Is the Cox 8820BC0 a JP1.3 remote?

If you have a new remote that isn't recognized by RMIR, post the details here so we can help create a new RDF for it. Or, if there is an issue with an existing RDF or map, this is the place.
phb1342
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:49 pm
Location: Escondido. CA

Prolific Driver & additional comm work

Post by phb1342 »

eferz: the file you referenced, PL 2303_Prolific......v1.5.0.zip, IS the 'updated' driver file I found and used when the Tiao drivers that I used for XP wouldn't work in Win7. That v1.5.0 file produces Prolific driver ver 2.0.2.1. and that's what I have been using throughout this exercise. Which seems to work fine with the other remotes I have tried: RCRP05 & 1056B01

Further, when I previously looked at the Tiao site, it seemed out of date, but did reference a Vista driver, which I did not download since my experience is that many various drivers written for Vista don't work in Win7.

Do you think that any of this has to do with the "chips" issue that Prolific complains about unauthorized copying?? I am pretty sure that I bought my jp1.2/3 cable from DYI and that the driver recommended was/is the Tiao version. Don't know if there is any "chip" issue with the DYI cable.

=============

3FG: thanks for the additional info. I will try that later today or tomorrow.

=============
Now, however, I am going to put this frustration aside, grab my OARP05S, hit the Power button and the PIP button and watch some serious B Ball!!

thanks so much,
phb
eferz
Expert
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:25 am
Location: Austin, Texas

Re: Prolific Driver & additional comm work

Post by eferz »

phb1342 wrote:eferz: the file you referenced, PL 2303_Prolific......v1.5.0.zip, IS the 'updated' driver file I found and used when the Tiao drivers that I used for XP wouldn't work in Win7. That v1.5.0 file produces Prolific driver ver 2.0.2.1. and that's what I have been using throughout this exercise. Which seems to work fine with the other remotes I have tried: RCRP05 & 1056B01

Further, when I previously looked at the Tiao site, it seemed out of date, but did reference a Vista driver, which I did not download since my experience is that many various drivers written for Vista don't work in Win7.

Do you think that any of this has to do with the "chips" issue that Prolific complains about unauthorized copying?? I am pretty sure that I bought my jp1.2/3 cable from DYI and that the driver recommended was/is the Tiao version. Don't know if there is any "chip" issue with the DYI cable.
Yes, that's exactly it. For some reason, I thought you were using a modified CA-42 cable as Tommy recently recommend along with the JP2.1 adapter. These cables (which work for our JP1.x and 2.x remotes) have counterfeit PL-2303 chips inside them which is why the new version of the Prolific drivers didn't work for me. Whereas the DIY cable probably has an authentic PL-2303 chip which is why it works for you.

I guess someone needs to get their hands on a DIY cable with the authentic PL-2303 to figure out why they are not compatible with the JP1.4 & 2.x remotes.
Remotes; JP1.2: Comcast URC-1067, JP1.3: Insignia NS-RC02U-10A, JP1.4 OARI06G, JP2.1: Cox URC-8820-MOTO (still trying to figure out how to make them self-aware.)
phb1342
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:49 pm
Location: Escondido. CA

JP2Sniffer data re: 8820 Remote

Post by phb1342 »

3FG: thanks for the additional info. A word doc is here:

http://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload ... e_id=10830

Let me know if the format isn't acceptable and what would be better....

thanks,
phb
3FG
Expert
Posts: 3434
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 11:48 pm

Post by 3FG »

Format is fine. It seems that the remote is able to receive messages from the program, but the programs don't receive the correct responses. For example, when you click End Comm, the remote blinks twice. It is supposed to do that, and so that strongly suggests that the End Comm command was received. The GetInfo command generates a response--it's not the correct response (wrong values and 7 bytes instead of 8), but it is the same using RMIR or using JP2Sniffer.

I've uploaded a revised version of JP2Sniffer (still in \Tools\Programs) that doesn't crash when GetSigBlk is responded to incorrectly.

One thing to try is to start JP2Sniffer, click to LowLevel, click Begin Comm and check that the buttons don't respond on the remote. That tells us that the remote did receive the Begin Comm command. Then clicking End Comm should get two blinks and the remote should respond to keypresses.

Another possible more interesting check: Start JP2Sniffer, click to LowLevel, click Begin Comm, click GetInfo, and then manually enter 62CC into the text box just to the right of the GetSigBlk button. 62CC is the correct address for the Signature block. Then click GetSigBlk, and I hope that the remote will respond with a fairly long (44) set of bytes. We know what those bytes should be, and it may be possible to guess what is going wrong in receiving from the remote by comparing the actual to expected.

