By accepting this End User License Agreement, you agree to not sell, give or share this copyrighted software in any way to any other party. Doing so will result in full prosecution as allowed by law. This software is meant for your own personal use. Our editor software is exclusive to authorized dealers and professional installers; therefore, URC does not provide programming support. A programming manual for your specific model remote control will be provided for your reference.
BACKGROUND RESEARCH FIRST IMPRESSIONS REMOTE SETUP REMOTE OPERATION CLOSING THOUGHTSBACKGROUND:I still remember my wife telling me with great sincerity that I had made the single greatest upgrade to the home theater setup in our den. It wasn't an HDTV, a subwoofer, a separate power amplifier, or a new set of speakers. It was a universal remote control. My first exposure to a universal remote from Universal Remote Controls (URC) was the OEM version of the SL-9000 that came with my Outlaw Audio Model 950. Prior to that, I had used a Yamaha learning remote (included with my Yamaha receiver in 1997), a UEI Catalyst48 universal remote (included with my Outlaw Audio Model 1050), and a Sony RM-AV2100 (Christmas gift from a friend) before deciding to try out the remote that came with my Model 950. I've been using URC remotes in the den ever since then.I liked the SL-9000, but it wasn't perfect. Of particular concern was the decision to have the navigation keys do double duty as transport controls, which was problematic for DVD players. When I made the decision to get a DVD recorder, I realized that this limitation would become a nearly insurmountable problem and I upgraded to an MX-500. This not only solved the navigation/transport problem, but also improved the situation across the board. It was the MX-500 that my wife declared our single greatest upgrade. When I moved to an MX-700 a couple years later, the upgrade was as much for her as for me. The two extra pages per device, the 10 extra devices, the much more robust macro support, and the software interface allowed me to do much more with it than the MX-500 allowed, but those things also allowed her to use the system more easily.It's been a little over three years since I got our MX-700. I remain very happy with the MX-700, and after three years of heavy use (including a three-year-old and two cats who can bang things around a fair bit) it looks and works as well as ever. The length of some or our macros can create IR aiming problems, however, and I decided to start thinking about upgrading to a URC remote that offered RF support. That led to some research.return to top
FULL Universal Remote MX-900 Editor
Download: https://tinurli.com/2vGNys
RESEARCH:My decision to upgrade my universal remote was based on an interest in adding RF support. Initially, I planned to simply pick up an MX-850 (same chassis and setup software as the MX-700, but with a new navigation pad and RF support). In the process of shopping for the MX-850, however, I came across the newer MX-810. The 810 offers a few things that the 850 doesn't: lithium ion battery, some additional hard buttons, and a color screen that supports longer labels for its six buttons per page. In the process of inquiring about the 810, Mike at Surf Remote suggested the MX-900 because of some extra features it offered and because the software would be much more familiar to me. The prices for the three were not significantly different once you factored in some readily-accessible discounts. Surf Remote couldn't provide me with copies of either the MX-810 or the MX-900 software to test drive (after URC's software distribution policy change in 2006, the only allowed distribution process is from authorized dealers like Surf to owners of remotes), but some past experience with URC's web site and the fact that I had the serial number for my MX-700 allowed me to download software for nearly all of their remotes (including the MX-850 and MX-900) shortly after the policy change, and I used the same procedure to retrieve a copy of the MX-810 software. As a result, I was able to install and familiarize myself with both software packages. After doing that for several days, I put together a list of "pros" and "cons" for all three remotes as well as some notes about the MX-810's software design. MX-850 Pros: MX-850 Cons: Already know software and have file builtFamiliar button layout / interface for familyseparate "select" button in navigation pad disposable batteriesno hard button for recordRS232 interfaceno support for variablesno separate skip buttons MX-900 Pros: MX-900 Cons: USB interface7-character button labels (up from 5 on MX-850)separate "select" button in navigation padseparate buttons for channel and skipbetter softwareexpect support for variables soon (currently in beta testing)"press & hold" macro optionnarrower, easier for smaller hands to useability to turn off LCD screen to save battery power disposable batteries (but can use rechargeable batteries)no hard button for recordnew layout for family to learn MX-810 Pros: MX-810 Cons: USB interfaceLithium ion batteryseparate "select" button in navigation padLonger button labels (multi-line)hard button for recordseparate buttons for channel and skipColor screen? new layout for family to learnSoftware (see notes below)difficult to write macros or set punch-throughs?no support for variablesno "press and hold" macrosMX-810 Software Notes:help file should rely on Windows standard (aids in searching)no ready access to software documentation (unlike MX-900)layers of "helpful" wizardry get in the way of setupactivities don't link to the primary device (requires creating separate device to control same component)can't copy entire pages between devicescan't find where to set punch-through"custom installer" market doesn't match "end-user wizard" feelAs an existing user of URC's MX Editor software, it's not too surprising that I preferred the MX-900's software. The MX-810's software does allow a great deal of customization, but the interface isn't nearly as well-suited to a power user who is likely to want to quickly achieve that sort of customization. My initial reaction to the MX-810's software was dreadful frustration, followed by grudging acceptance of what it could do (once I found the Universal Browser), followed again by frustration at how restrictive its "friendly" interface was. By contrast, the MX-900's software is a very effective refinement of the MX Editor software platform. The 810's move toward an activity-based concept