Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Toys Media Television Technology

Sony's $700 Linux-based Remote Control 290

Posted by timothy from the for-that-much-money-it-had-better-$verb dept.
SlashdotMeNow points out a remote control to consider if money is no object: "The NAVITUS from Sony has a 64k colour touch-screen with tactile response, 32MB of RAM and a 200MHz processor. Looking at the photos it looks like a sexy little beast! It uses Linux as an OS and you can customise just about everything about it by linking it up to your PC. Hell, this thing is more powerful than my iPAQ. Useful for replacing your TV, DVD, sound system and other home entertainment system remotes, it can also control your lights and air conditioner. ... Just be careful using the Memory Stick slot - you don't want to get a virus on a device that controls your whole house!" Of course, that would have to be a Linux virus ...
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony's $700 Linux-based Remote Control More

Sony's $700 Linux-based Remote Control

Comments Filter:

  • Way to pricey... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by chrispyman ( 710460 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:28AM (#9808916)
    While that sure does seem like the ultimate remote, who in their right mind would put $700 down for something as simple as a remote? Maybe it's just me, but wouldn't lowering the price quite a bit make 'em sell like hotcakes?

    • Re:Way to pricey... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by idlemind ( 760102 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:49AM (#9809002)
      The same type of people who would buy that remote might also buy B&W Nautilus speakers for about $50,000

      • Re:Way to pricey... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by NexusTw1n ( 580394 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @03:56AM (#9809214) Journal
        The same kind of people who go to AMX [amx.com] for wired home solutions.

        There are only 2 main players in the millionare home and lecture theatre/boardroom setup - AMX and Crestron [crestron.com]. Both charge an arm and a leg for solutions.

        AMX even have their own unique programming language which means lucrative engineer visits every time you add a new piece of kit. It is very Visual Basic like but the only way to learn the language and acquire the compilier is spend a fortune on an AMX programming course. A user programmable remote control for $700 is easily a better solution for homes and small offices.

        This could be Sony's attempt to break into the market, there is a huge gap between the millionare home theatre system, and the consumer level home theatre setup, Sony could well be planning to target this untapped market.

    • Re:Way to pricey... (Score:5, Informative)

      by bedouin ( 248624 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @03:06AM (#9809066)
      I generally agree with you, but . . . this thing seems to control nearly every imaginable device one could have bought for their home entertainment system in the past 15 years.

      Tape decks, DAT machines, Laser Disc players, lighting, air conditioners, etc. I could see how this would be interesting for a real enthusiast. The only thing not covered here are reel to reels and turntables, and that's probably only because those don't have remotes. To control all this stuff with a traditional remote you'd need something the size of a keyboard.

      • Re:Way to pricey... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by shaitand ( 626655 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @03:28AM (#9809129) Journal
        How is that different than any other touchscreen remote you pick up for $150 or less?

        Afaik there is nothing special about how this control things, any universal remote can do it, you just don't have suitable buttons and with a programmable touchscreen universal of any kind you eliminate the button problem...
      • The only thing not covered here are reel to reels and turntables, and that's probably only because those don't have remotes.

        Well, the first wireless remote control I ever had was for a turntable, the Accutrac 4000 [thevintageknob.org] had some kind of ultrasonic remote that was detected by this futuristic looking globe connected to the turntable. Really pretty cool for 1977! Obviously wouldn't work with this remote though.
    • I went to school with a guy who would have wet himself over something like this. He bought a programmable universal remote that I don't think did half the things this one does, and he dropped a few hundred on that one, so there are nuts that will buy it.
    • For someone like me who has exactly zero devices--give or take none--in the house that need a remote control this would be exorbitant. But to the afficionado this is probably a price point that could be just the other side of a juicy rationalization.

      I take it back about the remote control deficit. We have a Bose clock radio that has a remote control, for those times when I just can't be bothered to reach all the way across the bed.

