Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
Philips Pronto Classic 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:
Software for the Pronto
This thread has 30 replies. Displaying posts 16 through 30.
OP | Post 16 made on Wednesday December 2, 1998 at 20:34
Dave
Historic Forum Post
It would be nice if Phillips offered the software for the Macintosh. The Mac would be a natural, with the best user interface on the computer hooked to one of the best user interfaces on a remote. As for 8bit, 16 bit, 32 bit, Windows 95/98/NT problems - get rid of all this hassle - get a Mac.

Dave
OP | Post 17 made on Wednesday December 2, 1998 at 21:34
Timothy Morris
Historic Forum Post
Scott

I think you will have to look for a different remote.

From a commercial point of view, Philips are unlikely to:

a) develop the software to run under a "minority" OS, as it would simply cost too much.

b) release an API, or detailed specifications on how to talk to the Pronto, as I'm sure they want to keep this info close to their chest.

I know you don't like MS, but Windows is the closest thing yet to a hardware independant OS and has a huge installed base.

It is just tough.
OP | Post 18 made on Thursday December 3, 1998 at 02:01
Scott "popcorn"
Historic Forum Post
Timmothy: Actually, Windows can't hold a candle to Unix for hardware independence. With Unix, you simply port the program over, since it's usually in source code or pseudo-source code. Philips could solve the platform problem by writing the program in Java... Then you could run it on a Win PC, Mac, and any decent Unix system... :)
OP | Post 19 made on Thursday December 3, 1998 at 07:09
Tim Moss
Historic Forum Post
Scott: Thats not hardware independence!
Try running Solaris on an HP machine, or AIX
on a DEC Alpha.

When you "port the code over"
on UNIX, 90% of your time will be spent dealing
with hardware or system differences!


Back on Topic: :)

Hopefully the Philips Software will let you
save to disk your Pronto's settings, including
the actual IR commands you may "learn" from other
remotes.

We (and other 'net users) will be able to pass
configurations around, and just tweak them to
our own needs. You also should never have to
go back to the original remotes
(if you still have them) as the info will be backed up. We could even share the separate
"On" and "Off" codes for equipment, without
all of us having to get a "OneForAll" type remote
as well.

Or maybe Philips themselves will come up with
a way of accessing/sending these codes from within
the Proto software.


OP | Post 20 made on Thursday December 3, 1998 at 08:13
Jesse King
Historic Forum Post
Tim Moss,

That is a fantastic idea!

Passing the codes is excellent, esp. if someone 'misplaced' one of their remotes, etc....

I would love to see that feature in the software as well.

Jesse
OP | Post 21 made on Thursday December 3, 1998 at 13:43
Scott "popcorn"
Historic Forum Post
Tim: Just a comment... Now you're talking about the operating system. When you talk about a Dec Alpha, or a Sparc, you should run the variants of Unix that work best on that platform. What I was talking about is that the applications are easy to port. Not the OS.

I still want info on the configuration file and how to upload it so I can write a DOS version. Heck, if I wrote one, I'd let Philips have it to include for others who hate Win 95/98/NT.
OP | Post 22 made on Thursday December 3, 1998 at 14:27
Tim
Historic Forum Post
Sorry guys about the completely Off Topic post but:

Scott:
>Just a comment... Now you're talking about the operating system. When you talk about a Dec Alpha, or a Sparc, you should run the variants of Unix that work best on that platform.

I think you mean "the only variants of unix" in
these two cases.

> What I was talking about is that the applications are easy to port. Not the OS.

I wasnt talking about porting the OS - I was just
stating that they are completely hardware dependent.
As I said before 90% of the time it takes to port an *application* is spent dealing with the differences between different Unix's, and the hardware that they run on. This kind of stuff *is* easier under Win32 - there is only one Win32 and it runs on justabout any x86 based machine.

I'll shut up now! I just don't like people saying that what I struggle to do every day, to earn a living, is "easy".

If Scott wants to argue it further he can take it to email:

timm@sco.com
^^^

A Java version of the software is a nice idea but
unfortunately there is no way Java can do low
level hardware operations by itself.


