I am not going to continue with this theme as it is not very productive. I was trying to point out that the device has significantly more value than the asking price and also that I believe people would make their own purchasing decisions based upon the price.

Joakim I will get back to you tonight (PST).

Mike

I think the $100 price is fine - however, until it works on a Mac, I can't use it! (Which is why the MX-700 is useless for me.)

Joakim

When I figured out what the various user defineable memory locations contained I thought the macros were somewhat flakey. I put in some macros by means of my PC and the IRCLONE-MX and my memory tells me that the steps did not execute as I had planned. I didn't have time to follow up much on that as I figured that someone else might or I could do it later.

I think that it is possible to figure out what the problem is by getting a dump of your MX contents. Either by inspection or experimentation we could figure out what the problem is and correct it.

Mike

Is the hardware a third party piece (basically just a IR tranciever) or something Mike created?

Dr. Will

Mike designed the hardware.

Mike,

I'm sorry you feel that way. Frankly, I would have thought that you'd have found it entirely productive. I know when I've been involved in projects I wanted to know exactly what potential users thought of the entire project, regardless of what my views on it were. Unless I was doing something entirely for myself, I wanted all possible feedback available.

Of course people will base their purchase on decision on many things including price. That's exactly what's being discussed here.

Well Rich since you're determined to get an answer I will do my best.


I entered this effort with this intent as the thread shows. However when I saw the possibility to make it a reliable product, and charge for it, I declared that intent. I do think I would have appreciated the above comment back then. Instead you posted this on 6/16 on page 3 of the original thread.

"Mike,

Thanks for the continued support on this. I just got my MX-500 and would LOVE to have a device that I can interact with via my PC. Backup would be nice but I'm really hoping for interaction.

As far as what I'd pay for such a device, that ranges. If it is fully 2-way, I'd be willing to pay say $70 for a fully assembled solution or say $40 or so for raw parts."

I interpreted this to mean that would be willing to pay $70 for fully assembled hardware and would also love some software. As I have said before I do not think that providing "raw parts" would have given people a reliable solution. It seemed reasonable to think that you would pay extra for software.

As I said I am listening carefully to what is being said and am working on a variety of options.

Mike

Well said, Mike.

I agree. I hope that the software is freely available for download and that it will demostrate enough functionality without the dongle to help people make their buy decision.

That's a great idea, foodsnob! Letting someone play with the software and see how easy it could be to rearrange and reprogram their remote -- without having the dongle to make it happen -- might turn some of those "too expensive's" into "gotta get it's".

Alas, I had to enter the "too expensive" camp yesterday (thank you, Mr. Economy).

Steve

Dave and I agree that we will be making eval versions of the software available.

Mike

This is the funniest thing. I remember everyone talking about how great it would be to program the MX500 by computer...saving and backing up their files...could someone out there please do it!!?
MikeC steps up and is getting it done. He should be paid. I do not believe that this hardware and software could be had for anything less than $100 with any after-market manufacturer (if it works and is reliable). After about a year, and he recoups his time and expense, perhaps the product could be had for less. Thats how the pricing of ALL THINGS ELECTRONIC works...and every one here knows it. So, lets get fair with Mike et al.
kranston

It seems to me that that the pricing of this initiative can be evaluated two ways:

1) The existing MX-500 owner, with a remote which is essentially programmed and rarely modified, will consider this a "backup" solution first and foremost, since while the editing functionality is nice, it probably won't be used enough to justify the price. As a backup solution, it competes against the idea of buying a second MX-500.

2) The new MX-500 owner, or the existing owner who changes equipment and therefore the remote's programming on a regular basis, will evaluate this as an "editing" solution first and foremost. The combination of an MX-500 plus this package is about $130 less than an MX-700. For some, the extra cost of the MX-700 will be worth it for the enhanced macro capabilities and other extra features. For those with simpler needs, this package is going to look like an excellent deal.

This package looks very different when looked at from the perspectives of these two groups. It ultimately comes down to "evaluate based on your needs". For some this will be well worth the money, and for other it will not be. Just like anything else on the market.

Originally, the MX700 MSRP was $499. Some folks paid that for the benefit of the new device...don't forget.
kranston

As others have pointed out, this thing is a great deal for custom installers. They will save a bundle on each install using an MX-500 vs. 700.

Is there a way the software could be limited (but still fully functional) for normal users, and make a more expensive version for custom installers that will be programming multiple MX-500's?

Just an idea.

Also, I think the survey results thus far are in your favor. 25%+ of the people have volunteered that the price is right. Ask any group of people if X is too expensive and most will say "yup."

I think this thing is a good deal at $100. My 2-month-old MX-500 is still half-programmed. It's a tedious process to assign labels to buttons. I also want to move devices around now that I've used the thing for a while. I'm anxiously awaiting the IRCLONE.

Dave