    • I'm sure it can be hacked if you're good. Turn it into a nice little PDA and check TV listings from it!!
    • wouldn't lowering the price quite a bit make 'em sell like hotcakes?

      I don't want any hotcakes either.

      • wouldn't lowering the price quite a bit make 'em sell like hotcakes?


        I don't want any hotcakes either.

        But I bet if they brought out a Natalie Portman branded version it would sell like hot grits.

        Stuart
    • My X10 remote uses RF (not sure what band) and is "universal" but it doesn't have DVR functtions or PIP. My Sat Receiver is UHF but its remote doesn't have X10 functions, and is the wrong band for my X10 receiver.
      When they make a remote that will handle my VCR, my X10 wall wart receiver, 2 Sat receivers set at different IDs 1 is a DVR, my TV, my PC, and have an SSH client. Oh, and all of my entertainment equipment other functions, then, I'll pay $701 dollars.
    • The remote is only a dollar. The other $699 is for the Linux license.

  • But... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Tuxedo Jack ( 648130 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:30AM (#9808921) Homepage
    Can you restrict access to, say, changing the channel depending on priviliges?

    And just how the hell can you log in on a remote control anyways? What would the command prompt look like?

  • Jacking in from the "Big Fucking Deal" port (Score:3, Insightful)

    by multiplexo ( 27356 ) * on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:32AM (#9808935) Journal
    OK, it's a Philips Pronto [philips.com] that runs Linux. Who cares? Just because something runs Linux doesn't make it interesting or significant, perhaps it did in the late 1990s, but it's 2004, everyone knows that Linux is cool, especially device manufacturers who can use it for free and get an operating system much better than Windows CE (Is the abbreviation for Windows CE, WinCE, is one of the worst ever in the history of computer product names or what?) and not end up having to pay the Microsoft tax.

    • I have a Philips ProntoPro NG and am loving it and it's been available for a while. And if Linux is a must have, try the iPronto [philips.com]. If you are really serious about your remote needs check out the RemoteCentral [remotecentral.com] site which have a bunch of info on remotes and also a lot of predefined stuff for most of the Pronto models.

      /Mauritz

  • Here's a cheaper idea (Score:3, Insightful)

    by psetzer ( 714543 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:33AM (#9808938)
    I think that it would be cheaper to take advantage of the fact that just about every PDA out there has a built in IR transmittor. Just program it to act like a universal remote and you can save yourself several hundred dollars. Heck, if I were bored enough, I'd do it myself. I do know that it's possible to do it with a Lego Mindstorms Control Brick, so this should be doable, if not easy.
    • Problem is there are two kinds of IR.

      The one on most pda's isn't powerful enough and doesn't have quite the right timings to do consumer electronics properly. (it can do it, but the result is dissapointing, has a range of something like 5 feet).

      There was a linux pda (the agenda?) that did have consumer IR in it as well as the normal inter-device IR. Much cheaper, still a touch screen but grey scale. Other than that, much the same.

      Been keeping my eye out for a cheap second hand one but haven't seen it
      • There was also a springboard module available for the Handsprings that had long range IR and came with multi-remote software (http://www.pacificneotek.com/ [pacificneotek.com]) that let you define multiple screens and totally customise controls. Very good product for the price, but not a patch on the Philips Prontos.

        It was cool being able to press one button and have the DVD player, Amp and projector turn on, drop the screen and close the curtains. (This was back when I worked in a home cinema dealers).

        Stuart

    • Re:Here's a cheaper idea (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Phexro ( 9814 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @03:30AM (#9809138)
      Yeah, unfortunately, most IrDA transmitters in PDA type hardware isn't strong enough to control AV equipment very well. You end up having to get really close to the TV to use the PDA (or cellphone) based remote, and at that point you can just stick your arm out and use the buttons.

      I've tried using various AV remote software on Palm 3, Palm V, and (most recently) my Nokia 3650 phone. The results have always been disappointing.

