add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This could get me laughed right off the HB, but its worth a shot.
I was watching my wifeperson try and change the volume on the tv last night and I noticed she was not quite able to line the remote beam up with the photocell. I was laughing because there was a speaker on the floor that was just
in the way of the beam, aparently one of the dogs had bumped it out of place. As obvious as this was to me, she got pissed and gave up.
If the remote had a laser that was "fired off" when touching any button on the remote , the beam could be aimed at the photocell and she could easily align the red dot to the photocell.
To all the female readers: I know I should have got up off my ass and moved the speaker for her. I love her dearly and it was just a small bit that made me laugh.
IR remote repeaters
http://www.crutchfi...dGroup.asp?g=195050
a way to overcome obstacles to IR remote control [csea, Nov 02 2006]
[link]
|
| |
oh, aren't women such silly fluffy creatures!? |
|
| |
Po, this was not a crack at women! I was simply illustrating the situation that spawned the idea, no offence was intended. |
|
| |
you gotta be more convincing than that, buddy. |
|
| |
If I delete the idea, would that convince you? |
|
| |
where's my frying pan? its here somewhere... |
|
| |
as an idea, its seems o.k. I might even vote for it. |
|
| |
have you shown the text to wifeperson? |
|
| |
//have you shown the text to wifeperson?// She arrives home around 7 pm East Coast. When she arrives I will show her the text. Will that convince you? |
|
| |
Love to see that smile! I was starting to get a complex. From this idea to my anno on yours, I was wondering if I should cancel my subscription. |
|
| |
I have much less of a problem with you not moving the speaker than with your last paragraph's suggestion that female readers would sympathize with your wife. Being female doesn't make me an enforcer of social norms in your marriage, technologically inept, or requiring or deserving of chivalry. |
|
| |
That said, this is a fine idea; I'd love for there to be a little laser-aiming add-on to a remote control. Maybe with an optional viewfinder? Another product for the feeble and the militaristic alike! |
|
| |
Po, you made me feel bad enough that I couldn't wait for my wifeperson to get home. I ended up calling her on the phone and reading "Point and Click" to her. She took no offence to the text and also thought it was nice that she was the inspiration for a decent idea. |
|
| |
Jutta, I can see now how the last paragraph does seem like a call for sympathy. That was not my intent. I should take my own advice.. //Think then post//. |
|
| |
<phatic>Here it is, [po], just in case. </phatic> |
|
| |
<scours, rinses, wipes, retreats> |
|
| |
I've often thought that remotes should have the emitter on the underside, so you can see what you're doing and still have the beam aimed toward the photocell. |
|
| |
That's funny, I had the impression that women think that men can't aim... |
|
| |
Infrared remotes (by far the most common) are'nt very directional; they rely upon flooding the room, and reflections can work to convey the coded signals. |
|
| |
There are repeaters available which pick up the signal, and reconvey it directly to the sensor on the A/V equipment. [link] |
|
| |
A laser just makes the job harder (it has to be aimed much more precicely.) |
|
| |
Csea, nice link. For 30 bucks its a great option. |
|
| |
I don't like this idea, because (a) many remotes work even if you face them away from the TV because the signal bounces off the rear wall and thence back at the TV, and (b) if you do such when there's a laser in the remote, it could reflect back into your eye and obviate the need or (use) of changing the channel. |
|
| |
Oh the fun you could have with mirrored walls! |
|
| |