Home› AMX User Forum› AMXForums Archive Threads› AMX Applications and Solutions› VisualArchitect

Devices - Thumbs Down

[Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
in VisualArchitect
Post what you don't like about the device and connection manager in this thread. :(

Comments

  • Spire_JeffSpire_Jeff Posts: 1,917
    Inability at this point to add relay and IO devices. Not really tough to code in most cases, just would be nice to have documentation reflect this.... especially when determining total relays/IOs needed.

    Jeff

    (reposting this here for organization)
  • Spire_JeffSpire_Jeff Posts: 1,917
    I can't seem to find the ability to set inputs and outputs via codebuilder for the autopatch BCS switcher. I see that I can raise and lower volume and gain, but where do I set which input/output this command affects? I also don't see any commands to allow me to switch which input is being sent to which outputs.

    I see that the same is true of the VAUX switcher.

    Without the ability to set which output is currently being handled, how do I create a touchpanel to control multiple rooms (MODE navigation) using a switcher? I personally would like to make it so that when the room is choosen in the MODE nav, I set the current output control of the system to match the output for the room. Then, when I pick a specific device, I want the system to automatically switch the matching input to be the feed for the current output.

    Is this more than VA can handle at this time because of the posibility of multiple touchpanels? Or is VA capable of tracking current control variables by touchpanel?

    Jeff
  • Spire_JeffSpire_Jeff Posts: 1,917
    Is there anyway to add a second processor simply for the ports it provides? Depending on how many additional ports you need, it can be more cost effective and it allows you to connect via IP. I understand that you can't split the programming between two processors, but it shouldn't be that difficult to refer to a port on a different processor.

    Just a thought,
    Jeff
  • ImpaqtImpaqt Posts: 155
    Devices database is rediculously small...

    I've seen the DDDP workaround for adding placeholders.... Why not just have a Placeholder device? One that you can drop in and it asks you if its an IR, RS-232, or Ethernet controlled device... You can Name it there with Manufacturer and Device model.... THEN, once you get your system laid out, you can Click that placeholder device to open up the IR Capture or RS-232 Device editior..... Too much Back and forth in this program...

    Adding Devices.....

    No Way to add IR Codes that are not inthe template.......

    RS-232 Devices.....
    Huh? Tookme a while to figure out how to add basic Transport controls like Play FF, REW etc.... Again.. Too slow and repetitive a process.... your ALWAYS going to need a Play, Stop, Pause, FF, REW, FWD Trk, REV Trk, Why doesnt the String field populate all these automaticall when you drop the setdisctransport in?

    Fixed Header and Terminator Selection? Integra Codes for Example... THey all Start with !2 for DVD Players.... But I cant add that to the header.... minor annoyance there.. but still....

    THis program seems like its going to create a HUGE amount of work for me to get it implemented before it can save me any time at all.....

    From the Demonstrations, I figured I could give this to my sales guys so they could at least drop in the Processor they quoted and devices to give me a starting point..... Not even close.....

    Being that I'm in the middle of a couple substantial programming jobs right now... THis is getting shelved until the next revision most likely.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Hi Impaqt,

    You have a lot of good points that we will try to address in future releases. There are several planned improvements to Control String Definitions to improve usability, and I like your idea for a placeholder device that could take you straight into the IR or Control String area.
  • TryllTryll Posts: 33
    I have to agree with Impaqt. VA currently doesn't actually let us do anything new, and is so restrictive we can't even help AMX ease it into our workflow.

    There is no time savings to be gained currently with VA either, unless perhaps by some truly odd set of circumstances, VA has support for every device you are using, and the touch panel it supplies is exactly what you need. Other than that, using VA on a project will only cost you time.

    Example - in trying to set up the devices for my office (about 4 IR, and 2 serial), it wasn't possible to set up the device, or panel for any of them the way one would want to actually have it. I had to use TPD4 and IRedit, and Studio to do anything it all with it - the entire process would have been MUCH faster, and with better results if I left VA out entirely. Which ultimately I did - even though the entire intent of the exercise was to build it in VA. It simply couldn't be done. And I had VERY low expectations and demands going in. If it couldn't do this system, it certainly can't do any of our client's systems.

    Time = money, of course. I can't afford to use this product currently, and I can't imagine anyone actually could. We'll wait for some kind of revision as well.

    In order for this to be useful, it will need to be opened up a bit to allow integrators to craft actual solutions, and faster than they can without it.
Sign In or Register to comment.