      On the other hand, a Bluetooth based remote would rock.

      (Warning: beer-swilling geek trivia/rambling follows)

      When I throw a party, I hook my laptop's video out up to my TV, audio to the stereo, and load up a 3-5 hour playlist and some XMMS visualizations. With Bemused [man.ac.uk] and KDE Bluetooth [sourceforge.net], I can control the media player from my Nokia from anywhere in my apartment. Line-of-sight is not necessary, so I can be in the bathroom vomiting and queue up my favorite vomit music with ease.

      It would be great if I could control my regular AV setup with Bluetooth. I could do it from my PC, laptop, cellphone, PDA, or whatever else. Even better would be something like this [infosyncworld.com], but more universal. It would be great if I could stream audio from my PC to my stereo via Bluetooth, controlled by another BT device.

      Be even better if BT had enough bandwidth to do video.

      • Re:Here's a cheaper idea (Score:5, Funny)

        by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @05:29AM (#9809434)
        so I can be in the bathroom vomiting and queue up my favorite vomit music with ease.

        Yeah! Celine Dion!!

        Oh, you mean "music to vomit by," not "music to induce vomiting." My bad.

      • If you want to use remote control software on a PDA, get an old Handspring Visor. The Visor's IR is, for some reason, a lot more powerful than most (in fact some people found they had to move back to beam to other handhelds because the visor's signal was swamping the receiver), and I could easily control my TV from 20 feet.

        Sony also released a model of the Clie PDA with an enhanced IR just for this purpose.
      • You end up having to get really close to the TV to use the PDA (or cellphone) based remote, and at that point you can just stick your arm out and use the buttons.

        Indeed. It is "control", but it's not especially "remote" - I played around with a Palm III way back when, trying to get it to control the TV/cable box/etc. I finally gave up when I realized that the thing would never ever work at distances greater than six inches from the television.

      • Pocket PC PDAs have consumer-grade IR chips/LEDs in them these days, so they're great remote controls. They used to be crap a couple of years ago, when manufacturers were reluctant to break away from their IrDA implementations.

  • Ive often thought about... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ErichTheWebGuy ( 745925 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:35AM (#9808946) Homepage
    ... hacking a 3COM Audrey [amazon.com] to do the exact same thing. It runs QNX natively, but I think you can put Linux on it. There are discussions from time to time on AudreyHacking.com [audreyhacking.com] but I don't think anyone has (yet).

    The Audrey has a touch-screen and IR port built in. You can get em pretty cheap from e-bay, sometimes even new in the box. Since 3COM no longer offers the service that is required to run the Audrey, you can get em fairly readily (noone has any real use for em).

    Probably pretty time-consuming to try to hack one to be a remote like TFA describes, but might be worth it for someone willing to expend the energy! :) Oh, and if anyone does, you gotta post about it on Slashdot!

  • ....a remote? (Score:4, Funny)

    by System.out.println() ( 755533 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:35AM (#9808947) Journal
    The poster mentioned this was more powerful than his iPaq. Why the hell would Sony offer this (expecting it to be a success?) and not brand it as a PDA? Their Clie's offered remote-control functionality - in addition to being a PDA - and costed a whole lot less than this thing.

    So the gut reaction turns out to be right - $700 for a fucking remote?
    • Just because you think spending $700 for a remote is excessive doesn't mean there isn't a large number of people who wouldn't buy it. Not everyone wants to read their email, take notes, play games, surf the web, etc... on their remote. Sometimes, they just want to be able to easily use their home theater system and make it easy for their wife to do the same.
      • I know there are people with way too much money to throw around who would pay $700 for a badass remote. My point was that I could do all that on the Clie that cost me $180 (new) about five years ago - or, of course, not do all that if they felt compelled not to. A year later, there was a Clie for the same price with a more powerful IR transmitter and built-in remote software, designed for use as a remote. (Mine had a pretty short range and required third party software.)

