I received a reply from Pace regarding the capabilities of the Di4000, (it may be called the Di4100 - the Pace web site has changed since my original posting!), and Im afraid its not good news for CWC customers.

First the new box is NOT being distributed yet it is still in development.

Second - it uses the same IR system as the Di1000 and so will still not work with the pronto.

The NTL and CWC cable systems are not compatable and that with the merger I would thionk that they will have to decide on one system. Lets hope its the NTL one, otherwise our only hope is for CWC to respec their requirements of Pace.

I wrote to the bb under a similar thread a while back.

I've now sent another communication to ntl in the hope that they'll send the 4000 series box to me for testing also.

I've called them (whilst it was still C&W) a few times recently (gave up for a while as was pained by some of the inept responses) but received nothing but "...sorry that's the only box we do...".

However (and related to another problem elsewhere) I noticed that they've finally got round to upgrading their service to provide proper switching of aspect ratio for widescreen sets (miraculously mine worked tonight for the first time - I'm a C&W unfortunate - and the menus have changed to a proper blue colour. It's definitely something they've done at their end).

My faint hope is therefore that they're looking to upgrade their services to match what we, the customers, actually want. I'll let you know how I get on.

Meanwhile, thanks very much to Teresa and all the other contributors... This is one battle we have to win!

Andy
PS I've also since found a cunning place to hide a Sky dish (not technically allowed on my property owing to National Trust covenants). If they don't do something soon I'll cancel my subscription (Sky, incidentally, also has much quicker menus/pay per view and is cheaper).

Hi all,

I've just discovered this forum after finding that my Pronto won't control my C&W box. Thanks for all your efforts. At least I have managed to get my Wharfedale DVD750 to finally work with the Pronto thanks to RCC.

Here's what I have so far discovered regarding the C&W Pace box.
I have the DITV1000 (like everyone else).
According to C&W and Pace this is the only box there is for C&W customers!
According to Pace, their web site is confusing and the DI4100 is NOT a product but a 'family' or 'range' of products of which the DITRV1000 is the product that C&W are using.
C&W are expecting a new box soon (no date - I don't believe anything C&W say, or I'd have had Interactive Services June 1999 - still waiting!).
According to Pace they are NOT producing any new boxes for C&W!
I've requested a new box anyway (!?!) from C&W and they have made a note on my account (for what it's worth).

Mike.

Never mind Teresa. I'm in the same boat - Pronto vs. Telewest Digital, Pace box.

The only benefit is, that as Digital cable freezes, gives no picture, no sound, sometimes - and none of the promised interactive features have appeared - I just tend to leave it on Sky One, or watch DVD's!!

Nick, my Telewest cable box crahes, freezes, loses picture and sound, switches to widescreen all the time regardless of the fact I have it set up for 4:3 and Telewest still haven't delivered on the promised features. I still have the RC5000 and the cable remote on the table rather than just the RC5000. I hoped the update for the Marantz would maybe offer a solution but unfortunately not, it just removed the timers and custom beeps which I liked...

I'm getting broadband from them at the weekend despite the website saying its not available in my area. It told me cable wasn't available in my area when I enetered my postcode in uppercase, I emailed them and they told me it should be in lowercase or it wouldn;t work, it still didn't!

I've emailed them and directed them to this site, they read the Phillips site instead and said their 56KHz was within the pronto's range and I must be doing something wrong. Similarly for the fact my picture doesn't fit on the screen, I must have set it up wrong.... I'm a computer contractor, I think a cable box is within my capabilities....

In summary, Telewest don't have a scoobie what they're doing, so don't expect anything useful from them. their cable and phone service are both cheap and very nasty, I only hope their blue yonder broadband is better as it's a partnership with another company... so I'll probably not be able to read this group from Saturday!!!

Hi it looks as though I should have read this forum before spending £250 on a "universal" remote control. I also have a Pace/NTL/Cable and Wireless set top box so I am now considering:
1. Sending it back to the supplier.
2. Moving away from NTL.
3. Finding some other use for the remote control...

