JP1 Remotes

Capn Trips · Expert Joined: 03 Oct 2003 Posts: 3990

I thought I had all of this figured out pretty well, but...

Trying to program my 2117 with this device upgrade (which I created, Embarassed

so this is doubly embarrassing) and some unique (to me)behavior has emerged.

First, I originally built this upgrade using KM and a 1994. It uses NEC1 Combo protocol and has about half the functions using no subdevice and the remainder use subdevice 24. Now I'm trying to use RM and upgrade my 2117 and here's what's happening.

I took RM and opened the upgrade, selected 2117 as my remote and jiggled a few button assignments around, pasted it over to IR and uploaded to the remote.

When testing the upgrade, I noticed that only those functions with sub-device 24 worked, while those with no subdevice did not. Fair enough - I head over to RM and notice that RM had automatically inserted subdevice 0 for those functions with no subdevice. I tried to delete the 0 and RM won't allow me to leave that field blank. Confused

I switch to KM and look at the same upgrade. Here I am allowed to either leave the subdevice column blank or enter a number. I would not have expected the 0 vs. blank to make a difference, but I note that the hex code is indeed affected by this change. For example for power on, the "no subdevice" hex is 18 EF, but if I put in a zero for subdevice, I get FF EF. Confused

In RM, all of the "no subdevice" codes indeed show the FF xx rather than the 18 xx that I get in KM - obvously due to the 0 entry.

So this is a long-winded intro to the bottom line question - how do I enter a "blank" in the subdevice column in RM for an upgrade using the NEC1 Combo protocol?

Of course I could just do this in KM, but that's less fun. Razz

Also, in the course of this, I have noticed that in KM when I modify the upgrade for the 2116/2117, it calls for adding a protocol upgrade as well as a device yupgrade to the remote, while in RM, onlly a device upgrade is generated. I always thought that RM was just another way to generate the same code for copying to IR for uploading to the remote as KM does, so I naturally figured that if a protocol upgrade is required, that should be a function of what is resident in the remote's RAM, not what program one uses to create the upgrade. Confused

Can an expert explain the seeming disconnect - why does KM generate a protocol upgrade while RM does not for the same device/remote combination?

Capn Trips · Expert Joined: 03 Oct 2003 Posts: 3990

Following up ... through trial and error I have discovered that a subdevice of 231 Surprised

yields the desired 18 xx Hex code for those functions with no subdevice and the upgrade now works. Very Happy

So I'm going with that, BUT my previous questions remain:

(1) How (or Why not) can one enter a blank for the subdevice in RM for a device upgrade using NEC1 Combo protocol? Confused

(2) Why does KM generate a vastly different upgrade than RM? Fixed data are different, protocol ID is different, and KM generates a protocol upgrade while RM does not. It appears that RM generates a much more compact upgrade. Aren't they supposedly interchangeable? Rolling Eyes

johnsfine · Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 9:45 am Post subject:

(1) In the NEC protocol the way the lack of a subdevice is represented is by using a value equal to 255 minus the device number in the part of the signal where the subdevice normally goes.

Whoever programmed KM for this protocol knew that and included code in KM to compute that value when the subdevice was left blank.

Whoever programmed RM for the same protocol (it might have been me. I don't recall) either forgot that detail or found it too hard to impliment using RM's generic features (and didn't want to take the time to write custom Java code for that detail).

(2) There are often several different ways to create an upgrade for the same set of signals. Usually we try to use built in protocols when possible and to make upgrades smaller when possible. Since KM and RM are developed seperately, we don't always duplicate such things.

Capn Trips · Expert Joined: 03 Oct 2003 Posts: 3990

Mark Pierson · Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 2:39 pm Post subject:

That KM upgrade is using the hacked version of the 'NEC Combo' protocol. If you select the 'NEC1 Combo (Official)' protocol, the protocol upgrade goes away (for the 2117/2116 remote), and the device upgrade is identical to the on produced by RM (which is apparently choosing the "Official' version of the protocol when opening the KM file).
_________________
Mark