        I can't understand the logic of this
    • Perhaps this is for the same people to whom Sony also markets a $5000 digital camera [dynamism.com], a $2300 minidisk player [dynamism.com], or $3000 headphones [dynamism.com]?

  • If you want to know why it costs $700... (Score:5, Informative)

    by l0ungeb0y ( 442022 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:37AM (#9808955) Homepage Journal
    I thought it was a little steep, but after reading this:

    "Tactile Response Display

    Most touch screens are lifeless and inert. It's often hard to know whether or not your command has even registered. The NAVITUS remote is dramatically different. Imagine an LCD screen that actually presses back against your fingertip to confirm each command. With TouchEngine(TM) Technology, you're operating with confidence."

    I realised that turning on the Playboy channel will never be the same again. And it runs Linux... sound like a geeks wet dream to me.
    • The Kameleon [remotecentral.com] Has a "Tactile Response Display". It isn't exactly an lcd, as button location is static, but they do animate and such. They also feel like buttons, a nice remote overall with jp1 connector(JP1 allows you to program it via computer).

      Anyway my point is, I don't think that will drive the price up, as a kameleon is only $60. It's pretty cool, worth a look at a local radioshack, not sure who else has them besides online.

    • "Imagine an LCD screen that actually presses back against your fingertip". Most LCD screens do this. Its called Newton's Third Law of Motion. And I dont mean Apple Newton. Although apples were allegedly involved...

      Baz
  • I see his stuff and I think who in their right mind would want any of this?

    You are going to have the materialistic mega rich who after buying this stuff are gonna confirm the fact that they are just out there to pump their lives full of materialistic crap pefore they die. May be priding them selves on how sophisticated and character filled they are by the amount of technological crap hey own.

    This is a gross generalisation and I know that it is going to come back full circle one day but $1400NZD for a remot

    • I agree with you. I'm very happy with my computer, some coffee, math, and my girlfriend. Food is helpful too.

      But seriously... who needs all this shit? Isn't there some way to happiness other than bossing people around on your uberPDAfone while driving your BMW into your 50 car garage? That image of success has been drilled into me my whole life.

      Personally I can't imagine myself happier than having a cup of coffee with my girlfriend on a nice sunny morning. Oh well, to each his own, I guess. At least

    • Re:where is the limit? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by egomaniac ( 105476 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @07:38AM (#9809696) Homepage
      I see his stuff and I think who in their right mind would want any of this?

      You are going to have the materialistic mega rich who after buying this stuff are gonna confirm the fact that they are just out there to pump their lives full of materialistic crap pefore they die. May be priding them selves on how sophisticated and character filled they are by the amount of technological crap hey own.

      Ah, yes. If you can't afford it, then it's by definition a waste of money. See Aesop's parable of the sour grapes.

      I make a lot of money, and consequently have a lot of "materialistic crap", including two $1,000 remote controls (one for the living room, one for the home theater). While I'm sure that that seems like a terrible waste of money to you, keep in mind that the only reason you can afford a lot of the technology you can today (computers, televisions, etc.) is that the "materialist mega rich", a.k.a. early adopters, bought the stuff when it was ridiculously expensive and therefore helped to finance the R&D that made it affordable to the masses.

      In ten years, when plasma TVs are a commodity item, I'm sure you'll still look down your nose at the idiots who spend $20,000 on them today. And I'm sure the thought "Hey, if they hadn't done that, the technology would have stagnated and I wouldn't have been able to afford mine" won't even cross your mind.

      Society needs early adopters. Whether it's the latest and greatest $500 video card or a super-expensive remote control, if nobody buys it it will never become cheap enough for the common person to afford.
  • I have been really wanted to see a remote like this or the other multi-everything lcd screen sony remote that was out...but with missing feature:

    I want a touchpad key board and in a perfect work, a trackpad.

    For the last month or so I have been really thinking about a linux based HTPC, and if I could get a really sweet remote sized (or close enough) device like this, that could also let me use a keyboard type interface and work, well I would be extremely happy.