I commend everyone who tried so far to resolve this. What surprises me is that Philips/Marantz have not had much input into this. I have the packaging in front of me and it clearly states that it Operates all IR remote controls. Surely this is misleading? Only once you open the box is there a small comment in the instructions that mentions compatibility.

Sorry not to add any value to this forum....just thoroughly p...ed off.

Hi everyone,fortunatly for me, i bought the one for all 6 first, and then saw the Pronto. Now i want a Pronto but wont be able to control my C&W Pace box. The reason that the 1for6 works with the Pace box is because it not only has a IR output but also an IRDA output. Anyone with the 1for6 (doesnt Teresa have it?) can clearly see the 2 light diodes on the front, and unfortunatly that is one of the only remotes on the market that has IRDA and IR output. The 1for6 is not that good though, it seems to be unable to learn certain codes to function the "OK" and the "Interactive" buttons (if anyone has got these to work or has the codes please email me). As Michael Clare said, C&W arent planning on changin the boxes, the technician told me that they simply send the upgrade to the box over the cable network and that can upgrade all the software which then enables the hardware (such as the cable modem in our DITV1000's). It seems such a shame that Phillips who produce the Pronto and are owners of Pace who produce our cable boxes cant figure something out. Lets keep harassing Phillips, as i just spent £190 on a Pronto and dont want to have to change to sky.

Ben Kind

Number of diodes doesn't matter -- the Pronto has four! One For All worked for months to get working IRDA codes, and as far as I know they're they only one so far.

The two diodes on the One for All 6 are both conventional 940nM diodes (neither is 880nM like IrDA specifies). The reason for using a two diode set-up like this in remotes is to provide a combination of good range and good off-center performance. One diode will usually be wide angle and the other narrow angle. Kinda like driving with your foglights and high beams on at the same time. But neither are to IrDA spec.

I suppose if you wanted to get really adventuresome, you could buy an 880nM diode (Radio Shack, for one, sells them) and replace one of the OFA6 diodes yourself. But they don't come that way from One for All.

From my recent experiment with forcing carrier free IR transmission by the Pronto, it doesn't look good for getting the Pronto to talk to high speed IRDA without a fundamental change in the Pronto's control architecture. See [Link: remotecentral.com] for the technical details.

Have we all admitted defeat?

NO! NEVER SURRENDER

Telewest have temporarily terminated the roll-out of Active Digital due to a shortage of Pace STBs.

It has been reported that Telewest have just signed a deal with an unknown supplier for an alternate source of STBs. We can only hope that these boxes do not use IRDA.

See [Link: cablenews.diginews.org]

There is still hope. The experiment was later successful with 0100 as the first hex word to force un-modulated pulse generation. I think it can be done but it will take someone who has the the Pace box, remote, a digital storage scope and a fair amount of time to decipher and hand encode the sequences. From the low degree of interest regarding my non-modulated pulse experiment, I doubt anyone could justify the effort for the small number of users who would benefit.

A digital Storage scope!?!

I guess you use the tools you have, but that is certainly not the tool I would choose for this job.

Lots of people have computers that already have IRDA capable receivers. If someone has such a computer, the original remote and either a good IRDA utility program or a little programming skill, they could get all the information easily.

I don't know anyone who has all that, but it seems more likely than having a digital storage scope and the patience to use it that way.

I have the Pace box and remote(unfortunately!) and I have a laptop PC with Pico storage scope software and an A/D converter.HOWEVER my knowledge of IR code is minimal.Guy-I read of your IRDA experiments with great
interest but I dont know anything about deciphering
or hand encoding.Also what type of optic sensor are you using?

Ive been working on an idea which, in electronic terms is crude but would work as a "converter" for the Pace
IRDA problem.It uses a 15 Channel IR receiver with reed
relays on the output, connected to a spare Pace Remote
circuit board. The Pronto sends out conventional IR codes to the receiver and the Pace remote sends out the IRDA codes
Well I said it was crude!

A refinement on this would be a converter that plugs
into the IRDA input socket on the Pace box and would accept conventional IR code input, converting to IRDA.

But back to the point -

If IRDA codes could be simulated, even just one to start with, this would be a much better solution, and something that eveyone could use easily.