Re: Re: [Development] IREDS

["Ian Lowe" <ian@xxxxxxx>]

> --- In ukha_d@y..., "Ian Lowe" <ian@w...> wrote:
> > Thats a neat idea!
>
> But you have to maintain a mapping of which channel corresponds to
> which device. Fine for techies but not much good for mass market
> appeal. Ditto with using ARP.

Agreed, but thats the same situation as X-10 finds itself in: Users have to
think in terns of House codes and Unit codes.  I know, for instance that F9
is the speakers in the kitchen, whereas F8 is the bedroom curtains.

If the user has to plug in an emitter in zone 2, and uses Channel 3, it's
then a case of going to the abstraction system, whetehr that is
microcontroller itself, or a PC, and saying "Zone 2, Channel 3 is the
"Living Room TV", going further, at this point, you could say
this device is
a Goodmans TV, Model 336NS, which tells the PC/Controllers which IR Codes
to
use for that device, so that simple controls like Volume Up/Down Channel
Up/Down On/Off can be performed straight off the bat without learning..

> > Could you use a single 38Khx oscillator a-la-nigel, pipe it into
> something
> > like an 8-way analog switch IC, then just switch the particular
> line on or
> > off as requried to produce the pulses, or would you need a
seperate
> version
> > of Nigel's IRTX circuit for each channel?
>
> No need for analogue switches. Just use transistors off the outputs
> all commonned with a single oscillator -- since no two outputs will
> ever be active simultaneously.

Thats a design question I suppose: should the system be capable of handling
multiple outputs at the same time?  I had envisioned the central controller
being able to issue many commands at once if needed (so that if, for
instance, a Pronto was chugging away through a macro, you would still be
able to, say control the Sky box to change channels without waiting for it
to finish...)

Ian.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/