    So here's to hoping this remote is one step c

  • An Axim would do better (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Fiz Ocelot ( 642698 ) <baelzharon.gmail@com> on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:39AM (#9808973)
    The Dell Axim has a very powerful IR transmitter, it seems to perform just as well as my regular remotes. The only thing the sony has over this is a better interface, however the axim has Wifi and bluetooth :)

    I've thought about how it would be fun to write a nice remote control program for it, but there's no time for that yet.

    • There's already an IR remote program for PalmOS out there too for those with a palm-based device.
    • The Sony's shape, features, and battery life have presumably designed specifically for use as a remote control. The Axim has been designed for a completely different purpose; it may work reasonably well as a remote control, but in order to claim that it works "better", I think you have to make a better argument.
  • Lets see: $599 for one license of Linux and $101 for a remote control. Good deal! Sorry, can't resist :)

  • Incredibly overengineered (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lingqi ( 577227 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:40AM (#9808978) Journal
    I can't imagine what sane mind would try to market something like this! Let's see...

    1) remote should be take anywhere, put anywhere device, as this thing is a huge power-hog, it needs no rest on the charging stand when not in use.

    2) remote controls basically sends a relatively short sequence of bits to an infrared LED when a certain button is pressed. It does not need a 200MHz processor or a 65k colour screen to do this. In fact, this gets back to the battery / power thing - you can make a remote control that functions perfectly that can last a year on two alkaline cells.

    3) if you really want customizability, the remote itself doesn't have to do all of this! it would be much wiser and cheaper and easier (more later) to simply have the remote be programmable via, say, a computer - it'd be like writing to a cheap FPGA, if you want the remote to be that powerful. as for easier - programming a remote on a well designed application on a computer monitor would be much easier than doing the same on the tiny remote display, no?

    4) and it's like... twice the price of my TV! geez... fuck, i might as well write an app for my palm to control the TV via the infrared port. Heck it might be cheaper too...
    • "2) remote controls basically sends a relatively short sequence of bits to an infrared LED when a certain button is pressed. It does not need a 200MHz processor or a 65k colour screen to do this."

      Given the sad state of cable television set top boxes, el-cheapo remotes, and next-to-useless on-screen programming information, I'm all for any trend in the direction of adding 200MHz processors and 65K colour screens everywhere they'll fit. In time, people will figure out novel uses for things that the creator
    • Why write a program when one already exists. http://www.novii.tv/products/noviirb/ [novii.tv]
    • My calculator has a 200 MHz processor in it. It also runs for months on three AAA cells. With proper engineering and programming, a high-speed CPU does not have to eat batteries.

    • Re:Incredibly overengineered (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Tyrell Hawthorne ( 13562 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @06:45AM (#9809571) Homepage
      Fellow Slashdotters, please learn this: the fact that something doesn't suit you doesn't mean it's crap. Remember, you are not the customer. There's a market for advanced do-it-all remotes. Just to name an example, Philips made the Pronto [remotecentral.com] which is a touch-screen remote. It cost a few hundred dollars, a friend of mine's dad has one. He also recently spent $5000 or more upgrading his hifi set. Philips decided there's a market for even more up-scale remotes, so they've introduced a Pronto with a color display [philips.com], for someting like $1200 if my memory serves me right.

      This device from Sony does a whole lot of things better than previous offerings on the market (more powerful, more legible screen, tactile feedback LCD display, and hard buttons, to name a few). People spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars on home cinema sets. They can afford to spend $700 on one of these.

      Aside from being really nice for the intended customers, it has a high geek coolnes factor. Stop complaining, start drooling!
    • There are enough people who spend $20k on speakers or $100k or an entire AV system. Those are the people who buy $700 (or $2000) remote control.
    • Actually, my complaint is that part of it is under-engineered. The human-factors, interface-design part.

