| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
The Robman
Site Owner
Joined: 01 Aug 2003
Posts: 21234
Location: Chicago, IL
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 2:03 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| JohnParks wrote: | | Rob, could we start from here? Can I use the 'set' method mentioned by Steve to test the 8 codes for cc? |
If you prefer to use the long winded method, it would work, but you'll ned to open up the file I created in KM to see what the EFCs are first.
If it were me doing it, I'm much to lazy to do all that button pushing when it's not needed. Personally, I'd just create an upgrade with those 8 codes assigned to the numeric buttons and test them by pressing each numeric button once. It's sure alot easier than doing all that SETUP-nnn stuff. (Before we had JP1, that's how we all found secret codes, so I am very familar with using that method).
_________________
Rob
www.hifi-remote.com
Please don't PM me with remote questions, post them in the forums so all the experts can help! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JohnParks
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 60
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks Rob, that's exactly what what i did... then assigned them to the 1-8 keys. Except for one they did absolutly nothing. I was just curious about the 'set' method. My first experience using RM and the file you sent answered a ton of questions. KM is great, but the different perspective RM offered was very constructive. Thanks again!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Robman
Site Owner
Joined: 01 Aug 2003
Posts: 21234
Location: Chicago, IL
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So what was the one that did something, and what did it do?
_________________
Rob
www.hifi-remote.com
Please don't PM me with remote questions, post them in the forums so all the experts can help! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JohnParks
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 60
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Robman wrote: | | So what was the one that did something, and what did it do? |
OBC 62, (EFC 062) toggled the program grid |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JohnParks
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 60
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hay Rob,
What would be the best way to macro the cc function? When this option is presented (Closed Caption: > Off/On/Mute < ) the current state in shown then using the right/left arrow keys another can be selected. I'm thinking toadtog, but doesn't mean an extender? I'm using a urc-6131 (tv0702-necx2,cable/1477-panasonic (old),dvr1614-replayTV-advanced) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Robman
Site Owner
Joined: 01 Aug 2003
Posts: 21234
Location: Chicago, IL
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You can use Toadtog without an extender, but I'm not an expert with Toadtog, so you'll need toget help with it from someone else.
_________________
Rob
www.hifi-remote.com
Please don't PM me with remote questions, post them in the forums so all the experts can help! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JohnParks
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 60
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2004 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks anyway Robman, you've been a big help with jp1. I'll do some more research on toadtog and then start a new topic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
streetskater
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 75
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rob,
Well I finally broke down and got digital cable. I must say there is a real disparity in the kind of menueing and organizing capability you get from region to region. My mother down in Texas had really nice menus and remote function. Here in NYC Time-Warner sucks hard. Actually the channel organizing through my old Showstopper 2000 is better than that Scientific Atlanta box with it's weak UR5-8400 remote--and they have the nerve to call THAT a Universal remote! and their website is | Code: | | www.universalremote.com |
. which is a near blasphemy
Anyway I loaded your Scientific Atlanta Explorer Master.txt into KM 8.31 and I had some problems with it. It's OBC defined but there are no byte-2 definitions in the Function worksheet. I actually thought with these quick combo protocols that all the OBC's within a known range have discrete Hex codes making the byte-2 entries unnecessary. But without the right entry 1, 2, or 3--the upgrade just doesn't work for my 15-2117. I downloaded Jeff Van Ness's Scientific Atlanta Explorer 2000HD in the files/cable section on Yahoo to get the Dev#'s per OBC-- that make it work.
BTW:
OBC 45, dev#3, EFC 119, Hex B7-- is "Help" on my box.
Edited to ADD:
Just a little follow-up. I'm only seeing this problem with KM. RM calculates the discrete Hex values just fine with nothing more than the OBC. I noticed that you created the upgrade with KM 8.09 so I ran it with that version and still saw the problems above.
For example if I enter OBC 45 for the "Help" function-- without defining the Dev# I wind up with;
OBC 45, EFC 111, Hex B4 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Robman
Site Owner
Joined: 01 Aug 2003
Posts: 21234
Location: Chicago, IL
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The S/A cable box uses the Panasonic (Old) protocol, which is a mini-combo that lets you combine up to three different device codes. In KM, if you leave the 2nd and 3rd device code blank (as Jeff did in his upgrade) KM will default those device codes to the 1st device code. Therefore, in Jeff's upgrade, all three device codes are 27, which is also the case with my master file.
If all three device codes are 27, it doesn't matter which one you pick in the byte2 column.
