Cnet recently named the URC-200 their Editor's Choice in the remote category.

[Link: reviews.cnet.com]

And still no formal review on this site. This site is supposed to be THE source of remote control information and reviews. URC's 100, 200 and 300 been out for a long time and they are conspicuously absent here. This is how sites like this fade, when you can go to a site like Cnet and get more review information for the URC's than a site like this that specializes in remotes. I owned a lot of remotes and this is hands down the best for function and ergonomics that I've ever owned.

Greg

First of all, you will not find better researched and written reviews than on Remote Central.

Secondly, the CNET "review" is basically an "overview", while the reviews on this REMOTE-CONTROL-SPECIFIC site are well-researched, in-depth reports with numerous pictures, programming instructions, etc.

One of the reasons there are over 18,000 REGULAR users of this site is that the reviews are very comprehensive and give the prospective buyer a virtual "in-the-hand" view of the remote.

The URC remotes have been around long enough for a few "overviews", but detailed analytical reviews of the type that Remote Central has take time, and are well worth it in the long run.

I personally know of many people who have bought a remote based on "overviews" on other internet sites, only to be disappointed and then buy their remote in accordance with the reviews on THIS site and almost invariably be happy with their choice.

I'm not saying that the CNET report is bad in any way, but it is in no way a comprehensive REVIEW. Check out reviews of other components in magazines. They are long and detailed. Sometimes before the actual review, they may have an overview (with REVIEW to come).

Daniel DOES give you an "overview" of the remotes in the NEWS section when he gets the information. Then he writes REVIEWS that are well worth waiting for in order to get the right remote for your needs, especially if you cannot find them at your local store, or even if you can, the salesman does not have the knowledge that Daniel has about remotes, and what to look for in buying a remote.

Also, if anyone out there has any of the URC remotes, POST YOUR OWN REVIEW in the USER REVIEW section on this site, so that YOU can also help others with their decision.

Greg :-)

Nobody wants to spend time writing a review which will be rendered 'obsolete' by Mr. Tonks' review.

My post still stands and is quite valid. CNet has a review, this site doesn't. This WOULD be the 1st site I would check for a formal review of the URC-200. You sure went off on a big tangent. I never said the Cnet reviews were great or even better. I DID say that I expect this site, which specializes in remote controls, to be the leader in reviewing them. A formal review of the URC's, which have been out for some time, IS conspicuosly absent. I would hate to see people buy an MX-500/600/700/800 remote without first having a look at a review of the URC100/200/300. Could it be that some of this sites supporters don't sell the URC's? I dunno but it's still the best remote I've ever bought in my life and I've bought about 15 of them.

Greg

But this site doesn't specialize in HTM remotes, there are sony's, OFA's,and many more coming to market. And there is only one Daniel. Be patient.

Hey, calm down dude... I am but one person managing this site. My reviews take a LOT of time to complete, and URC was late getting samples to me compared to when they went on sale on the market.

Please cut Daniel a break. While I have no direct knowledge of his whereabouts, however, I see from his profile that he is from Canada.

I can only assume that if he is attempting to 'drink' the Stanley Cup final from his memory using *Canadian* beer -- it could take a while. :)

And honestly, Remote Central isn't about to wither and die based on the lack of a review for one consumer-level remote. Yes, it's an important product. But the primary audience for Remote Central is a group that tends to focus on remotes that cost three to ten times as much. Even URC recognizes this by marketing the 200 in the URC line, not the HTM line.

Well, there's also the lack of a Harmony 688. The Harmony 688 and URC-200 are among the more popular consumer remotes, so you'd expect to see them reviewed.

That said, I wouldn't want to Daniel to rush anything. I don't want to sacrifice the quality of his review just to get it a few days or even a few weeks earlier.

I want a URC-200 review that is going to comment on the feel of the fast forward / rewind buttons compared to the MX-500 / MX-700. I want a review that is going to comment on the lack of DVR buttons. Similarly, I would expect a Harmony 688 review to comment on its usability and "use by feel" compared to the 659.

This message was edited by RonL on 06/09/04 23:28.

Interestingly, I still don't *have* a Harmony H688. But I suspect that a review of one would mainly revolve around the physical differences between it and the H659, since I believe it is operationally identical.

One thing - I don't own and have never used a TiVo or ReplayTV (only generic DVRs are available in Canada, and even then they're typically only rentals from the cable/DSS providers), so you may not get as much discussion/sympathy on that as you'd like! :-)

> One thing - I don't own and have never used a TiVo
> or ReplayTV (only generic DVRs are available in
> Canada, and even then they're typically only rentals
> from the cable/DSS providers), so you may not get as
> much discussion/sympathy on that as you'd like! :-)

Aaaaarg!!

I don't suppose your area cable company has a DVR for lease? I know that several cable providers in Canada now lease the SA8000 / SA8000HD DVR.

If not, have you considered getting yourself a U.S. post office box...for um, mail.

Yeah, they have the SA8000 for $600 + $2 per month, or $20 per month to rent.

I know the SA8000HD was supposed to be "coming", and they now have some obscure text on their site about "PVR functions now available on HD PVR terminal", but the link doesn't mention anything about it.

Well, I've used them all with multiple Tivo units and the button feel of the URC-200 is no different than the MX-500/700. The separate center select button of the URC-200 is a plus, as is the macro-on-any-button ability. The available hard-labled buttons of the URC-200 is the same as the MX-700 and the comparison of that to the MX-500 has been discussed here repeatedly. I find the macro capability of the URC and MX-700 outweighs the advantage of dedicated ">>|" and "|<<" buttons on the MX-500, but that's a matter of personal taste. Ideally, a PC programmable MX-500 without dual labeled buttons and with macros on any button would be my favorite.

With regard to the Harmonys, I prefer the separate buttons of the 659 to the grouped button approach of the 688. I would like to have seen them take the 659 and just move the transport buttons up above the number buttons. YMMV

Mike
www.SurfRemoteControl.com

Mike,

I do wish the URC fast forward and rewind buttons had the same feel as those buttons on the MX-700. You tap three times to hit 60x speed on a Tivo, and the MX-700 seems to have a bit better button feel for this, imo.