      Yes, it has the tactile-response bit; that sounds great. Most of my truly tech-savvy friends love the really old IBM keyboards, the ones that click when you depress each key. That sort of tactile feedback is reassuring when you're throwing rapid sequences of commands at it.

      One of the things I like about the series 1 TiVo remote and also the iPod is that they're both physically designed to fit snugly int

  • Way too pricey .... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by p0rnking ( 255997 )
    Who (other than people who have way too much $$$ to spend) seriously would buy this?

    $700 ($932.40 CDN) for a hand held, limited PC to control you devices?

    It's not like they're including the hardware so that you are guarenteed that it will control your lights and A/C.

    Heck, i can buy a half decent PC for under that price

    Personally, I'd rather have one of these [radioshack.ca] (better image here [radioshack.ca])for $119 CDN (so thats like $50 US), which doesn't run linux, but has a nice display that changes depending on what device it's
  • This thing is so freaking powerful you could watch a streaming dvd on it.

    So, what's that TV for?

  • Can you watch TV on it? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Ark42 ( 522144 ) <slashdotNO@SPAMmorpheussoftware.net> on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @02:45AM (#9808996) Homepage

    Can you watch TV on it?
    On the remote itself?
    For $700 I hope so.

  • for the Linux guru's to start an "OpenNAVITUS" project, complete with remote terminal and gui console for a Freevo setup! [sourceforge.net]

  • But... (Score:2, Funny)

    by typobox43 ( 677545 )
    does it run Linux? Oh wait...

  • Am I the only one (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Machine9 ( 627913 )
    ...that would like to code a virus *specifically* to make someone's house go berserk because of his remote?

    surely I'm not the only one...

  • Does this mean that we have lost all will to demand better products? Instead of making products easier to use or more compatible, we are being offered an expensive way of wading through the clutter.

    How about implementing an industry standard for remote controls similar to, say, the v.9x standards for modems? I know it's far-fetched, but it's worth a try.

    On a different note, what if people manage to hack into these remotes and take control? Worse yet, what if they keep the channel fixed on Fox "News"?

  • How far we've come.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CHaN_316 ( 696929 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @03:10AM (#9809072)
    It's scary to think that this individual remote control has more computer power than the on-board computer of the Apollo spacecraft back in the day.

    • Re:How far we've come.... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Sir_Real ( 179104 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @04:37AM (#9809311)
      I have a toaster with more computer power than the on-board computer of the Apollo space craft. And a watch. And a calculator. And if I get really lucky, I can buy a coke can that does too.
    • Whats more scary is to think that this remote control has more processing power than my desktop machine, which I'm writing this post on...

      200Mhz? What could a remote control possibly need that much processing power for? Does it crack your cable TV box and get you free movies in it's spare time?
    • It's scary to think that this individual remote control has more computer power than the on-board computer of the Apollo spacecraft back in the day.

      Ummm, don't most digital watches and calculators, too? :-)

      -d


    • Isn't it time we started using Apollo spacecraft computers as a reference baseline (eg. "Libraries of Congresses", "Volkswagon Beetles", "Metric Buttloads") for computing power or has this already been done?

  • $700!!! That's crazy talk! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by anactofgod ( 68756 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @03:10AM (#9809073)
    I just can't figure out what justifies that price tag. There is no way any remote control should cost this much, let alone *this* remote. The feature list is underwhelming. This paperweight-in-training shouldn't cost more than ~$150.

    The key to these sort of speciality devices is the user-interface design. If Sony holds true to form, they'll have tried to fold in way too many functions, with way too little thought on how to make accessing those functions intuitive.

    Plus, when you spill a beer on it and short it out , it's really gonna suck.

    This remote may belong in a "smart home", but it'd be one with a really dumb owner.

