Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
URC's Consumer Remotes Forum - View Post
Previous section Next section Previous page Next page Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Page 2 of 3
Topic:
Question to URC about AUTHORIZED buyers not supported by URC's new policy
This thread has 36 replies. Displaying posts 16 through 30.
OP | Post 16 made on Thursday August 17, 2006 at 17:55
Captain Chris
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2006
18
I've had VERY GOOD interactions with Parasound every time I've talked to them. Yes, I've passed this to them, and it seems that they were as blindsided by this new policy as we the consumers were. Very sad, that such a good company like Parasound has been affected by this and had to do extra work, scrambling to handle the situation that was dumped in their laps. They're working on a solution, but it will take time.

I'm trying to be level-headed about this, and I think the best way is to try to give URC every opportunity to respond instead of jumping to conclusions. Up to now, I've been very happy with my MX-700 remotes.

URC, please contact me.
Post 17 made on Thursday August 17, 2006 at 19:18
BigPapa
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
October 2005
3,139
On August 17, 2006 at 17:55, Captain Chris said...
I'm trying to be level-headed about this, and I think
the best way is to try to give URC every opportunity to
respond instead of jumping to conclusions. Up to now,
I've been very happy with my MX-700 remotes.

I think most people would agree with you.
Post 18 made on Saturday August 19, 2006 at 01:49
yromj
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2006
107
Well, this just saved me some money. I bought my MX-900 to use in my yet to be completed new HT. I bought it early so I could learn to program it, etc. Since then, my wife has fallen in love w/ the thing and we've been discussing leaving the 900 in the LR and getting another URC remote, likely either a 950 or a 1000 for the new HT.

Well, this new policy change just killed that idea. As much as I love this remote, I won't take the chance that someday I won't be able to do something w/ it because of a policy such as this.

They have not only lost my business, but also my recommendation. In the days of Internet forums, the power of the keyboard is something to be reckoned with.

John
As my circle of knowledge grows, so grows the circumference of the unknown.
Post 19 made on Saturday August 19, 2006 at 02:02
GregoriusM
RC Consultant
Joined:
Posts:
December 1999
9,807
John: Why would you think that some day you won't be able to do something with it?

You'll be able to do everything that it purports to do now, and possibly a feature or two they add down the road.

The only thing you may lose is the updated database sometime down the road. You'll still have your fully functioning PC software, your fully functioning 950 or 1000, and still be able to learn any codes that you need.

This policy has not limited you in any way. Buy your new remote, program it, use it, love it...... for years to come..... since the quality of URC's remotes has been well established.

As I said in another thread, let's not shoot ourselves in the foot because of a perceived lack of support by URC. How they handled the change is certainly up for discussion and I am not the happiest camper in that regard, but I have in my possession every one of the remotes you mention, and even if they did stop Live Updates today, I'd be able to use and configure every one of them for years to come!

John..... don't shoot yourself in the foot! Your wife loves the 900. She'll love the next URC you buy. I'd take the WAF factor in a heart beat!

Greg
When ignorance is bliss, ‘tis folly to be wise.
Post 20 made on Saturday August 19, 2006 at 19:04
yromj
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2006
107
Greg,

I agree w/ the point you make about not shooting myself in the foot. I don't see this as a situation which means I have to throw away my remote at all. I still love it, and would love to recommend it to others whom I know personally, or via forums.

The thing that really scares me though is the "what if." "What if" last night when I used LU (for the last time apparently) to update my software they had crippled it? I don't think they would ever do that, but I bet a few months ago nobody would have thought they would have disabled LU either.

In other words, I'm not really that upset about losing LU (URC's database is not nearly as well kept as Logitech's and I was able to find config files on this site that weren't available in the software). I just wonder what they'll do next. Of course, since the software can't be updated anymore, it will always work in its current form.

John
As my circle of knowledge grows, so grows the circumference of the unknown.
Post 21 made on Sunday August 20, 2006 at 01:41
GregoriusM
RC Consultant
Joined:
Posts:
December 1999
9,807
John

When the average person sifts through all of the posts that contain some fact, some rumours, some guesses, some non-factual information, I can easily see how they would be in the same situation as you. I've known a number of the people at URC for 5 or 6 years, and I'm a bit muddled. In fact, I've refrained from reading every word in those threads, and mostly did some "speed reading" since so many of the posts start with a personal barrage, or misinformation, etc.

Yes, I'll state it here once again. URC did not handle this in a way that I agree with. Eric Johnson has popped in here and there to try and clarify things, such as the fact that URC has told people for years that they should always buy from an authorized dealer. Arguably, that information is not available to everyone, especially those without a computer and internet access. But then again, neither are the same policies by other companies.

