or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › A/V Control & Automation › Remote Control Area › MX-700 software
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MX-700 software - Page 2

post #31 of 199
Actually, discrete codes are more simple than Tony's explanation. A discrete ON code can ONLY turn a component on and a discrete OFF code can ONLY turn a component off.

So, your TV is already on and you send it a discrete ON code, it will remain on. It will not toggle off as it would with the standard power button the factory remote. Likewise, if the TV is off and you send it discrete ON code, it will turn on.

Reverse it for the discrete OFF code. It will only turn off a component that is already on because that code can do is turn it off.

Discrete codes are very important for Macros. A Macro is a string of different commands sent via a single button press. For instance, you might set up a Macro to:

1) Turn on the TV
2) Set the TV to Digital Input 1
3) Turn on the A/V Receiver
4) Set the A/V Receiver to DVD
5) Turn on the DVD player
6) Eject the DVD disc tray, readying it for a DVD disc.

If you don't have discrete codes for your components, in the above example, if the TV, AV/Receiver or DVD player is already ON before you send the Macro, the standard power toggle would turn those items off.

Conversely, with a discrete ON code for each component, the TV or other component could be ON and when it receives the discrete ON code it would simply remain on.

Now, the reason this is all very important to the discussion of URC's software policy change is this.... Very very few factory remotes have discrete ON or OFF codes in them. In most cases, you get those discrete codes from the DATABASE of IR codes that URC supplies with their software. Said database is the thing that gets updated when you use "Live Update" in the URC MX Editor software. No "Live Update" feature means you can't get access to any newer codes that URC might have added for newer components.

Yes, there are other ways to get the discrete codes. But much of the "power" of the URC software and the PC-programability of their remotes lies in that extensive collection of IR codes in that database. A database that is constantly being updated. A database who's updates are NOT available to folks saddled with the "No Live Update" version of the software.

Mark
post #32 of 199
True Mark.
Being an Engineer gives me a tendacy to overcomplicate explainations, etc.

Yes, I was surprized to find that URC had discrete ON and OFF codes for my HDTV.
I was lucky that all of my components were in the mx-950's nonupdatable Aug 1 database I downloaded.
If they weren't, even though I can learn from other remotes, I wouldn't have the discrete ON and OFF codes, which make it nice for not having to assign PWR state variables. I would have to find a hex file, etc., that someone else had, that had them and posted, and try to inport it into the mx editor.
Doable, but a pain.

Plus I was over at remotecentral, and in November, URC updated the mx-900's firmware to resolve a button press issue.
So for those discrete codes and firmware updates to resolve some issues, the "live update" is needed.
So there are risks to be taken when buying from an unauthorized dealer.

But even so:
I am VERY happy with my mx-950 remote!
post #33 of 199
called universal today and told them the serial number format I have does not work on their web site, they issued me a new number and I downloaded the software.

edit: they gave me the consumer version which is the latest but the live update is disabled, you have t0 download the software everytime you want to update, i need to try and get the professional version.
post #34 of 199
The "consumer version" (as you call it) that I downloaded about two weeks ago still had the database dated in June or July. Then, when I got the Live Update version it had a database dated in November. So, as of two week ago, the version with Live Updated disabled had a database that was at least 4 months old.

Hopefully, URC has changed that since then. But, somehow, I doubt it. I think you are being overly optomistic in thinking that you can keep downloading "consumer version" and keep getting updated database. So far, URC hasn't shown that such will be the case.

Mark
post #35 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Booth View Post

The "consumer version" (as you call it)


I think you are being overly optomistic in thinking that you can keep downloading "consumer version" and keep getting updated database.
Mark

actually I didnt name it the "consumer version" URC did it.

No I am not overly optomistic, I am simply stating what URC told me.

If you have the version with the live update then why dont you help us all out and make it available to us.
post #36 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiddk1 View Post

If you have the version with the live update then why dont you help us all out and make it available to us.

Because it is illegal to distribute the software and I don't need URC breathing down my neck.

Mark
post #37 of 199
I've received a couple more E-mails and private messages from folks asking me to provide them with the newer, Live Update enabled, version of the MX-800 editor software. As I mentioned above, I'm not willing to do that. There are others that are reading these topics (both here, and over at remotecentral.com) that offered to provide the software to me when I first started posting about this. And, in fact, I did download the software from one fellow's site (that he put up only long enough for me to download) BUT I NEVER UNARCHIVED THE FILE. Why? Because I was already in the process of getting the software directly from URC. And when URC cooperated, sending me the software on a CD-R, I deleted the other file. As mad as I was at URC, I felt guilty about acquring their software "illegally". Not that I don't feel that I'm entitled. I do. But there was much more satisfaction in getting it directly from URC.

So, I'm sorry.... I won't be distributing the software to ANYONE. It's simply against my principles. I felt bad enough "accepting" the download the one fellow offered.

My suggestion is for everyone needing the software to:

A) Call URC support and plead your case. You will likely need a serial number on your remote (under the batteries) to get them to cooperate. You will also need to tell them which unauthorized vendor you got your remote from.

B) If you got your remote from an authorized dealer, then that dealer should provide you with the software.

C) If you got your remote from an unauthorized dealer and your serial number is missing, then your best bet is probably to post a message in the big forum thread pertaining to this over at remotecentral.com. There are MANY sympathetic ears over there. I even had one custom installer in my local area E-mail me and offer to come to my house and install the software for me based upon my complaints in that big thread.

Good luck!

Mark
post #38 of 199
Never Mind, I Read the URC policy, your right



I didnt know it was illegal to give away free software Mark,I thought it was only software that is sold and had individual serial #'s but maybe I was wrong. thanks anyway.
post #39 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quill View Post

This move by URC has got to be the biggest corporate screw-up ever made by a manufacturer. If they have such a big issue with "unauthorized dealers", here's a clue: don't sell to them!

Make your distributers sign an iron-clad agreement limiting the sales and marketing of the product, with hefty fines for not playing by the rules. It works for Paradigm.

Does URC really believe this is the best solution? Or are they simply enjoying the best of both worlds: reaping smaller profits from high-volume sales from the low-ball unauthorized distributors, and only supporting the high-profit, low volume dealers.

From here on out, I'm going out of my way to ensure no-one I talk to buys a URC product.

Well I am an RTI and URC dealer, and I appreciate manufactures that protect their product lines. It in no way is intended to hurt or screw the consumer, but rather get them a capable remote in their hands that works appropriatly. It also prevents internet dealers (aka people with a garage and no overhead) selling them for nickels over cost which people like me cannot do. Could you imagine letting everyone have the software? You might say YEAH i could! It would be awesome! But think of the support required to keep consumers on the right path during the programming process(Just look at how many harmony threads are on here!!!!) I would say the average person would make a few phone calls to get their remote programmed. Now if its in the hands of trained programmers that have done X amount of remotes, they will probably fuction better, have a better name as far as brand quality because its programmed well.

Now the downside to controlling the software is that capable people cannot make changes to their remotes, dealers that initially programmed it may go away and leave the customer stranded without the abilities to update the remotes (favorite pages, and hardware changes)


B
post #40 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Booth View Post

Because it is illegal to distribute the software and I don't need URC breathing down my neck.

Mark

Me either! =) I am not trying to be a jerk either, but like any other dealer we have certain agreements with manufactures, which we are obligated to honor. If we do not then we are no longer a dealer.

URC as most manufactures that requires software uses this as a way to keep unauthorized people for selling their equipment. Which protects us the dealers, and you the consumer, keeping you with products with a warranty and good support.


B

PS anyone with a URC remote that wants some minor changes could ship it to me and I'd be happy to help you out.
post #41 of 199
thanks for the reply crazy, but I think it is screwing the consumer, imagine microsoft saying well, if you dont buy windows directly from us, you cant get windows updates. I did get the software 2 days ago b/c I bought from an authorized retailer but the policy is not fair.
post #42 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy1 View Post

Well I am an RTI and URC dealer, and I appreciate manufactures that protect their product lines. It in no way is intended to hurt or screw the consumer, but rather get them a capable remote in their hands that works appropriatly. It also prevents internet dealers (aka people with a garage and no overhead) selling them for nickels over cost which people like me cannot do.

Some assumptions here.....So in your opinion, if urc only sells these remotes to authorized dealers and installers to 'protect the product line' how do you think the unauthorized dealers are getting these products? Why punish the end consumer for a problem urc has with it's dealers?
post #43 of 199
Fortunatly there are many other options out there, Personally I know why they control the software as I mentioned above, it controls gray markets gear, and unauthorized people reselling it.

Anyways hope you get it all working!
Brandon
post #44 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nimnifnof View Post

Some assumptions here.....So in your opinion, if urc only sells these remotes to authorized dealers and installers to 'protect the product line' how do you think the unauthorized dealers are getting these products? Why punish the end consumer for a problem urc has with it's dealers?


They should do a better job, by tracking serial numbers then the people doing it would be found quickly. Unfortunatly since these are sold through distrubution it would be nearly impossible to get all the distrubutors to feedback all the information to them reguarding each remote.
I don't think they are 'punishing' the end user. They want you to have a product you are satisfied with, and what they found is ones that are sold sideways and not programmed properly hurt their reputation when someone make a comment like 'X remote sucks because....' Usually its a programming error, as the remotes usually do what they are told.

If you would like, I would encourage you to email URC your concerns. That or simply not purchase their equipment. When you purchase it you understand exactly waht your getting in to with the restrictions on the software availability. If you still choose to get it then I can' feel sorry for you.

Brandon
post #45 of 199
Thanks for the feedback Brandon. I'm not on the anti-urc bandwagon, but I do think their policy is a bit skewed. URC has the ability to control their distribution and that there would solve their problem instead of placing this responsibility on the end user. Which is where it is.

For a product like this I probably wouldn't check for an authorized dealer and would have bought it through newegg or amazon. Heck with the size and amount of business those two do I would have assumed it was a legitimate source. Not even thinking of having software issues. Fortunately at the time I was looking for a remote I found out about this policy as I was looking at an mx700. Didn't want the potential hassles and ended up with a harmony though still kinda wished for the mx, but happy with my harmony.
post #46 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy1 View Post

I don't think they are 'punishing' the end user. They want you to have a product you are satisfied with,

They certainly are. For 4 years I happily programmed my own MX-700 and kept the software updated via Live Update, now they won't allow me to do that anymore. So, I was a satisfied customer, now I am not a satisfied customer. So their policy is having the exact opposite effect of what they were attempting to accomplish.

You're happy URC did this because you see $$, that's all. You expect business to increase because this will artificially create demand for your services. Milking a cash cow, that's all it is. Put any spin you want on it, it's all basically just BS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy1 View Post

Which protects us the dealers, and you the consumer, keeping you with products with a warranty and good support.

Yes it protects you dealers at the cost of us consumers. It does not protect us consumers as you state, quite the opposite. It forces us to pay for a service that we don't need to pay for. It only protects you and your cash flow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy1 View Post

PS anyone with a URC remote that wants some minor changes could ship it to me and I'd be happy to help you out.

At what cost? Free? Out of the goodness of your heart? And you'll pay for shipping both ways? And you'll send a loaner remote first so the customer won't be without? See what an inconvenience this is? As opposed to just connecting it to my PC and making the modifications required and being done in 10 minutes or so.

You did make one good point, lets all email URC.

Let them know how you feel!

[edited to remove e-mail address. Posting an address asking for people to just "them them know" via e-mail is not something we like to see.]
post #47 of 199
Screw URC, RTI and the rest for assuming CI's are the only people capable of working with their products. As this entire site can easily attest to, there is a huge "pro-sumer" market out there that can easily match skills with the "professionals". I've got the MX-3000, T2, T2+ and am looking to upgrade to something (maybe T3?) but seriously hate the draconian views these manufacturers have of the consumer.

If anyone not in the moral majority here has the "pro version" of the URC MX software (Live Updates enabled) and can send it to me, I'll happily host it on my FTP.

Give it to me and I'll give it to the world!!!
post #48 of 199
I am one of the guys that has tried to get the updated software from some other users. I bought my mx800 as a product and a SERVICE two years ago. the product is great, always has been. URC has now cheated me, IMO. They have taken away the service which they sold me two years ago.
At that time when I purchased the product URC could have stated that it only lasted a year. I would probably purchased it even if they charged for each update. But this was not the policy. The policy was that I would receive free updates. "wow, I think I will buy that brand, product and service!!" I feel now with their new policy they will not sell nearly as many remotes but that is fine, that is their business decision. What is ethically wrong is taking away something that was already sold. In other words they should have said from this remote henceforth we will not be updating consumer versions. It is akin to stealing or at least fraud. (taking back a service) they should refund our money or at least part of it. You bet I will email them. Allthough it will probably do no good since many on other sites have commented that URC doesnt typically reply to EM's. I wish I could afford a class action law suit. Thats how the business world works.
post #49 of 199
If anyone is interested in emailing URC there is some information at this link suggesting who you might want to email.

Universal Remote Control Alienation Policy

My origianl post was subject to censorship. Does URC advertise here?
post #50 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

If anyone is interested in emailing URC there is some information at this link suggesting who you might want to email.

Universal Remote Control Alienation Policy

My origianl post was subject to censorship. Does URC advertise here?

I would think the owners of this forum don't want to have a flurry of harrassing of mass emails suddenly start appearing from their domain into the URC mailboxes since they're in the same industry. I agree. But what URC has done to existing owners does suck and will certainly keep me from upgrading from my trusty MX-500.
post #51 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyWalters View Post

I would think the owners of this forum don't want to have a flurry of harrassing of mass emails suddenly start appearing from their domain into the URC mailboxes since they're in the same industry. I agree. But what URC has done to existing owners does suck and will certainly keep me from upgrading from my trusty MX-500.

It wouldn't be from their domain, the source and return domain in the address would be that of the sender, not AVS Forum. There would be no tell tale sign that AVS was involved, it's not like the RFC Received lines in the email header have referer info embedded in them like clicking on HTML links do.
post #52 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

You're happy URC did this because you see $$, that's all. You expect business to increase because this will artificially create demand for your services. Milking a cash cow, that's all it is. Put any spin you want on it, it's all basically just BS.

The BS is your myopic view of the entire situation mixed with a healthy dose of cynicism. I know you're not happy about it and I don't expect you to be, but what's with the crusade? You'd say more to URC by not buying their remotes, as opposed to sending them emails.

Nobody is creating an environment to 'force' people to pay CI's, that's not what this is about. That's a joke. There are issues with channel control, of which Crazy1 did touch on. It's not a perfect world and you can hammer URC for all it's imperfection, but at least they tried to fix a problem; a problem that some of you 'pro-sumer' pros don't know about and don't seem to acknowledge as a problem, because it's not a problem to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

Yes it protects you dealers at the cost of us consumers.

More jaded hyperbole based in nothing more than antagonism and misinformation. There's more that went into this decision than just money. Someone attempted to explain this to you, but it sure seems like you aren't open to this viable and pragmatic dynamic, which is too bad.

Look, some of you guys are PO'd and I don't blame you. I don't think URC is perfect. But URC made a decision to try and control their channels of remotes, of which control and delegation of SW tools is one aspect. Good, bad, or indifferent, that's what happened. But, some of the spin about 'forcing consumers to use CI's' and other inferences to good old CI greed are nothing more than that, spin. So, anybody who says they won't buy another URC remote because you don't like their policy, I can't argue. If you want to state that they're going to lose sales, we can debate that. But when you say things such as "URC is punishing their customers" I'm going to call it what it is, good ol fashioned hyperbole.
post #53 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by carpecervisi View Post

Screw URC, RTI and the rest for assuming CI's are the only people capable of working with their products. As this entire site can easily attest to, there is a huge "pro-sumer" market out there that can easily match skills with the "professionals". I've got the MX-3000, T2, T2+ and am looking to upgrade to something (maybe T3?) but seriously hate the draconian views these manufacturers have of the consumer.

Another tenet of the anti-URC crowd. As anybody with a modicum of sense, DIY or CI, there is a fair amount of very capable people on this forum and RC that take this equipment to it's limits. Yet, to assume that all participants of this forum are as capable as your boasting self is fallacy. One only has to peruse this forum to realize that most aren't as skilled as yourself.

It only stands to reason and logic that any manufacturer has a responsibility to make sure their equipment is maximized. Many of you can maximize it without a pros help. Some of you are probably more skilled than any pro you can get out of the phone book. Having said that, it's still reasonable for URC to want these remotes channeled through competent CI's or AD's so the support is there, should it be needed.

Most buyers aren't getting that right now buying off the grey market.
post #54 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpapa View Post

The BS is your myopic view of the entire situation mixed with a healthy dose of cynicism. I know you're not happy about it and I don't expect you to be, but what's with the crusade? You'd say more to URC by not buying their remotes, as opposed to sending them emails.

Nope. They lose one sale? Doesn't mean that much to them. Keeping the issue in public view, that may lose them more then one sale.

And you're view, being an installer, isn't myopic? LOL

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpapa View Post

Nobody is creating an environment to 'force' people to pay CI's, that's not what this is about. That's a joke. There are issues with channel control, of which Crazy1 did touch on. It's not a perfect world and you can hammer URC for all it's imperfection, but at least they tried to fix a problem; a problem that some of you 'pro-sumer' pros don't know about and don't seem to acknowledge as a problem, because it's not a problem to you.

They tried to fix a problem of theirs that benefits URC and dealers. Period. And consumers that already own one of their products are the ones being affected. But of course, that's perfectly Ok with you because you're on the dealer/installer side and you get the benefits. Talk about myopic. Hey, take a look in the mirror some time soon will ya?

This pretty much says that URC wants (yes is not forcing?) you to use a CI.

"While it may be possible for a hobbyist or Do-It-Yourselfer to derive partial functionality, it is our strong conviction, based upon extended experience, that our products will not deliver their maximum potential unless they are professionally programmed."

(And I'm sure you've seen this before.) Unless of course you don't have the device codes you need, and URC won't give them to you now, so you have to go to a CI. Oh. That's pretty much the definition of forcing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpapa View Post

More jaded hyperbole based in nothing more than antagonism and misinformation. There's more that went into this decision than just money. Someone attempted to explain this to you, but it sure seems like you aren't open to this viable and pragmatic dynamic, which is too bad.

In your opinion. Which you're allowed to have. Hey! I'm allowed to have mine too! Wow! What a concept, eh? Boy, anything you don't agree with is myopic, jaded, hyperbole, misinformation. So, nobody but you are entitled to have their own opinions, eh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpapa View Post

Look, some of you guys are PO'd and I don't blame you. I don't think URC is perfect. But URC made a decision to try and control their channels of remotes, of which control and delegation of SW tools is one aspect. Good, bad, or indifferent, that's what happened. But, some of the spin about 'forcing consumers to use CI's' and other inferences to good old CI greed are nothing more than that, spin. So, anybody who says they won't buy another URC remote because you don't like their policy, I can't argue. If you want to state that they're going to lose sales, we can debate that. But when you say things such as "URC is punishing their customers" I'm going to call it what it is, good ol fashioned hyperbole.

CI greed. It's all spin. Yada Yada Yada. That's all it is. Yeah right. This coming from an installer. Wait, let me think how much weight I'll give, and how much belief I'll have in your statements that it's not about $$. I'll get back to ya on that.
post #55 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

Nope. They lose one sale? Doesn't mean that much to them. Keeping the issue in public view, that may lose them more then one sale.

And you're view, being an installer, isn't myopic? LOL

I can see it from all sides. I know, hard to believe, but it's true. The fact is that URC is making headway in achieving a stated goal, to combat grey market sales. People like you are helping this process along.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

They tried to fix a problem of theirs that benefits URC and dealers. Period. And consumers that already own one of their products are the ones being affected. But of course, that's perfectly Ok with you because you're on the dealer/installer side and you get the benefits. Talk about myopic. Hey, take a look in the mirror some time soon will ya?

I can see your antagonism growing. Might as well turn this into a RedStateBlueState debate. Just kidding.

This process will likely end up being beneficial to end users also, including the ones (like you) who don't want any help from a CI. The only difference is that you may have to purchase from different sources, not internet flea markets. So, no benefit to people like you. To others, who buy the remotes and don't have as easy a time as people like you, they should be able to get help from the person they purchased the remote from (not URC). Benefit to them. I'm not going to explain benefits to CI's or URC since you wouldn't listen anyway. Or, you might misquote and tell me what it says.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

This pretty much says that URC wants (yes is not forcing?) you to use a CI.

"While it may be possible for a hobbyist or Do-It-Yourselfer to derive partial functionality, it is our strong conviction, based upon extended experience, that our products will not deliver their maximum potential unless they are professionally programmed."

(And I'm sure you've seen this before.) Unless of course you don't have the device codes you need, and URC won't give them to you now, so you have to go to a CI. Oh. That's pretty much the definition of forcing.

Yes, I've seen it before. Many times. The funny thing is than each and every person says that statement says something different, all with certainty equal in fervor to your own. Who to believe? Surely, that statement can't say all the things people keep saying it says it does.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

Boy, anything you don't agree with is myopic, jaded, hyperbole, misinformation. So, nobody but you are entitled to have their own opinions, eh?

More fallacy charading as logic. You've made many statements, of which some of them I have properly attributed those descriptors. You've made some statements I can't argue with (or agree with) or attribute said adjectives to. But, your last statement....fallacy. Antagonistic. Spin, BS. Maybe we should just stick to the subject, eh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

CI greed. It's all spin. Yada Yada Yada. That's all it is. Yeah right. This coming from an installer. Wait, let me think how much weight I'll give, and how much belief I'll have in your statements that it's not about $$. I'll get back to ya on that.

I couldn't make any better argument that you are as biased if not more biased than you say I am. Since you aren't part of this industry, and you are angry at the URC policy change, then I suppose that anything you say is totally biased and not worthy of any merit because you don't trust anybody not in your same position. Likewise, you obviously don't understand the dynamics between URC, CI's, and the industry as a whole because of some of the statements you've made. So, should I take your assertions at face value?
post #56 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpapa View Post

Likewise, you obviously don't understand the dynamics between URC, CI's, and the industry as a whole because of some of the statements you've made.

You keep hiding behind this statement but you never explain it. Here, let me make a couple off the cuff statements that I'll assume you know nothing about (like you are assuming) and then blindly hide behind those statements using them to discredit you and your opinion/knowledge.

Your right, I knowing nothing about retail sales, supply and demand, product support, customer support, etc. You know nothing about me, you know nothing about my experiences, careers, education, training, etc. but you assume I know nothing and you know everything. You are the epitome of the word assume in this instance. And this time I am pigeon holing you because you are demonstrating this by your actions.

You continually attempt to discredit my opinion without providing any factual data. Could that be because you have none?
post #57 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

You keep hiding behind this statement but you never explain it. Here, let me make a couple off the cuff statements that I'll assume you know nothing about (like you are assuming) and then blindly hide behind those statements using them to discredit you and your opinion/knowledge.

Your right, I knowing nothing about retail sales, supply and demand, product support, customer support, etc. You know nothing about me, you know nothing about my experiences, careers, education, training, etc. but you assume I know nothing and you know everything. You are the epitome of the word assume in this instance. And this time I am pigeon holing you because you are demonstrating this by your actions.

You continually attempt to discredit my opinion without providing any factual data. Could that be because you have none?

I am not going to comment on your demeanor, you are obviously angry. What I will say is that I am an installer, and I do have access to the updates. I had no say in whether or not URC made this switch. I did not change their policy. My customer base has not changed in any way. We sell the remotes to customers where we have installed their entire system. The remote comes with the package basically. To date, not one of these customers has ever asked to install the remote themselves, edit or update the remote themselves, or even asked how it gets installed. They just want us to come in, install it, show them how to use, and be gone. Now my problem is that you blindly assume that all installers agree with this policy to "line our pockets". My business has not changed nor will it. It is not where my market is. So you saying that I will be making more therefore I agree with the policy is as blind a statement as me saying that you will screw your remote up because you don't have the proper training. It just wouldn't be true. So for that I take offense.

Furthermore, unless I am mistaken, the only real change in this software is there are no longer updates to the IR database. I honestly am not 100% since I have not seen the change personally. If this is the case, then grab your original remotes, do some IR learning, and program to your hearts content. It may take some extra time of course, and there may be a code missing here or there, but it will work. It's not like URC has an incredible IR database to begin with. Again, I could be a little off here as I have not had any experience with this software that no longer receives updates.
post #58 of 199
golovemd

Angry? Yeah, well maybe. Definitely not happy. Well, at least regarding URC's policy. Really happy about a lot of other things. It's been a great Christmas, in fact a great month, in fact a great year.

But, I do apologize for lumping you in with the rest. And there are probably a lot of other dealers that would be due that same apology also.

You seem like a reasonable, sensible person able to debate an issue without resorting to using really big impressive words to blow someone's opinion away and at the same time including personal attacks, like BigPapa seems to need to do.

Based on your approach to the situation, you're the type of person I would hire in a heartbeat if I had the need.

As an example, I had a Solar PV system installed this past summer. Last fall when I was getting quotes, one contractor impressed me so much with his attention to detail and follow though I stopped getting quotes and hired him. Was he the cheapest? Don't know. Was he the most expensive? Don't know. Did he do a good job and was I happy with the installation? You betcha. My point is, it's not just about the cost.

You obviously don't need URC's protection. I've been reading a lot of threads of late (since March) with nothing but dealers bitching and moaning and whining how their business is hurting, they can't make a go of it because other dealers are undercutting them on URC products. So, my opinion may be slightly tainted as of late. But you making it in the same arena, goes to show it's doable and maybe these other dealers need to learn a new approach.

I definitely would not ever consider hiring any of them.

Again, I apologize for the lumping, I know there are a lot of you out there that provide good value for the dollar and excellent service.

There is an high end A/V dealer locally that is exactly like that and they are always my first stop when looking for something. They have my respect for 30 some years now.
post #59 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

golovemd

Angry? Yeah, well maybe. Definitely not happy. Well, at least regarding URC's policy. Really happy about a lot of other things. It's been a great Christmas, in fact a great month, in fact a great year.

But, I do apologize for lumping you in with the rest. And there are probably a lot of other dealers that would be due that same apology also.

You seem like a reasonable, sensible person able to debate an issue without resorting to using really big impressive words to blow someone's opinion away and at the same time including personal attacks, like BigPapa seems to need to do.

Based on your approach to the situation, you're the type of person I would hire in a heartbeat if I had the need.

As an example, I had a Solar PV system installed this past summer. Last fall when I was getting quotes, one contractor impressed me so much with his attention to detail and follow though I stopped getting quotes and hired him. Was he the cheapest? Don't know. Was he the most expensive? Don't know. Did he do a good job and was I happy with the installation? You betcha. My point is, it's not just about the cost.

You obviously don't need URC's protection. I've been reading a lot of threads of late (since March) with nothing but dealers bitching and moaning and whining how their business is hurting, they can't make a go of it because other dealers are undercutting them on URC products. So, my opinion may be slightly tainted as of late. But you making it in the same arena, goes to show it's doable and maybe these other dealers need to learn a new approach.

I definitely would not ever consider hiring any of them.

Again, I apologize for the lumping, I know there are a lot of you out there that provide good value for the dollar and excellent service.

There is an high end A/V dealer locally that is exactly like that and they are always my first stop when looking for something. They have my respect for 30 some years now.

