I really appreciate all the bugfixing and developing new features. But is there any upcoming hardware fix or full Implementation of the IR functionality? This topic is really frustrating especially when other users invest their awesome skills to build an solution (independent IR dock) for an basic feature that should be shipped with an >300€ Remote.
Reading now this forum for months reveals that I am not the only one who is affected.
1 Like
The main problem with the dock seems to be the relatively narrow beam angle of the ir leds. The only official statement about the use case of the included ir extenders from Lutz (Head of Hardware) was posted in a German thread here in the forum last November (includes an English translation):
Yes. Now it’s March. Also this is not an excuse for wrong developed hardware.
What solution are you proposing? Recalling the docks for a factory mod? For me personally, not worth the trouble of sending it back to Europe.
It not only the dock but also the Remote itself. Nice that for YOU is not worth the trouble. For other customers it is.
I would expect a free hardware return & makeover or a free working dock. The forum user tiki already analyses and perform a mod to the dock which work flawlessly. Also he documented all his work via pdf. We know that it is possible.
2 Likes
I am interested in the long term success of the UC business. Demanding a free costly and time consuming mod on the dock and remote makes that less likely. Also, no matter where you live, it would probably involve doing without the remote and dock for at least a matter of weeks, something I’m not terribly interested in. And it would be a distraction from what in my opinion are more pressing matters, like bug fixes and more IP based integrations, so that we may some day get away from IR control altogether.
According to the link from the German forum posted in this thread, UC is planning on an improved IR extender in the future. To be honest, I was disappointed with the supplied extenders. I had been under the impression they would be “blasters” (as well as, of course, expecting better range from the dock, like everyone else). If they would supply these at no cost to original backers and purchasers I think that would be a reasonable compromise. But some people seem adamant that the dock itself should just work as expected. That would be nice, but I think making it so for all units in the field, at no cost to their owners, is too much of an ask. Right now the dock is working adequately for me, though I’m not happy about the complication of having to use a wireless extender for the projector, which is not 100% reliable.
I respect your opinion but highly disagree to your points.
A free replacement is usually only available if a fundamental function does not work (anymore) or if a certain part is recalled by the manufacturer, e.g. due to safety problems with batteries.
The fact that the beam angle of the IR emitter is not particularly large and therefore does not have a comparable performance to a Harmony Hub, for example, is of course a weak point but not initially a warranty case. If UC had already advertised a particularly long range of the IR emitters in the Kickstarter campaign or compared the performance with other competitors, then there would already be a reason for complaint here.
One possibility I see here would be to compare the dock with the original remote control. If the device can be operated with the original remote control from the same position as the dock, but not with the dock, then this could possibly be cited as a reason for underperformance. The dock is supposed to be able to replace all remote controls. But I’m not an expert on the subject. And even then they could say that you can use the extenders and place them directly on the device.