That being said, a much more palatable approach would have been a graduated approach, and an approach that doesn't make the DIY'er feel like the fantastic programs and configurations that they've worked hard on, some even shared, and some even entered into URC's contest with, are so very much less than what the average Custom Installer could do.

However, the situation is much more a marketing faux paus than a logistical one for the end user.

The vast majority, probably almost all users, will have fully-functioning software that includes LiveUpdates for the foreseeable future. Nothing has changed except the way that you get the update-able software.

I would hate to see you miss out on another great remote that does include the WAF factor due to "What If's" that really don't pertain to URC's action now, and in my opinion, have been brought on by the paranoia that some have propagated in this forum.

Please don't let a flawed marketing/informational move take you away from a piece of equipment that will enhance your home theater experience for years to come.

Like I mentioned before, just the WAF is worth it! :-)

Greg

P.S. I hope to instill even more confidence in you once I've given some concrete answers to questions in my "ANSWERS" thread.
When ignorance is bliss, ‘tis folly to be wise.
Post 22 made on Sunday August 20, 2006 at 13:10
robinp
Lurking Member
Joined:
Posts:
October 2005
7
I don't know if this suggestion is too simple but, why doesn't URC grandfather the users who owned their remotes prior to the policy change (assuming the unit has a valid serial number), and apply the policy to all new purchases. This would satisfy past customers, all new coustomers, and CI's (I think). Also, dealers and new users would know where they stand with respect to updates, access to the database, etc.

I feel realy caught up in this matter because I have an MX-850, am a tech-savvy individual, and enjoy programming my remote. I, like many others, cannot prove that I purchased my remote from an AUTHORISED source. I have registered the serial with URC but that doesn't seem to matter.

Robin
Robin
OP | Post 23 made on Sunday August 20, 2006 at 20:37
Captain Chris
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2006
18
Coming up on 3 weeks now since I first tried to contact URC, before I even started this thread.

URC, please respond to my attempts to contact you. I'm not a thief, or bought my MX-700 remotes on the Russian black market. I bought my MX-700 packaged with my Parasound C1 A/V processor from an authorized Parasound source.

Please let me know at least if you intend to support authorized buyers like me, not addressed by your policy.
Post 24 made on Monday August 21, 2006 at 11:03
Jeff Wagner
Founding Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2002
368
Chris,

Parasound - like B & K and other companies who we manufacture remotes for - handles all issues with their products. If you have any issues you'll need to contact Parasound directly.

Jeff Wagner
Post 25 made on Monday August 21, 2006 at 14:33
cma
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2003
3,044
On August 20, 2006 at 20:37, Captain Chris said...
Coming up on 3 weeks now since I first tried to contact
URC, before I even started this thread.

URC, please respond to my attempts to contact you. I'm
not a thief, or bought my MX-700 remotes on the Russian
black market. I bought my MX-700 packaged with my Parasound
C1 A/V processor from an authorized Parasound source.

Please let me know at least if you intend to support authorized
buyers like me, not addressed by your policy.

It is not URC's issue...
The software for the Parasound remote is downloadable from the parasound website at: [Link: parasound.com]
If you happen to notice Parasound states that their software is not the same as the software from URC and that the software from URC will not work correctly with the Parasound remote.

From Parasound website:

"MX Editor Software

This is a zipped executable (.exe) file to program your own settings for the two remote control handsets that are included with the Halo C 1 and C 2. These remotes are Parasound's custom version of the Universal Remote Control MX-700 and Sidekick.

Note: This version of MXeditor that you can download from the Parasound website is the only version that works with the Halo C 1 and C 2 remote controls. The version of MXeditor found at the Universal Remote Control website will not function correctly. "

Just like Crestron, allthough they may appear to be URC remotes, there are not neccessarily the same.
Post 26 made on Monday August 21, 2006 at 18:02
yromj
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2006
107
Greg,

I didn't read very much of the other threads either. (When I saw some of the personal bickering that was going back and forth, I left them alone.) The "what-ifs" that I mentioned came about because of my questioning the future.

As an aside, I think this really is a MAJOR marketing blunder by URC. They just alienated the entire DIY market.

I think they should offer two lines of remotes: the first line is their current line which requires the use of authorized dealers, etc. The second line should be the web or DIY line. These should come w/ no software, but the software be available for d/l (as it was before), and neither the product nor software have any support directly through URC.

This would allow people who want to go it alone, and save some serious money, the oppurtunity to do so. It would also allow the people who everything setup for them, to have that, also. This would cover two markets (and I feel the two markets are very seperate from each other) w/ essentially one set of products. All they have to do is sell the web line as "OEM" products just as most computer parts companies do.

