I use my phone as a remote control occasionally. It's terrible, because there are no physical buttons, so you have to keep looking at the phone screen instead of the thing you're controlling. There's an interface that lets you use swipe gestures as well, and that's still far inferior to a simple remote with physical buttons.

That's what I love about most of the Logitech Harmony remotes. They have the touchscreen for things like switching between activities and devices, where you could have more than fit on a single screen (paginated). Then they have hard buttons for device/activity specific functions (all illuminated on some versions). Sure they have their own problems (for some), but I think they do a great job of combining the hard and soft buttons.

Totally agree that an ergonomically well designed remote with a small number of functions will provide a superior 'eyes off' UX. But it has sadly been quite some time since that description applied to any of the remotes I regularly actually use.

You know, I think the Roku remote comes close: https://image.roku.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Roku-...

Unfortunately, their remotes are inconsistent between Roku devices. For example, some come with this layout: http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41WCaJRUARL._AC_UL320_.... Why the hell is it a good UX to include these proprietary buttons on there? I have an older version of it that includes Block Buster!

They also have a phone app that I use frequently. It's not bad, but lacks the * button, making it impossible to turn off subtitles.

Lastly, their remotes really need a way to control the TV power and volume. I hate having two remotes, one of which is just to turn the TV on/off. I believe the new Apple TV does have this feature, but of course it doesn't have Amazon Video so that's a no-go for me.

I have a Roku 3 and I like their remote - small and simple.

Yep - one of the reasons I could never get along with the Chromecast. Roku is far better as it has an actual tactile remote.

"It vibrates and makes sound when you use it, so if feels similar to a conventional remote."

I had to laugh at this. What kind of remote have these people been using?

It's weirdly phrased, but I think they're talking about haptic feedback to simulate the feeling of a physical button.

I think maybe they mean what used to be a physical button click sound and feel, some feedback is important :)

It can be incredibly convincing too, for example using the steam controller with headphones. I've had it for months and only just realized what I thought was a physical detent in the trigger was actually adjustable haptic feedback.

Yes, this is an expensive product with a niche market, but you are missing the fact that:

"The Huis is part of Sony’s new business creation program, First Flight [1][2], a crowdfunding program for new products designed by Sony employees."

Google Translate is not working very well for the page, but it seems that the product has been crowdfunded, and therefore pre-sold. This is not a regular Sony product, and it may never make it out of Japan.

If you can forget about its price, this is a beautiful product, seems functional and I wouldn't hesitate to give it a try it to replace all of my remote controls (2) if it was given to me for free.

[1]https://first-flight.sony.com/

[2] http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/1/8874943/sony-crowdfunding-p...

It's nice that they have stuff like this going on, I miss 'Weird Sony'.

I was wondering if I would be the only one to use the phrase "weird Sony" (first I ever heard it was from the Verge, describing...well, weird Sony)

I can see lots of benefits in using e-ink for this kind of ambient interface. But the price point is just appalling and consumers should just reject this out of hand. You could get a Nexus 7 for that price. Why is e-ink still so expensive?

Welcome to the world of high end remotes. I have a pair of fifteen year old MX500 that cost about that new. The current MX850 model lists at $400 MSRP but you can buy online for around $275, that's about one tier more expensive and fancy.

Full customization is expensive no matter the display technology. A lot of work goes into the software.

(edited to add, if you look at an ancient MX500 or a modern MX850, you can also see tactile vs display is a long solved problem ... just put rows of buttons along a column of displayed names. This has been solved so long, that any patents have probably run out by now. Basically hand held aircraft MFD.)

Please come out with reasonably priced e-ink monitors soon. It would really save our eyes and allow us to work outside. I swear there's a conspiracy against them. The only one I've been able to find is this and its almost $1000. http://www.dasung.com.cn/

I wonder if they'll do state management like the Logitech Harmony series does. For example if I tell it to switch to PS3, it will ensure the TV is on, set to the correct input, and that the receiver is on, also on its correct input. The remote knows what it already did, so it only takes the minimal actions to reach the desired state. Similarly I can press the off button and it turns off everything it turned on.

