Rockbox mail archiveSubject: RE: Remote control with display
RE: Remote control with display
From: Andreas Stemmer <Andreas.Stemmer_at_web.de>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 18:48:25 +0200
> > I missed the beginning of this, but why not just have a
> > setting in the options menu?
> 1) It's way cooler to make it work plug & play
> 2) Some guy will someday insert the new remote without
> enabling it in the options
This wouldn't be a big problem, he would notice if his
display stays empty.
> 3) Some guy will someday insert the old remote with the
> new still enabled in the menu
This could be a problem depending on the electrical design
of the old remote
4) I think we shouldn't introduce more options if they aren't
really necessary. You have to set this "option" according to
the remote you use, it's not a choice. If rockbox can detect
it there's no possibility for the user to set the option wrong.
The whole discussion started with my suggestion to make the
remote poll the data from the jukebox, i.g. the remote asks
the jukebox from time to time to send the required data. This
would have advantage that the jukebox only changes to send-mode
if the remote requested data and that the remote can "decide"
what kind of data it wants to have. The behaviour of the jukebox
could be the same with every kind of remote this way, becaus
there would just be another command "request data" that makes
the jukebox send data and the standard remote will never send
Andrew suggested to have the jukebox send data if something
changed to prevent unnecessary traffic and power consumption.
This only works of course, if the jukebox knows if there is
a remote that can understand what is beeing sent.
Received on 2002-10-04