我最近改变了接收电视节目的方式，包括更换现有机顶盒。这也意味着更换遥测器。新 遥控器 支持多达四个不同的设备，对我的设备而言是完美的。
娱乐电子设备的遥控不是一个新概念。实际上，Zenith Radio公司在20世界50年代首先提出遥控的概念用于电视设备。第一个这种设备被称为“Lazy Bones”，在遥控器和电视之间采用线连接。无线遥控不久就出现了，从那时开始，工业发展并改善了遥控器设计。根据Wikipedia的遥控器规范，1987年Steve Wozniak建立了CL9公司提出首批遥控器的一种，可以控制多种设备。
每次我得到新的“万能遥控”，都要疲于开发该遥控器的所有控制功能。到此为止，我从没见过一个遥控器能够充分控制所有东西。在最近这次，我的新遥控器和家庭影院系统不兼容。这很奇怪，因为两个遥控器是同一家公司制造。公司既没有给我提供遥控器，也没有制造遥控器，能够通过有效方式使我的两个设备相互通信（打开/关闭系统、调高/调低声音、开关音频和视频输入源）。
新遥控器的另一个缺点是尽管外在支持DVD机，但不能实现向前或向后跳轨，即使有两个按钮在快进和后退钮下面，直觉上 有效并能够满足需要。我的第一反应是想知道软件和设备开发团队怎么能允许这个一个简单而容易修复的疏忽被遗漏，而完成产品设计。每个人都测试设备有效性了吗？还是有更多不明显的设计替换呢？
以多年对这种“相对简单”设备的产品经验，天真的观察者也许想知道为什么通用遥控器不容易配置和使用。我近来处于研究无线遥控器的设计方案和要求的过程中。我的目标是研究能够提供若干让人感兴趣的信息条目。我计划在十月份分享即将到来的Prying Eyes特征遥控器的非明显设计方案。作为我12月上交项目（包括机器人论坛）的一部分，希望研究也能够帮助无线遥控器的使用。
当我和其他人说起的时候，我的经验似乎成为行业标准。似乎解决问题的人都这样购买昂贵的通用遥控器。不知何故，对设备而言似乎不合理，至少是乍看上去显得很简单。我鼓励分享你的见识（或信息源）到方案中来，影响遥控器的 工程 和设计决定。
英文原文：
Engineering decisions: remote controls
Aug 14 2007 12:04PM | Permalink | Email this | Comments (3) |
Blog This! using: Blogger.com | LiveJournal |
Digg This | Slashdot This | add to Del.ICio.us
I recently changed how I receive television programs. The change included switching out my existing set-top boxes for new ones. It also meant switching remote controls. The newer remote control supports up to four different devices—perfect for my setup.
Remote controls for entertainment eleCTRonics are not a new concept. In fact, Zenith Radio Corp introduced the first remote control, intended to control a television, in the 1950s. The first such device, known as the "Lazy Bones," used wires between the remote and the television. Remote controls that did not require wires appeared shortly after that, and the industry has been evolving and improving them ever since. ACCording to the remote control entry in Wikipedia, Steve Wozniak started a company calLED CL9 that introduced one of the first remote controls, in 1987, which could control more than one type of device.
Another shortcoming of the new remote is that despite the explicit support for DVD devices, it does not implement track skip forward/backward, even though there are two buttons directly below the fast-forward and rewind buttons that are available and that intuitively would fill that need. My first gut reaction is to wonder how the SOFtware and device development team could allow such a simple and eaSILy fixable oversight to make it through to the finished product. Does anyone test these devices for usability, or is there something more, like non-obvious design trade-offs, to it?
With decades of production experience for these "relatively simple" devices, the naive OBServer might wonder why universal remotes are not simpler to configure and use. I am now currently in the process of researching the design considerations and constraints for wireless remote controls. My goal is that this research will yiELD several informational itEMS that could be of interest to you. I am planning to share the non-obvious design considerations for remote controls in an upcoming Prying Eyes feature this October. Hopefully this research will also help out in using a wireless remote control as part of my December hands-on project involving robotic platforms.
When I speak with other people, my experience seems to be on par for the industry. It seems that the people who have solved this problem did so by buying expensive universal remotes. Somehow this does not seem reasonable for a device that, at least at first glance, appears to be very simple. I encourage you to share your insights (or informational resources) into the considerations that CAN affect the engineering and design decisions for remote controls.
英文原文地址： http://www.edn.com/blog/1890000189/post/870013087.html
本文关键字：工程 嵌入式系统-技术，单片机-工控设备 - 嵌入式系统-技术
