Posted by Gunther Gloop on 01/12/08 22:44
RCE Defiant wrote:
> I keep looking at this one and am literally watching the demo now, v
I have one of these but never use it -for the moment at least. I prefer
the Sky+ remote -and in the other room I prefer the Pronto.
....I got a free one for some feedback a few months ago. I doubt anything
I said made a difference, but here's what I said about it at the time...
This remote looks and feels a lot better than the 885 I think. I prefer
the bulging buttons.
But there are some "niggly" things that I don't like about it (in no
1. The controller is slightly too long, making it uncomfortable to use
with one hand.
I believe it would be possible to reduce the length (or at least move
the touchscreen slightly closer to the centre) by moving the
"Activities/ Help" buttons to above the screen.
2. The central directional controls are good, but I would prefer if they
were more enhanced. Most times when I grabbed the control, I found my
thumb automatically went to the "UP/ DOWN" arrow controls above this
....and I don't even know what these are for or why they are there,
taking up such prime space!?
In fact if they weren't there at all, there would be more room to have
the 4 'menu' type buttons on 1 row across (also helping reduce the length).
3. I don't like the idea of the touchscreen being used for
frequently-used buttons such as the colour buttons. In fact, I found the
lack of colour buttons the biggest reason I kept going back to my Sky+
remote instead of this.
It's nice to know where the blue "favourites" button is without having
to look to the touchscreen all the time (and without having to move my
hand too much, stretching it all the way up the loong remote).
4. The Philips Pronto has a 'light' button on the side that can be
(optionally) used to activate the light on the remote instead of having
it come on automatically. You can also set it to come on without having
to press the button, but I think it's a very nice option.
I don't like the way this new Logitech remote (and others) activates the
screen and lights up everytime it is moved or any button is pressed.
I would much rather have an option to press a button on the side of the
remote to activate the touchscreen and/or remote lights. And/Or be able
to activate the touchscreen by just tapping the screen itself.
Apart from anything else, this would enhance the battery life.
5. What I *would* like to be able to do with the touchscreen is create
macros -ie. a series of options in one button.
I think this technology already exists in Logitech remotes, but the web
software just doesn't allow you to do it. (?)
6. The Power Button... I think it would be better on the righthand side
at the top. Most people are righthanded and hold the remote with the
right hand. It's harder to switch it off when the power button is on the
top left hand side -especially when the remote is so looong.
7. My favourite area of the remote is the lower half. Alas, these
buttons are rarely required. I think it would be possible to slot in a
row of colour buttons above the PLAY button by just reducing the size of
each of the lower ones a little bit.
Alternatively, I'm sure I could suggest a few other buttons to remove
instead of the colour ones -eg. "MUTE" could be handled by a single,
quick press of the "-" volume button. It takes up prime space where it
is (as well as the other one on the same line) and is unnecessary.
Why not add the word "mute" in small letters to the "-" volume instead?
8. One thing I would like to see on any remote (but don't think I have
yet) is different shaped buttons... ie. Have the PLAY button in the
shape of a triangle rather than just a _picture_ of a triangle on it.
If only that much was done it'd make a big difference to be certain of
pressing the right one without looking. A bevelled triangle on the
existing button might be alright.
Other shaped buttons could work too for FFW, REW, STOP, etc.
I don't mean to be overly negative. I think this remote is a step in the
right direction as is, but I would be much happier if these issues could
[Reply to this message]