Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Remote control with display
Re: Remote control with display
From: George Styles \(RipnetUK\) <"George>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 14:29:59 +0100
I still think before we get bogged down in the detail, we need to prove that
a un-modded Archos can commnicate two way via. the headphone socket.
I also still think that connecting to a PC to get this working is the way
forward, as its a lot quicker to change software on the PC than it is to
make custom hardware to test it
just my 2c
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andreas Stemmer" <Andreas.Stemmer_at_web.de>
Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 8:54 AM
Subject: RE: Remote control with display
> > I honestly think this way is simpler. Especially as I would
> > like to see it integrated with the WPS. If the LCD remote is
> > in, the the remote LCD WPS info is sent down the serial line.
> > If not, it is not. No extra modules (OK, maybe a new serial
> > handling module, but we need that anyway ....).
> I'd prefer it independent from WPS. Of course, one could design
> a special WPS for the remote and one different for the archos
> display, but I'd like to have the possibilty to let the remote
> decide, which data has to be displayed.
> > Now I'm not a coder, I may be wrong, but I don't see a remote
> > polled situation being any simpler
> Perhaps that's our problem, I'm a not a coder either ;-)
> Perhaps some rockbox guys can give a statement which solution
> is better (in terms of rockbox-realisation)
> > (and unless you have a 'go' button on the remote, a polled
> > situation is going to require insertion notification anyway,
> > or it will draw MUCH more power).
> That's true, the only difference is that in my case, only the
> remote needs to know wheter it is connected or not, the jukebox
> won't care.
> > Good point. Maybe have to use the Archos poll scheme ....
> > The other option would be to monitor for changes on the music
> > lines, which would indicate insertion. Maybe the lines to
> > the headphones change status on power-up? I'll check.
> Very good idea!
> > But I agree we should remain unconvinced until we can test this.
> > However, the HW should be designed to accomodate all schemes,
> > so the testing _can_ be done .... and I'm just a HW guy at heart
> > (and mind). This is why all this discussion is a good idea.
> My thoughts...
> Andreas Stemmer
Received on 2002-10-05