    ---anactofgod---
    • About five years ago, a friend of mine spent about 300 UKP (about $550) on a flashy universal remote control with touchscreen and user-definable operations and button sets. It was the fabled dogs danglies. Unfortunately, it suffered from one major drawback (apart from the price). While you could set up wonderful sequences like turn on the TV, DVD player, set the amp to AUX, dim the lights, close the curtains, etc, there was no way of the remote knowing if the target device had received the signal correctly.

    • I just can't figure out what justifies that price tag. There is no way any remote control should cost this much, let alone *this* remote. The feature list is underwhelming. This paperweight-in-training shouldn't cost more than ~$150.

      Some people have different budgets. When you're spending 10 to 15 THOUSAND dollars on a home theatre, what's another $700 for a great remote?

      Jason.

  • Wanted: NAVITUS Configuration Engineer (Score:5, Funny)

    by anactofgod ( 68756 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @03:30AM (#9809139)
    Must have 5+ years experience in programming remote controls and configuring consumer electronics. Proficiency with all major manufacturers of mid-grade consumer electronics a must. In addition, familiarity with 2 or more high-end manufacturer's desired. Educational requirements: Must not be old enough to have a high-school diploma, though exceptionally talented older engineers may be considered. Strong references from parents, relatives and neighbors required. Competitive pay commensurate with experience.

    Please help, my VCR has been blinking "12:00" for three years now!

    ---anactofgod---

  • I've wanted for a while (Score:4, Informative)

    by phr1 ( 211689 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @03:35AM (#9809152)
    to use my Sharp Zaurus PDA as a remote control for my music/video library. The Zaurus would just run a web browser over a WiFi card in the CF slot. The server with my Vorbis and video files would run a straightforward web application that I'd browse with the Zaurus. I could search for titles, look at artwork and lyrics, and whatever; and there would be an XMMS-like control panel that would let me play stuff through the speakers and on the monitor. No need for a CD player or DVD's or anything; it would all come straight off the hard disc and out the audio and VGA ports.
    • And forgot to mention: the server could also send the audio (and maybe even video) stream back to the Zaurus through the wifi, so if I wanted, I could listen through headphones or watch video on the little PDA screen, turning the Zaurus into a wireless portable music/video player with essentially unlimited capacity for use around the house (i.e. within range of the wifi base).
  • Am I the only one who thinks a screen that displays only 9 buttons is a bit too small? The one thing I like about my current setup (5 remotes side by side) is that every function is available instantly, without hunting through menus or using three-fingered salutes.

  • PDA (Score:2, Interesting)

    by maroberts ( 15852 )
    Why not get a full fledged PDA, or even some mobile phones now, which have all the funtionality needed to do this and then some?

  • why? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by shaitand ( 626655 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @04:12AM (#9809250) Journal
    Why pay $700 for this remote? It doesn't sound like it actually DOES anything a programmable lcd remote had for $150 can't do.

    Don't get me wrong, embedded linux is always good. But this is just another example of Sony ridiculously overcharging for their products... like they always do.
    • Why pay $700 for this remote? It doesn't sound like it actually DOES anything a programmable lcd remote had for $150 can't do.

      Why pay $70000 for the Porsche? It doesn't sound like it actually DOES anything a $15000 Ford can't do.

      Oh--it does it with more style, costs more to repair, is faster, and it makes your dick larger.

  • Let's think about this for a minute
    $699 for the linux license
    $001 for the report
    ====
    $700 total.

    Not a bad deal at all...
  • ... does it run Li- oh wait, it does.
  • Why must they keep using the memory stick! It's dead Jim! Stop beating the dead horse!
  • Anyone here remember the Cloud Nine CORE remote? It was shaped like the letter "T" and had gobs of programmable buttons. Designed by Steve Wozniak (yes, Woz, the guy who designed the Apple I and Apple II) as part of his CL9 company shortly after leaving Apple.

