OK here is my setup.

I have a central located equipment closet with a Media Center PC for DVD's and running Casatunes for audio (will upgrade to Nuvo's new music server soon) with my Nuvo Grand Concerto, 2 Comcast DVR's, Gefen 4x4 Component Video/Audio Matrix switch.

I also have a theater room with a Pioneer Elite Receiver, Xbox 360 and Blueray player (currently using IR for this but would like to go RF).

I am Using 3 Harmony 890 Pro's right now to control 5 rooms. I have the RF receiver located in the closet and using IR for the TV's and theater room.

I would like to have some two way feedback capabilities and maybe the ability to control my music server with a touch user interface. Most of my remote usage will be for standard TV viewing. I would also like to add some wireless lighting. It is important that I can select all 5 rooms with any remote.

Hard buttons are important to me for standard TV viewing so maybe a combination of 2 hard button remotes and 1 touchscreen.

Cost is not a huge factor as I come from the cheaper harmony brand where I tried to cut cost. I will pay for good remotes.

I will program these remotes myself so software programming is also of importance.

RF and Zigbee has me pretty confused as to what is the better option?

The remotes I am more interested in are:
RTI - T2-C, T2-Cs, T3-V and T4
URC - MX-980, MX-880, MX-5000 and MX-6000
Pronto - TSU-9300, 9400 and 9600.

Any advantages given for Pronto over URC and RTI would be great.

Thank you for any advice given.

I cannot comment on URC as ive never used any of them. however.

All Pronto models have the ability to communicate via existing wireless "G" networks aswell as stand alone RF or direct IR, some RTI models also do this but not all have wireless 802.11g (the t3-v you listed i believe does) the rest use a form of zigbee which is a low cost alternative medium of wireless. some of the RTI panels have a built in web browser where as the Pronto family at current does not.

Personally i believe greater value is to be had from the Pronto (though i would guess this is hardly suprising as you are in the Pronto forum) as it can utilise your existing wireless infrastructure if you already have one. The aesthetics are also less bulky.

The Best Suggestion I can offer you is to go to the Philips Pronto site and register then download the software and play around with it. there is a simulator included for testing out your configurations.

Thanks. I will download the software and play around with it.

I was a die hard URC customer (MX3000 and MX950) and switched to Pronto (own a TSU9400, TSU9600 and TSU9800 as well as RFX9600 and RFX9400s). Much better overall integration and programability. Not tried the newer URC remotes, but I've much prefer Pronto (fyi - I was a RTI customer before going to URC :)) ..... SJ

RTI is targeted to be programmed by a pro. While I don't think that the RTI is any harder to program than a URI, RTI does not release the programming software to the public. It is possible for a URI owner to get their hands on a programming tool.

While each has its own little pluses and minuses, the URC and RTI programming environments are similar. One nice feature about the RTI environment is that the program is aware of the various controller models. One specifies which models are in the project and the program will manage the lot. RTI offers lots of little accessories to make my life easier.

Warts and all, I prefer the Pronto because I have great control over the user interface.

If a customer wants a low end remote for a simple system where I have some control over what happens, I'll use URC. I never claim that the results will be as good as I can get with a Pronto.

In terms of my programming time, there is not much difference. In fairness, I have much more experience with the Pronto's and at this point I have lots of shells and little pieces of Pronto "business" that I can rapidly copy and paste together. I can throw together a relatively sophisticated, customized controller with minimal effort. (We'll ignore the time an effort required to build those little pieces)

In all cases there is room for programing "style". I've taken over a few URC programs and, within the capabilities of the remote, used principles and interactions that I routinely use with Pronto's. Customers remark that the remote is much easier to use than before. Basically, the original programmers were trying to impress someone how quickly they could throw something together. While there was only one remote, all of the pain of separate remotes was accurately captured inside of a single shell. Within the remote's limits, my work integrated everything into a system controller. I'm sure that I spent more time on the program than the earlier person.

Do URC and RTI have the equivalent of ProntoScript? I've been able to integrate several things into my prontos because of this capability (for example, my HAI home automation)..... SJ

I don't know about URC but RTI programming doesn't have a backend codes type of programming, it's a bit like simpl of crestron I think. However RTI is releasing development kits in the near future so that would include some codings for dealers who would like to create their own drivers. I would say RTI is great if you want to do full house automation and don't have the Crestron/AMX budget but if it's for a 1 room home cinema type of install i'd say just go with pronto, their handheld are more robust..

however for full house automation, pronto is introducing their first processor and inwalls in Q4 of this year so perhaps they might be in the same pedestal as RTI soon in terms of automation etc..

ok that's my opinion on this thread!

I don't know about URC but RTI programming doesn't have a backend codes type of programming, it's a bit like simpl of crestron I think. However RTI is releasing development kits in the near future so that would include some codings for dealers who would like to create their own drivers. I would say RTI is great if you want to do full house automation and don't have the Crestron/AMX budget but if it's for a 1 room home cinema type of install i'd say just go with pronto, their handheld are more robust..

however for full house automation, pronto is introducing their first processor and inwalls in Q4 of this year so perhaps they might be in the same pedestal as RTI soon in terms of automation etc..

ok that's my opinion on this thread!

Can I intergrate my Nuvo system into Pronto, is there a script for that? I am really wanting something I can integrate a a music server with mulitple audio outputs into, such as Nuvo's new music server.

A quick scan of the prontoscript modules shows "NuVo Grand Concerto" controlled by IP or RS232 (for all the pronto prof remotes). Frankly, I don't know anything about this particular piece of equipment (or if this is what you have), but they do have two modules (IP and RS232) for controlling this one NuVo device. SJ

I too want to 're-programme' my Philips Pronto TS-9600 to control (and old) Nuvo Concerto. I also have the RS232 unit.

I have done this once already and it worked well but was quite time consuming to write all the RS-232 commands for each button. Unfortunately I seem to have lost the program and have to start from scratch so was looking for a script library or something to speed up this setup.

Anyone able to help me out?

theres one on the philips website

You must be Level-1 certified in Pronto to be able to download. Click the ProntoScript button/text on top right of page at www.pronto.philips.com to create an account and eventually, take the test.