This is probably my biggest problem with the Harmony remotes—since there's no feedback, the state management gets out of sync. Which usually means drilling into the menus to get it back into sync or getting into the troubleshooting wizard and answering a bunch of yes/no questions.

After 3 different Harmony remotes this is really what killed it for me.

In an ideal world, this is where HDMI-CEC would come in. A device can broadcast requests up and down the chain based on remote inputs, so it can request different links be turned on (TV and/or AVR, for instance), handle switching inputs, and handle other elements like menu navigation and volume.

Sadly, the spec sucks and most OEMs don't ship fully-compatible equipment (for example, the PS3 reliably will not turn off my TV, but will turn off my AVR).

The Harmony approach is only a problem if you use other remotes at the same time. Even then it works out fine if the devices have "absolute" codes - eg separate codes for power on and power off, separate codes for each input (vs a "next input"). Many do have the codes, even if the remote control doesn't apparently show them.

Pressing the Help button usually recovers, asks if everything is ok, and if not asks about each item.

But given the choice between using 3 remotes (or 3 screens on a device like in the article), plus having to remember things (eg which inputs on receivers and TVs are correct), versus the occasional Harmony fail, the Harmony wins every time.

Admittedly I've also tended towards the lower end less complex models.

In a world where everyone can have a personalized remote in their smartphone, smart remotes are a tough product to justify making. A Bluetooth IR blaster and app should win on capability and usability and be much much cheaper.

>A Bluetooth IR blaster and app should win on capability and usability

Without physical buttons, phone-based remotes won't win on usability.

Physical buttons are one dimension of usability that hasn't been decisive in any other product domain where smart mobile devices have replaced dedicated buttons in UI. On the other hand, smart mobile devices add multi-device sync, personalization, persistent configuration and preferences, memory of where you left off, etc. Music players, snapshot cameras, GPSs, etc. all had dedicated physical user interfaces. None were important enough to save those product categories.

I use my phone as a remote, but I'll always miss the feel of physical buttons on a tv-remote. I like to adjust volume, channel, browse etc. etc. without having to take my eyes of the screen.

I went out and got a ray:

https://www.ray.co/

It is pretty, but they use swiping for moving around/changing channels on Roku and it's infuriating. It becomes a workout to do even the most basic of things.

In my experience, swiping is nearly universally horrible UX.

I had a Sony touch screen LCD remote, maybe 15 years ago. I used it for a couple of months and eventually broke out the original remotes - just so I could have actual buttons to push. Looking down at the screen all the time to find the buttons was a hassle.

I keep wondering why TV control is still mostly IR based. How have we not graduated to Z-Wave/ZigBee style control yet? Especially on the high end with all the hubs around the house.

An IR LED is super cheap compared to even the cheapest radio chips. Also you need to have some sort of bonding between the remote and TV or you risk messing up customers with multiple copies of one device in range and that's an extra annoying step.

I understand, but were talking dollars on to an already likely expensive TV. Especially with the market that these remotes live in. Also, all those Z-wave/zigbee type devices are unique ID correct? Shouldn't be an issue with multiple copies.

I'm just thinking we could be so much better at controlling our TVs from a 'connected home' perspective.

It's also dollars with every replacement remote too and means basically every existing fancy remote would need to be replaced. Also if you tie TV to remote what happens when someone inevitably loses their remote?

There's definitely a lot that could be done to integrate TVs etc with connected home but moving everything to radio controlled has it's own small heartaches.

Technology changes over, you can't use the fear of replacing old remotes as the reason not to do it. If that was the case we'd all still be using CRT monitors and VGA only.

Choice is just as good as stability. There is also no reason you can't do both.

Logitech seems to have no problem with doing radio and their little radio receivers.

I'm not saying it's a difficult or particularly hard problem it just costs more and I have a personal dislike for adding more things that require pairing to my life.

That sounds more like an issue with pairing tech being terrible.

On a fundamental level, there's no reason you couldn't pair the device, by pointing your phone at the tv and having some sensor figure out what you want. Maybe it could fall back to sending a code to your TV via infrared, maybe it could show a QR code when it first boots, maybe it has some signal-strength based proximity sensor so that you can tap your phone to the TV to pair it.

Maybe these sorts of device pairings can be backed up in the cloud so that if you replace your phone, they can be transferred to your new one.

