I agree with the critic but you mentioned some things that were just wrong that I wanted to correct.
If you buy a product from Kickstarter you’re not buying a finished product. You’re an early adaptor and most of the time this means there are some things that need more time to develop.
It’s not like UC is completely ignoring all of the bugs and feature requests. At lot of them have been fixed and implemented but some of them (especially Bluetooth) took them longer than expected. Most likely because things very more complicated than they seem in the first place.
Their communication strategy is what you can definitely criticize. They getting better and Markus (Head of Software) is now updating users on a regular basis but only on Discord. This needs to improve. Also the documentation is virtually nonexistent at least for the end user. Developer docs are better.
The remote is no longer a Kickstarter project but a finished product for sale on their website. And R3 was not technically a “new”’platform at Kickstarter launch. Emphasis on “3”. It was a third generation hardware device released on a software platform that had been around for a few good years. So yes and no.
How much time should a KS project be given?
Isn’t five years enough to finally have a product that can be configured with a reasonable amount of time and then used reliably?
Dani, I think the first couple of years have been very slow because the adoption rate was low. They produced a small batch of remotes. There were only a handful of users. I was on a waiting list to buy a R2 for something like 9 months and they had none to sell. Eventually R3 was released and that was my opportunity to get one.
R3 has been very successful on KS and that means money and also means a much wider audience. More developers came on board to code integrations for specific devices / platforms. More users providing feedback. More work being done on the software side to address bugs, to add features, to improve usability.
And I have to say I have seen a massive improvement over the last say 6 months. At launch R3 was almost unusable. WiFi performance was terrible. IR performance was terrible. They had maybe 20-30 integrations all in all available on the platform.
But we are still running a beta. Some promised features are not yet implemented. WiFi performance is far from being bulletproof and developers are still working on it. I don’t think they will be able to offer the Harmony experience (select your device from a drop down menu, automated setup etc) any time soon, if ever. But there is continuous progress and, as long as new adopters continue to come on board, developers continue to sell remotes and have a steady stream of income to work on the issues, R3 will become a better product over time.
Now can YOU be bothered to spend the money and time and energy to make this work in progress work for you? That is something only you can answer. If SofaBaton does what you need it to do and does better for half the price, then that is your answer.
I don’t think you can give this a number as this always depends on the product and the circumstances. And they are still quite challenging. They started during Covid and then the chips crisis. Now they have to deal with the memory shortage and worldwide supply chain disruptions. The fact that Remote 3 was announced is a consequence from these developments as the SoC used for Remote Two was announced EoL shortly after the release. The development for the new SoC again needed more time that could otherwise be spend in more time developing new features.
From the software side UC is also depending on third party vendors like for the WiFi chip and this process seems to be very slow as UC points out itself.
I’m still not sure if all developers are working full time for UC or if they have other jobs. At least sometimes it looks like this as there are periods where almost no progress happens and then there are new developments almost on a daily base. Hiring new developers also seems to be a problems as this has been announced a long time ago and so far I don’t see any new developer beside Markus and Marton.
I am fully aware of what you are saying and yes, most developers now work with SoCs and depend on buggy third party firmware.
You, the end user, provide the feedback to UC, they provide it to the SoC manufacturer and have to wait for a firmware fix. This new firmware, usually developed by a small team in Asia, is likely to fix some things and break others.
This has been my experience of late with not just UC but pretty much any connected device - audio, video, networking etc. Often the issues are never fixed and the SoC developer simply releases a new SoC. New product, new bugs, new challenges. The cycle lasts for one to two years. I anticipate talk of a R4 within a year.
Still, Dani is right to have certain expectations for his 419€.
Those are all just excuses. Since when has software development depended on memory bottlenecks or other hardware limitations? Over the past five years, simply not enough has been done on the software side!
I also assume there will be an R4, R5, and so on. But don’t count on me—I’ve already felt cheated twice, so there won’t be a next time.
That is absolutely fair mate. As I said, vote with your wallet. If it doesn’t work for you, spend the money on something that ticks the right boxes.
The only thing I would say to you: the Harmony demise tells you something. The Oppo exit signals the same thing. The universal remote market is shrinking because the high end HT market is dying. Even the Hifi market has been contracting for a while.
People live in small quarters. At best they get a big OLED screen. Maybe a soundbar. They stream heavily compressed Netflix garbage. They control everything with the TV remote or an app. They might have a Sonos system, or Apple, or Alexa or whatever to play music.
There is less and less demand in the world for a universal remote. It is an act of courage to continue to develop a platform like UC against these odds. And if UC folds, and if SofaBaton goes under what will you be left with? Harmony is already gone and their database will not be maintained forever. I give it another 3-5 years.
So keep that in mind as well before making a decision. R3 might be far from the perfect solution but it is one of the very few solutions still available in an ever shrinking market. And, if you ask me, it has a lot more potential than the SofaBaton or the Harmony. For that reason alone I will probably buy the R4.
As an IR device , few consumer available devices were in the league of a Pronto. I would argue that the MX-980 was superior, but that’s preference. Certainly, Philips was miles ahead of Harmony or anything else outside of URC in the non-CI space (which URC ultimately abandoned).
