From: Andreas Stemmer <Andreas.Stemmer_at_web.de>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 15:48:18 +0200

Stuart Tedford wrote:

> I agree too :) The remote doesn't know when the current
> track has changed and the display needs to be updated - only
> the Archos knows. It would be a waste of power to have the
> remote poll the Archos for this case.

When should rockbox send data and what should it send then?
It could send the whole WPS every second (to have updated track
time) or just the song title each time a new song starts.
Somebody wants to build a remote with a complete copy of the
rockbox display for the car for example, somebody else wants
to display the song title only.
Transfering all available data every second is much data and
not needed in most cases. If we introduce a system to choose
the data to be transmitted, it is the most simple way to
frequently poll the data.

> The only problem is that key presses on the remote need to
> be delayed if the Archos is in the middle of tx. If we
> limit the packet sizes from the Archos then we can minimize
> this delay. If we implement ACK packets from the remote,
> then they could contain some data - which is reasonaby common
> practice.

That's no problem when the remote polls the data.

> As was mentioned in an earlier post, I really like the idea
> of a cable/adaptor type solution, with Archos on one end and
> a standard serial port on the other. This would allow
> anything with a serial port to display and control the
> Archos. The LCD remote can be one such device too - without
> limiting the solution to just one platform.

This is no problem. If we have one working solution, we can
program the controllers to (almost) everything we want.
I'd like to have one translator for my Sony car stereo, too.
But for a normal remote, I prefer to have one piece only that
needs to be carried around and wants to have batteries.

Andreas Stemmer
Received on 2002-10-08