I think you are completly missing the point. The idea isn't to force everyone to use the same remote. Everything will still be the same as it is now. The software is the same, LIRC still works, etc. There are two minor differences, though. First, The documentation can be more specific, since there are "recommended" remotes, that all have certain buttons, etc. Second, you can make a default configuration that works out-of-the-box with the recommended remotes. However if you prefer to use another brand (or no) remote instead, you are of course welcome to configure it yourself, just as you do today.
Open Source is a wonderful thing, but generally speaking, there isn't much OS hardware. If we did, as originally suggested, come up with a design and fabricate our own OS remotes, they would end up costing substantially more then the ones I linked to. So you basically have three options: No standard: Pros: Less "commercial"; Cons: Poor documentation, harder install, generally poorer user experience. OS Remote: Pros: excellent user experience, documentation, & install; Cons: very expensive, limited flexibility, high financial risk. Recommended commercial remotes: Pros: Good user experience, documentation, & install, inexpensive; Cons: none really. On Wednesday 08 December 2004 1:33 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi, > > there is a serious risk in the following musings: > > > One thing that scares me is lack of standardization. Especially with > > > Freevo remotes, as they use nothing but 3rd party vendor solutions. It > > > would be cool if we could make a standard remote spec. The > > > instructions on how to build them are on the site. It would also be a > > > cool way to make money if we started selling some... I have machining > > > friends I could get in on it. There was also an online oriented custom > > > fabrication place on /. a while ago... > > > > > > Anyway, I think that is a ways off and a rather large project. > > > > A much better solution would be to choose two or three readily available > > universal remotes, design the interface & documentation for them, and > > sell them via an Amazon associate program or the like. This eliminates > > the financial risk, but still gives you the advantage a set "interface" > > on the remote. The One-For-All remotes (such as > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0000ALPBA) are > > consistently highly rated. > > The problem with such actions is, that you are leaving the spirit of linux. > The OpenSource idea is what made software like freevo and it's components > what they are today. If you make them commercial, no matter how, you are > discouraging people to contribute. > Standartisation is a good thing, but use OpenSource standards. They are out > there, you just have to find them. I thought lirc was pretty good at that? > If anyone has to make money with freevo (I could understand that, have to > pay my life too), I woud suggest the donation way. Just look at meedio. > Since it has gone commercial, there doesn't seem to be any further > development. People still use it's free precessor. > > Just my 2 cents on this... > > ToBe ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Freevo-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freevo-users