Personally, I wish I could control the TV volume with my phone because the TV remote always goes missing, but I always have my phone. In particular having a fingerprint-sensor phone has made using it as a remote less painful since I don't need to enter my PIN, but maybe we will get remotes that work from the lock screen and turn on when you pick them up.

At this point where we always have a communications device in our pocket, I don't see why remotes need to exist at all.

Yeah pairing things can be a pretty annoying process especially if it ever loses pairing.

I've used Xbox Smartglass before which works pretty well as a controller replacement. I haven't tried using my phone as a remote. Do you find yourself having to look at your phone to control stuff?

> Do you find yourself having to look at your phone to control stuff?

Yes, but unlike a regular remote I don't find myself pressing the same button 100 times.

I no longer watch broadcast television, so there is no need to flip through channels to see what is on, I just select what I want to watch on my phone, and then tell my phone to play it on my roku/TV.

The interface could still use a lot of work, but remotes are very clearly stuck in the last century and we've just gotten very used to them.

This would be a breakthrough device if nobody invented the smartphone. If I want a universal remote, why don't I just use the device I have to carry around with me all the time?

So your friends/family/whoever can use it if you're not there? So somebody else can use it while you are?

I have remote apps on my phone, but never use them. I'd much rather use my Logitech one (or even the one the device(s) came with if needed).

So sync to a server that stores your remote layout based on your wifi name/some other criteria?

£169 for a remote control ? it doesn't seem to be aligned with the functional value. But maybe they're just trying to sell it to wealthy people, as another status symbol.

Slightly OT: Would love to have a notebook or computer screen with e-ink just for Vim, the console and coding, assumed it's fast enough. Is there anything like this?

Not afaik, but there's this: https://github.com/kisom/dotconf/blob/master/.vim/colors/ein...

Maybe one of the large e-reader. For example there is an Onyx Boox not released yet that is supposed to be 13.3" 1600x1200 and running Android. Maybe it can be repurposed. I doubt refresh rate is going to cut it though.

> I doubt refresh rate is going to cut it though

You could probably make it quite usable by running xterm in Tektronix emulation mode. Old school vector displays and new e-ink screens behave somewhat similarly, in that you can add content to the screen without actually refreshing.

I'm keen to get rid of my overprice logitech remote, but at first blush I'm not sure this will do the tree. You need at least some physical buttons.

Apart from your aircon - how many people have more than 2-3 IR remotes (TV, PVR & DVD)

TV is dead. IR remotes are awful - but good enough.

And no-one looks at the remote when changing channels.

No one changes channels any more.

The top pay-TV providers account for 94.0 million subscribers [0]. Unless they're all turning on their sets and settling for whatever happens to come up, many people are changing channels.

[0]http://www.leichtmanresearch.com/press/111615release.html

I think what the parent comment is saying is that channel surfing is no longer common. For me, it basically died out when we switched from ~100 analog cable channels to a zillion coming in over a STB that takes forever to change from channel 10 to 11, and then to 12...

This looks like a very slow gadget, thanks to e-ink screen.

Well, as a remote I'd expect you'd not have to CHANGE the screen often, which is where eink excels. I don't sub-sub-sub-menus on my remote. I want everything directly available, and presumably some sort of mode switch to toggle between my different devices. If you combine details from one devices (TV power on, volume Up/down) with another device (roku controls) on a single control screen, then I would only rarely have to switch modes at all.

I've been waiting to see eink used in more places - I recall reading that India had non-smart cell phone handsets that used it for the screen, which seemed a great purpose (display time/date, incoming call number, outgoing call number, none of which require rapid changes in display), but not hearing that it had really gotten anywhere else.

It also doesn't help that there aren't a few tactile buttons for frequently used tasks like FF, REW, Pause, Play, etc.

If you're controlling any type of media player, it is always nice to have those buttons available so you don't have to look down at the remote to input an operation.

"I often like to watch the buttons change on my tv remote. Sometimes I spend hours just staring at the buttons as they move around." -type0

e-ink? So you can't see the buttons in a dark room?

Hope they did some usability tests in this.

The kindle has a built in light, similar to the one on the old Casio watches. E-ink is highly usable in the dark.