John
As my circle of knowledge grows, so grows the circumference of the unknown.
OP | Post 27 made on Monday August 21, 2006 at 18:28
Captain Chris
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2006
18
cma, I'll repost my response to your same post in the other URC thread:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks, guys, for trying to help. Good to see that this is still being read by people, even if it's just our fellow public. CMA, you may or may not know that the only difference between the Parasound MX-700 remote and the standard URC MX-700 remote is that the power buttons have been switched, so "On" is "Off" and vice versa. Why, I have no idea--perhaps there's some agreement that an OEM remote can not be packaged in its original form with other equipment. Both the URC and Parasound versions of MXEditor work for any MX-700 remote, as long as you keep straight which power button is which.

In any case, the "Parasound" version of MXEditor was also locked out from Live Update with the same 25 July update from URC. It now has the exact same pop-up note as the standard URC version, that you must contact your URC dealer for access to the new Complete Control program. As stated, us Parasound owners bought the product from Parasound, not URC, so many of us don't have a "URC dealer". Clearly, this IS a URC issue that is not addressed by their policy, and I'm waiting to hear from them regarding if and how they will support people like myself, trying to give them every chance to respond. Even if they have no intention of providing support to authorized buyers that are falling through the cracks, I would just like to hear that, or something, just one way or another.

I would assume that URC intends to support ALL authorized buyers of their products, but URC needs to be the one that states that, not us fellow buyers, users, and industry members.

As for calling URC, I'm currently on a military deployment halfway around the world, but if I don't get any response for the next several months will be calling them at my earliest opportunity.
Post 28 made on Monday August 21, 2006 at 18:51
cma
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2003
3,044
On August 21, 2006 at 18:02, yromj said...
I think they should offer two lines of remotes: the first
line is their current line which requires the use of authorized
dealers, etc. The second line should be the web or DIY
line.

They allready have and currently do.. they have always had a Consumer product line and a Custom/Professional product line and they have always been promoted that way on their website as well as the fact that only remotes purchased from authorized dealers would be supported. The fact that other people were selling the Custom/Professional line in a way that it was not intended has caused this to become an issue. If URC had vigorously persued the problem from the beginning none of this would have ever happened. You can still buy all of the remotes that they produce and get the software with the remote. At the time you purchase the remote you can then register it and get all of the updates that you desire. If you have a current remote and software, I could only see the 3000 needing a change or update seeing that it is new to the market and has some obvious issues. Most of us buy things on-line, myself included, with the thought that hey, it's cheaper and why should I pay extra to someone who only has a server set up to accept orders and isn't really doing anything else to support me, we typically forego the thought of possibly needing future support to save a few bucks. I do not sell URC remotes, but the issue still bothers me. I have visited their web site numerous times in the past to get information as to whether or not it is a line that I may want to carry and their policy of unauthorized sales has allways been listed on their site. When I am researching items I may want to buy I allways do alot of reading up on features and benefits and whatnot and I would guess that most of the people who are complaining about the new policy also did alot of research before they made their purchase, I would find it difficult to believe that if they had visited the URC website that they would have missed the authorized dealer support policy, as when you went to the page to find a dealer it was right there. Now, they either knew that fact and are now mad at themselves and taking it out at URC or they just plain chose to ignore it and take the chance.
OP | Post 29 made on Monday August 21, 2006 at 19:03
Captain Chris
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2006
18
On August 21, 2006 at 11:03, Jeff Wagner said...
Chris,

Parasound - like B & K and other companies who we manufacture
remotes for - handles all issues with their products.
If you have any issues you'll need to contact Parasound
directly.

Jeff Wagner

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Wagner-

Thank you, I've been anxiously trying to get URC to respond to my requests for 3 weeks now as to whether they intend to support me. One way or another, I now know where I stand with URC, and can pass this on to all other OEM owners of URC products.

I'd still be interested to hear if URC intends to support other authorized owners of URC products that are not covered by URC's new policy, but at least I know for me personally now.

I've been talking to Parasound's top executives ever since URC sprung this new policy, and they were as surprised by URC's decision as any of the rest of us public users, custom installers, or industry insiders. They are now scrambling to pick up the pieces and recover from this--I've just been trying to give URC every opportunity to provide some sort of support.

I shall confine my attempts at obtaining URC product support to Parasound only now, and shall pass on to other OEM URC owners that they should do the same.

Thanks for the response.

Chris
Post 30 made on Monday August 21, 2006 at 19:53
GregoriusM
RC Consultant
Joined:
Posts:
December 1999
9,807
It seems that some of the questions I am submitting to URC are being answered!

Good!
When ignorance is bliss, ‘tis folly to be wise.
Page 2 of 3


Jump to


Protected Feature Before you can reply to a message...
You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now.

Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.

Hosting Services by ipHouse