The Homey Community has been moved to https://community.athom.com.
This forum is now read-only for archive purposes.
How is the IR beam of Homey or Which remote shall I choose?
We need to simplify the remote chaos we have so we needed a
universal remote. Amazon had a great Black Friday deal for two of the Logitech
remotes. As the stock and the timeframe
was limited I had no time to proper decision I bought both remotes. They are
still unopened but soon I should return the unwanted one. I believe I
understand the most of pros and cons but not sure which one would work with/complement
better Homey. So I have this two:
Harmony companion | Harmony touch | |
Has WiFi connection | Decorative | |
Strong IR | Minimal visual and actual footprint | |
Wide IR characteristic | More `buttons` as it has touch screen interface | |
Long battery life | ||
The API is limited (I haven`t seen it but been told) | Lower battery lifetime | |
The IFTTT does not have trigger channel | Less impact/scratch resistant | |
Not too decorative | ||
1-2 extra things taking space on the shelf |
Personally I like the Harmony touch as in that case the (not
too nice) IR blaster(s) would not take extra space on the shelf. However I am concerned
about the IR characteristic of the Homey. Does it have good vertical signal (as
most of the chips are on the horizontal plane)? Is it strong enough to send/receive
indirect signals (bounced back from walls or ceiling)?
I have no closed cabinet everything is open but the TV would be well above
Homey. Also media center has the IR window on the front so if Homey is on the
same shelf would not have direct view on the media center`s IR receiver. If you
got your Homey could you please help me? It would be greatly appreciated.
Comments
You mention 'Lower battery lifetime' for it, but I think you shouldn't worry about that. We generally put it in its charger overnight, but sometimes we forget that but we never had it failing because the battery was drained.
But I have a Harmony Smart Control and tbe range of the hub and blasters is incredible, so that would be a great choice also
Yes I know the video. But please consider that the ring has a tilt and the guys climbed up to a gallery so that could mean that Homey has a very tight beam. In this way Homey could have a direct view on the TV:
Of course it was a prototype and not the mass produced Homey, so that is why I would like to know how is the final product. This exercise is strictly not about questioning the quality of Homey or anything like that. Just want to know if has a narrow beam meaning no good vertical IR distribution or how strong the IR beams when it does not have straight view (if it is good than the first question is irrelevant). This would help to decide if I need the IR blaster or not.
Just because something can shoot 7m in straight line that does not mean it can do 3.5m+3.5m with bouncing as there is serious absorption factor.
This is why the indirect IR strength is important for me. I don`t think that my situation is unique:
My blaster is facing down onto the cupboard. The beam is maybe (probably?) wider then Homey's but still...
It has to blast onto something to reflect back to the front of my tv.
If it goes to the opposite wall and back, that's 4m + 4m. If it goes down, it has to reflect on the cupboard, then up to the ceiling and then back to the tv.
Either way, it's normally not a straight narrow line, so you should always have enough surfaces to bounce off I guess.
However this is what I wish to avoid as the functionality of the Harmony companion is limited. Just as @DaneeDeKruyff I would also like the Touch (which does not have hub or blaster). And here I need help: @Athomey How strong is the bounced IR beam of Homey? If for example standing before homey can it still turn on the TV?
Seems like you have the perfect arrangement, the sort of I was talking about as you home sits behind front plane of the TV and don`t have direct view on you DVD player/amplifier/not sure what is it. If you decide to pair your remote with homey, could you please let me know your findings? Thanks again.