Providing a .ccf file is just a way of providing Pronto Hex. The .ccf file is just a container. It isn't significantly different from providing the Pronto Hex in a text file or an Excel file or a pcf or whatever. Obviously it would be nuts to provide Pronto Hex on paper (though I've seen that done).
You might be happy with a .rcc or .mxd file, but I'm sure most of their customers would like that a whole lot less than .ccf.
What about a .lirc file or a jp1 upgrade file. Lots of their customers would like that a LOT better than a ccf file. I expect you wouldn't like those at all.
There is no industry standard form for providing IR data. In the world of custom installers a .ccf file may be as close to an industry standard as you can get. In the world of end users a .lirc file might be closer to a common standard.
I guess none of that means they shouldn't provide a CCF file, just that they should provide it in addition to the more concise form of the info not instead of the more concise form.
On November 15, 2006 at 11:29, RobZ said...
if we don't all tell manufacturers what we want we will
always spend OUR $$$ and spin OUR wheels on something
they could do once and distribute freely.
Most manufacturers don't use Pronto's and don't know about CCF files, so if you're asking them to provide a CCF file you're really saying they should learn to use tools like MakeHex and IrPanels instead of custom installers learning to. But if they view you as their customer or the path to their customer, that is what they should do.
Last edited by johnsfine
on November 15, 2006 14:25.
