On August 28, 2012 at 21:17, Mitch57 said...
Those CI's that claim it doesn't exist haven't updated their CCP and downloaded it to the remotes in the field.
Not true. As I've stated we have dozens and dozens of MX-980s in the field and believe me if there was in issue, I'd hear about it. SO, just out of curiosity...and since you are calling us CI's out I have an MX-980 at home with me to test your theories.
Before you claim this "Latency" issue is not a problem with the MX-980 check the facts. I would like to challenge those who have a 980 and equipment to test with, to update their CCP software to the latest version and then download to MX-980. Take any/all base stations out of the picture. Set the 980 to either IR/RF or just RF.
What good does it do to have the remote set to RF only...if you want us to
Take any/all base stations out of the picture.
?
I'm betting you will see the latency. You can further test this by changing the 980 back to "IR" only and you will see that the remote has very little to no latency what so ever.
What's the bet? Because I see no latency when the remote is set to IR/RF with no base station.
Again, take all base stations completely out of the picture when you're doing these tests.
Done. Still not sure what you're expecting to see if you take the base station out but have the remote set only to RF.
I've had this at home for a week, using it on my daily use system. Works just fine. Programmed via CCP with latest update on a Mac via VMWare Fusion in case you're wondering that too.
