Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion' started by tivoknucklehead, Feb 14, 2018.
I had better luck using the up button on the bottom right of the Caavo remote.
Hmmmm ... thanks, I'll try that.
Yea, that’s the one I use and it works perfectly every time. No long press required
CEC control for TVs is something we had issues with on the first platform but hope to resurrect in the near future. Got a few higher priorities to focus on at the moment.
Commercial Skip is activated on TiVo remotes with the D or Ch Up button, not FF. If you're watching a program with Commercial Skip, press the UP arrow on the bottom right of the Caavo remote.
Now if you're actually talking about Skip Ahead functionality vs Fast Forward, the default behavior is set under Settings> Devices> TiVo> Control Settings> Ring Gestures. First two options set the default for the REW/FF buttons and also enable the Ring to use a 120 degree swipe for the secondary function.
As for channel changes and unification, voice control is where much of that resides. "watch History Channel", "watch channel 1102", all of the Search/Watch ("watch Big Lebowski") commands are much much faster using voice. Our microphone is very good so you don't even have to lift the remote up to your mouth.
I have been using it with TiVo Mini VOX since buying one on Black Friday.
Qnap Fan: While I understand where the design emphasis is ... I would submit that a more conventional button arrangement (virtual or actual) would INCREASE the versatility and thus global appeal of the remote and system. Case in point, I made this system primarily for the family and mother ... and voice commands are (even in 2019) still fresh and relatively novel. Simply put, the kids are okay with it ... adults I know in general are like ... meh ... and seniors? Very few if any of mothers friends actually feel comfortable or like voice commands. It seems to me that the very segment that would most benefit by this device ... is the one that seems to be glossed over in regards to the hype of new technology.
To give you a rough idea of the kind of numbers I'm talking about ... my mother had large group of her friends over (she is 87 and the group was about 15) ... she showed them the CAAVO based system and for the most part they all liked it ...
Very few raved about the remote ... and almost none liked the voice function as a reliable method of device usage. (Most of them have tried Siri, Alexa, Cortana, etal.) Out of curiosity, I asked one of that generations techie type ... and his response? He said to me ..."Voice is nice, but the paradigm of A.I. assessment and problem solving is the key ... give me Hal or give me a keyboard.
Got it, thanks for the update. Hopefully this makes its way back in at some point.
How many of you are fans of their remote? The corners are downright painful. Do they have support for a third party IR remote? The voice button and hover feature are neato, but assuming their remote controls EVERYTHING is losing proposition. If I could use my own remote, it might be tolerable.
I have no problem with the remote for everyday use. I occasionally need the tv remote to change some settings but other than that I use the Caavo remote exclusively. The only real problem is the sharp corners which are very uncomfortable, but the wife made a short pouch that fits on the remote that mostly alleviates the problem.
That's the thing ... the acknowledged scope of the product seems to be ... universal remote/device changer (up to 4 devices)? If this is design intent, one should consider the global context of how many functions are needed (common and proprietary per device) in lock step with reasonable ergonomic placement. Ideally the linear flow would be something like - determine number of functions common to all usable devices (baseline) configure button layout with most successful arrangement per the users ... then add the unknowable fudge factor ... purpose installed user definable buttons either placed strategically or as a bank of buttons which are color coded or labeled in some way. Then to hedge even one step more ... make ALL the buttons potentially user definable with clear cut variations (double tap? short press? long press?) Shape of the remote? Others have made clear and compelling points on that ...
Then the ace up the sleeve ... the advertised potential (and invitation) to third parties for collaborative designs for remote variations ...
In thinking of an analogy ... the closest I could come to the feeling ... would be something like having to use a "Chicklet" style keyboard sans numeric pad and mouse for a Windows 10 desktop machine... it could be done, but it wouldn't be fun ... all the while knowing that there are better physical input devices for the usage context.
I prefer the Caavo remote to the Apple TV remote. I was never able to get a Harmony product to work as it should, so I'm sticking with the Caavo remote.
Given the comparison, I agree completely ... relative to the (IMHO hideously ineffective Apple TV remote, the Caavo remote is a relative gem by comparison <Apple Remote for me is THE reference standard for bad remote>. As for the Harmony remote, for me its an ambivalent 50/50 ... a pain to set up and justify due to cost, but once working, it did/does a better job at mimicking the functionality of the range of original devices.
The AppleTV is the only device plugged into the Caavo that uses a remote. I have a Chromecast and a pc. i could put away the Caavo remote, but with the Apple remote being what it is, I'll stick with Caavo.
That being said, I've been having issues with the Caavo remote not controlling the Apple after turning everything on. I need to start the Caavo app, and then use the Apple remote to refresh the control setting. It's a PITA.
My Harmony works just fine with my Apple TV and we use it daily. The only downside compared to the Apple TV remote is the fast scrubbing available on that remote.
If you add "Apple TV Beta" as a Harmony device you'll get the scrubbing feature on your Harmony remote. That's the one thing that worked as expected for me.
Whenever I use the voice command on my Caavo and try to tune to a channel (e.g., “Tune to Showtime”), it just goes to a “Top Results” screen and doesn’t tune to the channel. Is there something wrong or something I need to do to get this to work?
That command should work in most situations, however I can think of several technical reasons why it might not. Since this would go way off topic for this thread, I recommend contacting Customer Support so they can look at the details of your equipment, firmware version, and help troubleshoot further.
My biggest complaint with the system is that the remote communicates to the base using bluetooth and all my equipment is on a different floor in a rack (and I control using IP and not IR). I've made a couple requests through support to either open their API or allow customers to populate their control database but to no avail. Right now it's working as a smart HDMI switch using the original remotes, which given I paid $60 for it is something. I don't even know where my Caavo remote is. I've given up on a single physical remote that intuitively controls all devices and while soft remotes can do it, you're stuck with all the downfalls of a soft remote. I do appreciate Caavo's model of trying to make content agnostic from the platform and I think they are the first company to attempt to disrupt the space in quite awhile. Build an IP-based remote, open-source the control library, and I'll put one in every conference room we have.
Nice versatility! ... I was eventually thinking of adding a NUC (Celeron 4100x or higher) for native 4k ... and was thinking that it could be easily integrated into the CAAVO command train? I am guessing that it responds to something like the old Wake Up On Lan protocol? ... or is this hdmi based CEC?
The pc is only hooked into the Caavo in case I need to access it directly. It's only used as a Plex server and handles the HDHomeRun and Channels app. I don't actually play any content directly from the pc. It's mostly "headless".