Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mm1352000" data-source="post: 1118002" data-attributes="member: 82144">Anybody is welcome to write a blog etc. If you need help with posting the text etc. then just ask. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />Sorry, I think you may have missed my point. I'll try again... <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />My point is that somebody who is using MCE + old generic HID now will have MCE + new HID enabled after upgrade. It isn't that people would necessarily apply that configuration intentionally. Rather, it will be the natural consequence of a standard upgrade for people who currently use that [potentially common] configuration. That's why I asked what would happen for them. Suddenly having many/all button presses repeated would not be good.Like I said, people use them together because sometimes MCE alone isn't enough to get all the buttons on their remote working. This may be a sign that the MCE implementation is incomplete, or that certain &quot;MCE&quot; remotes are not actually MCE-compliant. I don't know. I'm simply trying to look out for the interests of people that currently use MCE + generic HID.If the legacy implementations are not required then I'm strongly in favour of removing them as fast as possible. