[kleptic]

whats the difference in these remotes besides the 800 has the rf station so you can use it without aiming it?


thanks

kyle

 

[utstimpy]

nothing, AFAIK

 

[AnthonyP]

the features are the same, all the stuff that is different is RF related

 

[myrison]

Well.... plus the fact that you can specify individual emitters to blast only the intended equipment with the MX800, i.e. when sending a DVD "pause" command, the IR signal is sent only to the emitter on the DVD player, not to the receiver, TV, etc.


For most people this is not a big deal, but for me it was, since the volume up command on my receiver was the same IR signal as the "eject" signal on my DVD player ... The MX800 was the best way to solve this hugely annoying problem, and I don't think the MX700 would have done this.


Jason

 

[AnthonyP]

myrison: you are right. But like I said "all the stuff that is different is RF related" and not just that it has RF.

 

[myrison]

Sorry for the confusion Anthony, I wasn't trying to say your post was incorrect.... I just wanted to clarify that even without RF there could be a difference between a remote with an IR repeater/blaster that only repeated the signal on a given emitter vs. one that repeated the IR signals on all of them.

 

[AnthonyP]

I never took it as a criticism of my post, so no need to be sorry. And you are most definitely right that RF can be implemented in different ways and the way it is implemented on the 800 is the most versatile.


The MX-600 is the least (just repeater and IR is always on)

then you have the Prontos (routing only with what RF base is used)

then you have the MX-800 (routing to the port)


so if you do need port routing then the MX-800 is the best (as far as routing is concerned)


(but it was 3 am and did not feel like getting into the details that is why I did say that the differences were RF related and not just RF