    The CL9 CORE was **insane**, it had two 6502 CPUs and the manual was a huge binder full of technical specs and sample code. Programming was done in assembly and/or a BASIC-like language. The CORE could communicate with damn near any IR device and do j
  • I have a lot of devices including a quirky Echostar PVR. I wanted a universal that had all the buttons I needed and was seriously programmable so it could control all of my devices. After a bunch of research I discovered that the JP1 model control, generally from One For All or Radio Shack, has a huge internet fan community and if you get the right one you can buy or build a cable to program it directly from your computer.

    It doesn't have a touch-screen, but it costs something like $20 and I have been com
  • with that kind of power, you could probably replace the TV, Sound System and DVD Player themselves...

    I wonder how long it is till they build a small device that you can plug in the TV.
    I have got a PC at home hooked straight in my amp and TV so that I can watch DVD and DivX, listen to MP3s and CDs and play games (MAME mainly)

  • My Clie NX-70v [sonystyle.com] already has a universal remote, and it's a fully functional PalmOS PDA, with other toys like a still/video camera, an MP3 player, a voice recorder, and a full (but tiny) qwerty keyboard.

    And according to Amazon, you can get the things for under $120 now [amazon.com]. Don't you just love the radical depreciation on a device you paid four times more for barely 18 months ago? *sigh*

    But anyway, yeah, the remote. It's fantastic. Going out to eat with a whole bunch of friends, and the restaraunt puts you all

  • MY handspring Visor had some software (Shareware?) that couldbe used as a learning remote... and it worked great across the room. The only problem? No real buttons (that PDA touch screen), I had to hold it sideways (IR port on the side) and I had to use my freaking PDA to change the channel! Convergence isn't always good...

    Enter, the Sony RM-VL900 [remotecentral.com]- the coolest learning remote. ITs got real buttons. And it learns EVERYTHING. SO for $60 bucks, I have a macro capable super-tacular learning remote that is
  • I bought and junked a Philips Pronto Neo universal remote and have now got a Harmony H688 which works brilliantly - it has a web-based programming application that gets smarter as more people teach it about their equipment, and it involved far less effort than the Philips to get it working. Effort to get a remote working is probably the key factor for most people - even though I'm something of a geek I draw the line at spending tens of hours programming a remote, though I did spend about 4 hours tweaking a

  • Source Code? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mgeneral ( 512297 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @11:27AM (#9811971)
    So can someone help me clarify this GNU/GPL licensing stuff.

    Since Sony is using some port of Linux, don't they have to post the source code for it too?

  • If you're drooling over this remote... (Score:4, Informative)

    by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @12:10PM (#9812556)
    I see no reason I'd buy this thing for that much money when you can pick up a Kameleon [sjgreatdeals.com] at any Radio Shack for about $60. I don't see anything significant the Sony remote can do that this thing can't do, and the Kameleon remote just looks cool. The buttons are actually just images and the panel reconfigures itself for each device. Feels like Star Trek!

    However, if you're selecting remotes based on how many colors the display has and whether it runs Linux, I think you're beyond my help, though :-) Go ahead and spend your $700.

  • Even Sony is prejudiced (Score:3, Funny)

    by Xeger ( 20906 ) <slashdot@tracAAA ... inus threevowels> on Tuesday July 27, 2004 @12:42PM (#9812932) Homepage

    From the linked page:

    • Fully customizable -- import color mages to personalize each screen and create "skins"

    Alas, the seething racial tension running through world of sorcery and magic leaves no corporation untouched ... I can't believe that Sony has stooped so low that they are now importing underpaid, immigrant mages to run our miracle gadgets.

    And the sheer gall of these people, calling their employees color mages! That kind of language may have been appropriate in the 1950s, but this is 21st century America where we believe a mage's color is a secondary characteristic and has nothing to do with his/her personality, skill, intelligence or hireability.

    I feel deeply for those poor color mages, forced to create skins. What's wrong with the skins they've already got? This kind of intolerance, from a major electronics manufacturer, makes me seething mad.

    FREE THE COLOR MAGES! BOYCOTT SONY!

Slashdot Top Deals

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz

Close