they should quickly see why there's a method to our madness on these things and what they're actually paying us to do and to know.

I agree with Ernie on this one. I've only been contacted via email by a couple people. Only one was a jerk, he was complaining about the grammar in my signature. haha

go ahead and post it and see how fast those copywrite laws get to you, if you don't think RTI will do it!!!

These are the same people that can't comprehend that AMX or Crestron source code isn't just freely available to download and modify, and then get angry that you won't just send them all your hard work, customized GUI layouts, etc.

Yeah, because that works so well for Hollywood studios and Software developers! The only reason the software isn't available on the web is because most people out there could care less.

That response simply amplifies his point.