A quick question to any Pronto owners:
Does the Pronto have a database of preprogrammed IR codes ?
If so how extensive is it - and does it have any codes which were not on the original remotes ?



Another useful feature in the Pronto which may just be possible via a software update:
allow IR commands to be sent at programmed times Very useful for recording things off satellite - no need to remember to set everything to the right channels before you do it.


I hope those Philips developers really are reading all this stuff - we could end up with a serioulsy powerful unit.
OP | Post 23 made on Friday December 4, 1998 at 12:38
George Mills
Historic Forum Post
Sorry, like it or not, Windows will deal with more hardware than any other OS (CPU's are not everything). Why? Because hardware developers want to make money. How do they make money? By choosing the most common OS to develop drivers for.

Here is a great example, Phillips and Marrantz have developed new touchscreen remotes and what OS did they pick to talk to there hardware. Windows :-) Why because they wnat to make money. It's what makes the world go round.

Find the slickest printer you can find and I assure it will run on Windows. Find the slickest scanner and it will be Windows. We have $20,000 printer that makes 4 foot wide thermal wax posters and it just plugs into windows and you print. Just as Applications are what's key here so are peripherals.

Corporations are switching from Mac and Unix workstations to PC's. Motorola and DEC to name a couple. Microsoft and 3rd parties are investing huge amounts of money into centrally managing PC's. Even where huge number crunch is done people are now using Windows PC's as front end to number crunching servers. One the few area PC's have not got into is Heavy CAD and Graphics (SGI and Sun). Schools are switching from Mac's or Unix to PC's also.

Look at the 5000 printers, 1000 scanners, 100 camera's. Even technical instruments are switching from Mac to Windows because you just can't find programmers to work on Mac.

Having a monopoly such as micorsoft may not be a good thing, but it's just too damn expensive for companies to deal with multiple OS's. Windows was chosen because it ran on cheap hardware. That's the only reason. I think Microsoft has done a reasonable job in catching up with other OS's and in some areas gone beyond and other areas still is behind.

Windows *IS* the defacto standard. Nobody will say it does everything the best. It's just everywhere, in every country.

Java may change things, but it's still too early to tell yet.

I've worked on Several flavors of Unix, VMS, OS/8, RT-11, DOS, Windows 3.1/9x/NT, TOPS-10, TOPS-20 (one the coolest OS's ever), RSX-11, and I enjoyed them all (DOS perhaps the least). But you won't find me with out windows machine within 30 seconds reach.

Sorry for staying off topic Daniel, but a lot of us don't want to see someone misout on things just because they refuse to run Windows under their roof. A lot of us went through the same transition.

Most of us like what we know and understand. It took me several years to switch from VMS to Unix and it took several years to switch from Unix to Windows. And I still use Emacs on Windows for tough editing jobs.

OP | Post 24 made on Friday December 4, 1998 at 13:45
Scott "popcorn"
Historic Forum Post
George... You're missing the point. The whole point is that Microsoft has monopolized the computer industry, using a rather poor operating system I might add. And this is illegal. Why do you think they're in court right now? Now, the remainder of the point is that all these hardware makers are ensuring that monopoly contines by writing drivers and controlling applications ONLY for that operating system... Now, if you can think about that, think about this: If it continues, eventually EVERYTHING will be Windoze. Everything will have GPF's and have to be rebooted often. And quite frankly, after seeing what Microsoft has done in the past, I don't want their grubby hands on my future. And if that means I have to build my own hardware and write my own software, I'll do it. I'm very handy at that sort of thing... THAT is the point. Do you honestly want Microsoft to grow richer? Do you honestly want to see the future Enterprise Starship (assuming we actually decide to explore space) running Microsoft products? It's a very bleak future indeed. That's all I'm saying on the subject, except that I am currently moving away from all MS/Intel products, and soon I'll have a computer with very little, if any, MS code in it.
OP | Post 25 made on Friday December 4, 1998 at 16:10
George Mills
Historic Forum Post
I do understand your point.

I did not say I like all Microsoft's practice. But as a developer I love being able to get real good at one OS rather than mediocre at three. I, as user love to not have to choose which machine will run the applications I don't know I'll need in the future. Users, Developers, and Peripheral venders want one OS. CPU and OS companies are not happy about that and wanted it to be them.

