我最近改變了接收電視節目的方式，包括更換現有機頂盒。這也意味著更換遙測器。新支持多達四個不同的設備，對我的設備而言是完美的。

　　娛樂電子設備的遙控不是一個新概念。實際上，Zenith Radio公司在20世界50年代首先提出遙控的概念用於電視設備。第一個這種設備被稱為“Lazy Bones”，在遙控器和電視之間采用線連接。無線遙控不久就出現了，從那時開始，工業發展並改善了遙控器設計。根據Wikipedia的遙控器規範，1987年Steve Wozniak建立了CL9公司提出首批遙控器的一種，可以控製多種設備。

　　每次我得到新的“萬能遙控”，都要疲於開發該遙控器的所有控製功能。到此為止，我從沒見過一個遙控器能夠充分控製所有東西。在最近這次，我的新遙控器和家庭影院係統不兼容。這很奇怪，因為兩個遙控器是同一家公司製造。公司既沒有給我提供遙控器，也沒有製造遙控器，能夠通過有效方式使我的兩個設備相互通信（打開/關閉係統、調高/調低聲音、開關音頻和視頻輸入源）。

　　新遙控器的另一個缺點是盡管外在支持DVD機，但不能實現向前或向後跳軌，即使有兩個按鈕在快進和後退鈕下麵，直覺上 有效並能夠滿足需要。我的第一反應是想知道軟件和設備開發團隊怎麼能允許這個一個簡單而容易修複的疏忽被遺漏，而完成產品設計。每個人都測試設備有效性了嗎？還是有更多不明顯的設計替換呢？

　　以多年對這種“相對簡單”設備的產品經驗，天真的觀察者也許想知道為什麼通用遙控器不容易配置和使用。我近來處於研究無線遙控器的設計方案和要求的過程中。我的目標是研究能夠提供若幹讓人感興趣的信息條目。我計劃在十月份分享即將到來的Prying Eyes特征遙控器的非明顯設計方案。作為我12月上交項目（包括機器人論壇）的一部分，希望研究也能夠幫助無線遙控器的使用。

　　當我和其他人說起的時候，我的經驗似乎成為行業標準。似乎解決問題的人都這樣購買昂貴的通用遙控器。不知何故，對設備而言似乎不合理，至少是乍看上去顯得很簡單。我鼓勵分享你的見識（或信息源）到方案中來，影響遙控器的和設計決定。

　　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：