I believe this is the first attempt to use the DIY interface with JP2 remotes. I suspect that the drivers and chips are OK (since they work with JP1.3 remotes) but perhaps the components that translate RS-232 levels to 3 volts aren't well suited for JP2 remotes.
phb1342
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:49 pm
Location: Escondido. CA

Still working.....

Post by phb1342 »

Thanks, 3FG -- you're up late....

Will try this tomorrow, Sunday.

thanks
phb
phb1342
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:49 pm
Location: Escondido. CA

jp2Sniffer ver 1.1 results: 8820 Comm, DYI Cable, PL driver

Post by phb1342 »

3FG:

Here are the updated results, I hope following your instructions:

http://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload ... e_id=10833

Let me know if I need to do more (or less...)

& thanks!

Summary:
Button response: exactly as you stated
62CC entry: yes, a long string produced, but also a warning message in bottom panel (see file)
phb
3FG
Expert
Posts: 3434
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 11:48 pm

Post by 3FG »

OK, I think that pretty much assures us that the remote is receiving commands from the computer OK, but the path to the computer when reading from the remote is very unreliable. Here's the comparison of the response versus expected for the 8820, including my guesses of how the bytes may have lined up.

Code: Select all

00 2C 32 35 33 36 30 32 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 08 00 62 CB 62 F8 F7 FF F8 00 FF FF 02 00 FF FF FF FF 
00 09 32    4D 26 13 92    20 02 20 02 20 02 20 02 20 02 20 02 20                         42 00 AC 4E E1 F7 F8       FF 02    FF FF E7 00
I think the first thing to try is to make sure that the remote has nice fresh alkaline (not rechargeable) batteries, to make sure that there is plenty of voltage. If that doesn't work, and you have a way to identify weak batteries (or have rechargeables), try those.

If neither of those approaches work, probably some of the resistors inside the DIY interface need to be tweaked in value. Of course, getting an interface from Tommy may be the best course of action....
mdavej
Expert
Posts: 4631
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 7:08 am

Post by mdavej »

3FG wrote:...I suspect that the drivers and chips are OK (since they work with JP1.3 remotes) but perhaps the components that translate RS-232 levels to 3 volts aren't well suited for JP2 remotes.
I think you are on to something. I seem to remember Tommy telling me something about the authentic prolific chips having the wrong or inverted voltage levels when testing the various nokia cables. This may be related.
phb1342
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:49 pm
Location: Escondido. CA

Fresh Batteries -> same data dump

Post by phb1342 »

I checked the batteries in the remote -- they were 1.5 + but replaced with new Duracells, which are at 1.5++

I redid the 62CC test, but the resultant data was identical to what I sent earlier.

(I was reluctant to change the batteries because the original batteries were official UEI batteries, "Designed with UEI Technology.")

But, in the interest of science, I did it!

Now, however, did I read that Tommy is not making cables any more??

Any further thoughts would be appreciated.

thanks again,
phb
tonydix
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:01 pm

Any progress on this

Post by tonydix »

I have one of these remotes and cannot find the appropriate rdf file. Has this problem been resolved ?
Thanks
Tony
3FG
Expert
Posts: 3434
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 11:48 pm

Post by 3FG »

Install RMIR 2.03 Alpha, and use the RDF files linked to on the announcement page.

The actual problem seen in this thread is the USB to serial interface cable. Cables based on the Prolific chipset (Tiao and DIYgadget) don't work with MAXQ microcontrollers. It is necessary to use a cable based on FTDI chips.
tonydix
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:01 pm

Post by tonydix »

The 2.03 Alpha and the suggested rdf files have got me talking to the remote. I can now seek to construct an upgrade.
Many Thanks to 3FG.
Tony
phb1342
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:49 pm
Location: Escondido. CA

Belated Update.....

Post by phb1342 »

3FG wrote:Install RMIR 2.03 Alpha, and use the RDF files linked to on the announcement page.

The actual problem seen in this thread is the USB to serial interface cable. Cables based on the Prolific chipset (Tiao and DIYgadget) don't work with MAXQ microcontrollers. It is necessary to use a cable based on FTDI chips.
Exactly....

I recently pulled my jp 'box of stuff' out of the cabinet to find and program a 6131 for three audio only devices and noticed the URC-8820BC1 Cisco remote looking so lonely.

Since the difficulties noted in the above posts, I have built a T Tyler cable. I tried this with the T Tyler 5 pin adapter and it works perfectly. Just for drill I made two new devices for the 8820, a SqueezeBox with presets, and a custom Yamaha code. Both added fine and work as expected.

The Prolific chipset cables do work for other remotes, but not this one!

I am too satisfied with the OARP05S and RCRP05B to consider further work with this version of the 8820.

But, thanks again for all that hand holding.
phb
Post Reply