The hardware venders would much prefer ONE OS. For every OS they need another team of developers. They make more money and life is simpler with ONE OS.

My Windows machines rarely crash and when they do it's usually my fault because I wrote bad code. One reason why "Windows" appears unstable is because it runs with a HUGE array of hardware. It's amazing it works at all. 99% of all crashes are due to BAD device drivers. Pick good hardware (not hardware that's too cutting edge because device drivers are not debugged yet) and Windows 95, 98 and NT are pretty damn solid. Device drivers that come with windows are often the most stable (maybe not the fastest or have every feature).

Also cheap hardware dos not have the backup systems Unix workstations had. It's not Microsofts fault the public demands cheap hardware. Most systems don't even have parity memory. Blame the public, blame east asia for super cheap hardware, don't blame Microsoft. Hardware is getting better these days.

No system is bug free and since Windows is so popular if any problem do exist you will surely hear about it.

If as much cheap hardware and applications were all on unix today you'd have similar issues. It was easy to control Unix or Mac machines because all the hardware, OS and in some cases even the applications came from the same vender. Yes Unix runs on PCs today and 3rd parties make Mac's but they were to late. Windows/Intel already took over.
OP | Post 26 made on Friday December 4, 1998 at 23:56
Scott "popcorn"
Historic Forum Post
No. we don't want one OS. we don't want one CPU. Choice is the best thing we can have, and helps to define freedom. What we want and need is one STANDARD. Then have several OS's people can choose from, several CPUs people can choose from, while still having the STANDARD there so everything will operate on it. It CAN be done. One other thing about people who develop (particularly for Windows) is that they keep adding more and more features without cleaning up the code they already have. No one except CAD engineers and graphic artists would need anything higher than a 486 if the code was clean. And don't tell me we can't have clean code. I'm a CS. I know about computers, and I've worked with them ever since I had my first TRS-80 COCO with 4K of RAM back in the early early 80's. I can write clean code. It seems to me people just don't care about it. Most software nowadays is throwbacks from decades ago that has had new segments tacked on over and over again, creating bugs and do-nothing code.
OP | Post 27 made on Saturday December 5, 1998 at 00:52
give it up already
Historic Forum Post
What ever happen to having a question about remotes?


OP | Post 28 made on Saturday December 5, 1998 at 10:53
George Mills
Historic Forum Post
Sorry, I tried to ask Mr. popcorn to send me email or post his email. Please Mr. popcorn send me email if you want to debate this further.

Multiple CPU's and OS's means application developers and hardware developers will "CHOOSE" too!!! That's the problem. They WON'T support them all, it's too expensive. The industry went through all this already and almost everyone now picks Windows. Yes, you don't have a choice any more if you want to play the game.

If you are as good a programmer as you say a new PC should be pocket change for you.

Sorry you lost your argument with the 486 thing and graphics artists. Why don't you go render ONE frame of a "A Bugs Life" on 486 and let me know when your done. Or load the engine drawing of Boeing 747.

If you really think this way, I take my offer of a reasonable email discussion back. You have a valid complaint and I'm simply trying explain why it happend and why it's unlikely to change. But the 486 thing means you have no idea what your talking about.
OP | Post 29 made on Monday December 7, 1998 at 01:25
Scott "popcorn"
Historic Forum Post
George: Perhaps you should READ posts next time... I said *EXCEPT FOR GRAPHICS ARTISTS AND CAD ENGINEERS* Get a clue. And if you had a clue, you'd also realize that I mentioned a set of standards, meaning that developers would only develop one port of an application. Any OS based on that set of standards could run that OS. You really need to get out off the Microsoft Zombie club once in a while.

As for e-mail, first I think people that want to read this thread should have the right to, rather than it being privatized to e-mail... And second I don't want someone who *thinks* they know-it-all to spam me. :)
OP | Post 30 made on Monday December 7, 1998 at 13:08
George Mills
Historic Forum Post
Sorry, I misread your sentence.

If you want to debate this publicly then let's move it to an appropriate forum.
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