I thought that KM would default to the 1st device code if you left the byte2 column blank, but it does appear that leaving it blank results in a different hex code. So, try entering a 1, 2 or 3 in the byte2 column with my master file and see if that works.
Btw, thanks for the HELP code, OBC 45 was not part of the master file.
_________________
Rob
www.hifi-remote.com
Please don't PM me with remote questions, post them in the forums so all the experts can help! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
streetskater
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 75
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Robman wrote: | | Btw, thanks for the HELP code, OBC 45 was not part of the master file. |
Well TPTB in a Remote Dimension can't keep any secrets from us when we have our combined accumulated knowledge, computer interfaces, and learning remotes.
I'm still puzzled by the behavior I'm seeing in KM. You're quite right, of course, that all three devices are defined as 27 but plug in 3 different Dev#'s and you'll get 3 different hex codes. Jeff's code, as it loads on my version of Excel 2003 actually has specific Dev#'s associated with each OBC code. If I change those number--even to an identical iteration of dev 27 then I get the "wrong" upgrade code. This totally makes no sense to me but I'll wager it's a gremlin in KM that only manafests under extremely specific circumstances. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnsfine
Site Admin
Joined: 10 Aug 2003
Posts: 4766
Location: Bedford, MA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 5:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
There are four possible values for the part of the hex command controlled by the byte2 column. Three of them select among the three device numbers on the setup sheet and one of them computes a (normally useless) signal from just the hex cmd, ignoring the fixed data.
I don't recall which of the four numbers does which thing in KM. But you could compare to RM. I'm pretty sure I fixed the protocols.ini in RM long ago to get those right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Robman
Site Owner
Joined: 01 Aug 2003
Posts: 21234
Location: Chicago, IL
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| streetskater wrote: | | I'm still puzzled by the behavior I'm seeing in KM. You're quite right, of course, that all three devices are defined as 27 but plug in 3 different Dev#'s and you'll get 3 different hex codes. Jeff's code, as it loads on my version of Excel 2003 actually has specific Dev#'s associated with each OBC code. If I change those number--even to an identical iteration of dev 27 then I get the "wrong" upgrade code. This totally makes no sense to me but I'll wager it's a gremlin in KM that only manafests under extremely specific circumstances. |
Define "wrong". If you change the byte2 code, you will indeed change the hex code, but the signal generated should still be the same (with the exception of when youleave byte2 blank, but that willg et fixed).
Jeff doesn't specify byte2 values, he coded his file using EFCs which by their very nature have the byte2 value encoded in them.
_________________
Rob
www.hifi-remote.com
Please don't PM me with remote questions, post them in the forums so all the experts can help! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
streetskater
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 75
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Robman wrote: | Define "wrong". If you change the byte2 code, you will indeed change the hex code, but the signal generated should still be the same (with the exception of when youleave byte2 blank, but that willg et fixed).
Jeff doesn't specify byte2 values, he coded his file using EFCs which by their very nature have the byte2 value encoded in them. |
Rob,
I'm sure you're right on both accounts. I actually only verified a wrong signal for the 'byte2=null' case. Like forensic scientists we must "assume nothing" 
John,
I hope you didn't take my post as any kind of criticism of your efforts with KM. Given how complex that "application" has become and given the fact that it all must be maintained within Excel--it's AMAZING how reliable it actually is across so many possible combinations of remotes, protocols and special features. It's gotta be a "labor of love" is all I can think |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnsfine
Site Admin
Joined: 10 Aug 2003
Posts: 4766
Location: Bedford, MA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| streetskater wrote: |
John,
I hope you didn't take my post as any kind of criticism of your efforts with KM. |
I think you're confusing which expert is which.
My development efforts with KM were long ago and trivial. I don't think I was ever even the third most involved expert in KM. Now I'm barely even an experienced user with KM.
I was trying to answer just based on my knowledge of the Panasonic old executor in the remote, not based on knowledge of how KM translates the byte2 value into the four possible values that go to that executor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
streetskater
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 75
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmm, It's Mark does all the grunt work for KM I guess?
What I know is all the experts, past and present , in all areas know a lot more about nearly everything than I do.
I gotta comment again about how BAD Time-Warner's channel management is for their digital cable. You have hundreds of channels to peruse and you get about 4 channels per viewing page with all the ads--it's not like that with every provider. Even though duplicating the SA8400 remote has been pretty fast and painless it's not a device I foresee using much at all. The channel management within Replay is WAY better.
On the plus side my Home Theatre finally rocks with the new hookup. I mean literally. The subwolfer shakes the entire building on the Special Effects. I can't wait for the Pompeii special coming end of this month |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
File Section
Wiki