initially intrigued me, until I found that it didn't link back with the device pages at all (requiring you to basically build setups for devices associated with an activity twice). I also ended up finding several uses for the "press and hold" macros on the MX-900 (which the MX-810 and MX-850 lack). The other thing that intrigued me about the MX-900 was the fact that URC had support for variables currently in beta testing on the MX-900. Variable support could be a great way to address the handful of devices I have that lack full discrete on/off support. The combination of macros (to automate complex functions with multiple devices), RF support (to eliminate the need to aim accurately), and variables (to pick up the loose ends left over from macros by the lack of discrete codes) could be sufficient to make operating the home theater almost perfectly automated.The only things that made the MX-810 appealing were the separate record button on the remote, the longer button labels, and the lithium ion battery. The battery charges by plugging it in like a cell phone, not by simply dropping it in a cradle, which I could deal with (I'd just add that charger to the array of other small cables under the computer monitor and plug it in at night every so often) even though it wasn't exactly optimal. I could almost as easily use the battery charger that I already have for our digital camera and charge spare Ni-MH batteries for the MX-900. The longer labels would be handy, but I wasn't sure how easy they'd be to read. That just left the record button. We have only two recorders, one of which (DVD recorder) we almost never use anymore and the other of which (HD cable DVR receiver) we record to almost exclusively via automatic timers. Sticking a "record" button on the LCD screen was an easy step to take and one that we've been doing ever since we got the MX-700 about three years ago.In the end, the MX-900's extra capabilities and the MX-810 software's extra hassles made my decision for me. I'm keeping the MX-700 around, as it's still a great remote, although I plan to revise its programming a bit to make it a "whole-house" jack-of-all-trades (bedroom TV, DVD, and HD cable; dining room two-channel system; kitchen TV/DVD; and at least some devices in the den), but I locked in on using the MX-900 and an MRF-260 (partnered with my existing Xantech IR distribution system) as an RF solution for the big system in the den. That just left ordering it, which got delayed almost a month by a broken femur. That same broken femur combined with a busy work schedule and a week of vacation to delay this review another six weeks or so beyond that.return to top
REMOTE OPERATION:I've enjoyed using the MX-900. It probably helped that I had the programming largely done before it even arrived, so I was able to go straight to using it (the beloved "instant gratification" that is rare when dealing with universal remotes). There is an inevitable learning period, when your fingers re-learn where commonly used buttons like mute, info, pause, and menu now reside, but the layout is sensible enough and similar enough to the MX-700's that the process was relatively painless. The balance and feel of the remote are comfortable, and I have been pleased with the overall feel of the buttons.After all of the work involved in programming the remote, actually using it is almost anti-climactic. In our system, you start out at the main page and can press the "On" button to fire up the entire system for cable TV viewing (the default starting point because that's what the family is most likely to want to do). In addition, each device has a macro set up for the "Off" button that will shut the entire system down (including all components associated with that initial "On" macro as well as whatever device is currently being used and any other components that have discrete "off" commands). The TV will also be left in a state that works for TV viewing (both input and aspect ratio control). I've got devices grouped two ways. "Watch" includes the trusty old VCR, the DVD recorder, the HD-DVD player, the Blu-ray player, the OPPO 983H DVD player, and the cable box, with a few other less-used devices tucked away on page 2 (kitchen TV, HDMI switch, den lights, HDTV, and the SMS-1 subwoofer EQ). "Listen" includes the surround processor (which rarely gets controlled directly), the living room two-channel music system (with both the RR2150 and 980H combined on a single device), the AM/FM tuner, the Roku Labs SoundBridge network media player, OPPO 983H multichannel analog output (for SACD and DVD-Audio playback), and the OPPO 983H digital output (for CD playback). Simply by pressing "On" that first time, macros allow you to subsequently simply select the devices you want to use and let the RF signals make any necessary adjustments (turn devices on, change inputs, and so forth). If I want to access a device page without changing the system, I press and hold the device button and after a second or so the MX-900 will change to that device without sending any signals. In addition, there's a "FIX TV" button on each video device page that has two macros: a "press" that sets the TV to the correct input and a "press and hold" that turns the TV on or off. Since moving to the RF system, we've not needed these, although I use the "press and hold" at times to turn the TV off when trying to get our daughter into bed in the evening (that and mute or pause can simulate a complete system shutdown while still leaving the system running). The RF control has basically eliminated issues with aiming during long macros, which has been great. It has also been good for pausing or re-starting shows from a distance (such as from the kitchen or hallway) when wandering through the house on my walker or sitting at the dinner table. The one thing to be cautious of is unintentional button presses when the remote is in a pocket or between couch cushions, since the RF signal is oblivious to such obstructions. The simple solution there is to switch to a non-RF device if you are walking around with the remote (I've been using the kitchen TV device when carrying the remote in a pouch on my walker) and "press and hold" to change back to the active device when you need to do something. It has taken a bit of getting used to the idea that aiming isn't required, and we still sometimes point the remote toward the TV when using the remote. It doesn't hurt anything, but it is sort of funny to see that familiar habit linger.return to top 2ff7e9595c
Comments