And sometimes those macros take a while to run. But they aren't bullet-proof and you need to remember to correctly point the remote at the proper device in order for it to function correctly.
That's fine, and some IR-based remotes are excellent. OK, are you starting to get it? I know that the first scenario is an exaggeration and some of you are yelling at the computer telling me that your IR remote will allow for macros and ease of use.
Major name brand systems have yet to hit the market in sufficient numbers to drive consumer awareness and enthusiasm.More advanced programming leaves them thinking it may be more work than it's worth.
They assume RF remotes are too expensive.They haven't had the chance to experience RF and assume it's just another style of remote.I can only guess that there are several reasons consumers haven't jumped into the RF world in droves: In that sense, third party remotes are always (and should always be) king. That's the equivalent of buying a car and being forced to pay more for an upgraded audio system when you'd just as soon go out and buy your own. Remember, one thing that we DON'T want is for manufacturers to put so much into the remote control that it ends up being a non-removable option which results in more expensive gear. Even with my criticisms, perhaps the best integrated remote is one that is ergonomic, but doesn't drive the cost of the unit through the roof. I have no tolerance for bad remotes - the industry has been around long enough to avoid any of the common errors that plague a bad unit, yet for some reason they seem to always reinvent the wheel… And often times that "wheel" ends up being flat, balding or just plain wrong for its intended use. I've been fixated on IR and RF remote controls for some time now, and it frequently shows in my review critiques.