But, IR is an archaic protocol and none of these devices are actually RF (RF is used to transmit from the remote to a base station which then emits IR to your devices).
If you want IR control, then Pronto is hard to beat and the logical successor is Sofabaton (as long as it works for you).
As for the lack of an IR library, you can pretty much find 90% of the IR codes through Global Cache or Remote Central (which thankfully Daniel keeps up and running). I do think UC could learn something from Sofabaton and provide a library of user-uploaded IR codes.
As an early adopter of the R2 (two on the original kickstarter) I expected the user experience I received. Where we are today is night and day from where we were. I find myself in a uncomfortable position. I feel like UC the company has treated me like shit with no appreciation of my (or anyone esle’s) early support. The product itself, though, is simply untouchable in the consumer space and further development will make it even more so. I won’t ever buy directly from them again, but if I need another remote, I will buy another off someone on this forum who decides to sell.
I will continue to provide support to the user community (to the extent I have the knowledge and excepting those who call me a liar) and will continue to support all the great devs who write integrations. I keep saying this because it’s true. This is the only CI level product available to a consumer without having to use a dealer/CI. Because of that level of functionality is what I want, the R3 is a fantastic product for me.
I like the hard buttons of the Pronto TSU9400 much better than the Remote 3. I don’t like the rubbery feel of the Remote 3’s hard buttons. Also, with the exception of the cursor and OK keys, I find the other hard buttons unintuitive to use. They are spaced too closely and are shaped similarly so I have to look down on the remote to use them. A main reason to use a remote is for the hard buttons, so one doesn’t have to look at the remote for frequently used buttons. In remote 3’s defense, the most commonly used hard button these days for many apps are the cursor keys, OK, Menu, Back and volume. Cursor and OK keys are easy to use but not the other buttons (I frequently have to look down at the remote when using the other buttons). IMO, Pronto and the Harmony Elite hard button design is better than the remote 3.
The Pronto is far more configurable, but to take full advantage of it, knowing software development helps. In its hey day, companies were writing integrations for it (like a Kaleidescape library that even included media browsing) many years ago. But to use the latest components, I’ve had to write ProntoScripts for Marantz, JVC projectors, madVR Envy, Kaleidescape, etc. that do two-way IP and RS232 control. The remote 3’s integration with Home Assistant inspired me to add HA integrations for my home theater equipment, and to write a ProntoScript library for my Pronto to control Home Assistant entities. Works like a charm and makes it easy to introduce new components to my home theater.
I also prefer the screen of the Pronto Tsu9400. The resolution of the remote 3 is nicer than the Pronto, but I like the Pronto’s larger screen to fit more buttons but not too closely spaced together that can be easily used without “fat fingered”.
I do like how much faster the CPU of the remote 3 is compared to the Pronto. Loading Kaleidescape and Plex graphics is much faster than the Pronto. Granted, showing movie posters in a remote is mostly eye candy (given we’re already watching the content), but it sure is nice eye candy in the remote!
Assuming that one’s components are already being supported by UC, the remote 3 is a very nice remote. Less configurable but much easier to setup than the Pronto. But for Pronto users out there, ease of configuration probably isn’t an issue given how long you’ve been using the Pronto.
the remote 3 can be a good daily driver. Needs more fixes still, but they should get there. I do like that it is fast and I like how well it works with the web configurator. It would be nice to see how they evolve. Hope they continue to improve their software, and hope a future Remote 4 will have better ergonomics for the hard buttons. I want to be able to rely on muscle memory to use all hard buttons and not have to look down at the remote. If I wanted to look down at the remote all the time, I can just use my iPhone!
@randman What was that?: Less customizable, but much easier to set up than the Pronto.
Are you serious about all that? Are you talking about theR2/R3? The opposite is true, and on top of that, the R3 is also unreliable.
I was thinking in terms of 2 way IP control. With Pronto, I wrote my own ProntoScript libraries for madVR Envy, JVC Projector, Marantz AVR, etc. With the R3, there were already integrations available for them. So, no need for me to write my own integrations for the R3. I may get there some day, but for now, I’ve been able to take advantage of available built-in or community integrations. I can customize my Pronto much more than the remote 3, bit given its age, you’re not going to find readily available Pronto libraries for the latest equipment.
EDIT: a positive result of my using the remote 3 is that it motivated me to add integrations for my Home Theater components into Home Assistant. Some remote 3 integrations (specifically the Plex Media player) didn’t work well in the remote 3 version of the integration, but the HA integration worked well, so I just exported it from HA to the remote 3.
Anyway, the UC remote’s integration got me motivated… I wrote a ProntoScript library for Pronto to integrate with Home Assistant, allowing my Pronto to send commands and receive status to/from HA. Now, my Pronto can control devices that HA can control. In the long run, this will make it easier to add new components in my Home Theater. As long as there is an HA integration for that component, I can easily control it from Pronto without me having to write a custom ProntoScript for it, unlike before where every component needed a new ProntoScript if I wanted to control it via IP or RS232. Of course, IR controlled devices are always easier to get started with pronto compared to remote 3.