Thanks, I appreciate that. One thing I have learned over time is that you just have to go with the flow. I am not a dealer that relies 100% on a remote control system. We more or less offer them with our systems, and explain how these will make their life easier and allow them to enjoy their system. The majority of our customers just do not have the knowledge base and really have a difficult time just turning on a system. We have done some harmony remotes, but they are just not as customizable, and to be honest, they are a little "dainty". I have seen quite a few break from drops of no more then 2 feet. I have yet to see a single URC remote that has suffered the same fate. I am getting a little off topic here though. My place in this business is to help people, not just profit. I have to make a living, yes, but I will also spend the extra time in order to make sure that my customers are satisfied. This approach alone has helped business tremendously. While my heart goes out to those that truly can handle the programming and have been used to doing it for some time, I am afraid there is nothing that I can do to change the policy set forth by URC. All I can say is I wish you luck.
post #60 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

You keep hiding behind this statement but you never explain it.

I just explained some of the issue in my previous post. Let me explain again, even though I've explained it before. Maybe you missed it.

1. CI's have been complaining, rightfully so, that the ebay/fleamarket internet sellers are way underselling their prices. This is a problem because in very general terms, these are two separate markets. CI's offer much more value added services, but are asked to 'compete' with internet pricing. The only way to accomplish this is for the CI to offer the same level of service as the internet reseller. Not only that, many of the internet resellers have wildly varying levels of after purchase support. Some have none at all (usually the ebay sellers). I don't think this is right for the overall market. More on that later.

CI's constantly create bids and give advice on AV electronics equipment, only to get price shopped on the internet when it comes time to sign a contract. As I've said before, we charge MSRP on an MX remote, but we include programming with it as long it's not too custom. Bummer when people ask us to match an internet price.


2. MX series remote sales aren't properly qualified and supported.
While some of you here at AVS forums don't want any after sale support except physical replacement since you are hobbyist or skilled, most aren't. It's quite apparent that many purchasers of these remotes have a little harder time than they probably thought they might when they bought them. I think, and would hope, URC manages it's AD's a little better to provide the after sales support should somebody need it, and just as important, qualify a sale beforehand and have a discussion with the purchaser to properly inform them of what they're getting into.
Notice this doesn't create any undue strain to DIYers who don't need this level of support.

Additionally, even the most advanced programmer of remotes may have problems with a remote; a SW bug or something, can't find a IR file, etc. Some think that URC should be the only one providing this support, and sometimes it seems, any support at all. Why not the seller of the remote? I support the products I sell, I don't tell the client to call Fujitsu when their TV acts up. Again, nobody is holding the seller of the remote accountable for issues with the remote.

Yet, I'm asked, as a CI, to 'compete' with them. Well, when they have problems with their systems or remotes, they call my cell phone and I answer. Sounds like a competitive market to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

....but you assume I know nothing and you know everything. You are the epitome of the word assume in this instance.

That's funny. You're making the assumptions here, and very wide ranging ones at that. Let's pare the dialogue down to AV industry and such... yes, by the statements you've made, I don't think you know much about our industry. Add to that you're angry, I don't know if you can be reasoned with either. At least I'm trying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoComBlankMan View Post

You continually attempt to discredit my opinion without providing any factual data. Could that be because you have none?

I've put forth some anecdotal and factual evidence, mixed with some logic and reasoning. I've merely clarified what's already there, a naivete about the situation at hand and our industry displayed by your statements. Notice that there are many people who post that they aren't happy about URC and their policy, but I don't engage in dialogue with them, maybe it's because there's nothing to debate since I understand why they aren't happy about it. Then again, they didn't state that 'this is all about money' and 'CI greed' and other antagonistic statments of the like. As you can see, it's not all about the money. CI's aren't trying to force people to pay more money for their remotes, and they aren't afraid of competition, that's more misinformed or intentionally antagonistic hyperbole. CI's should compete with CI's, and we do. Ebay sellers of remotes aren't CI's, so it's absurd to assume we can compete with them. They can't compete with us either because people seem to give them a free pass when there's problems... they go directly to URC. Must be nice.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Remote Control Area
AVS › AVS Forum › A/V Control & Automation › Remote Control Area › MX-700 software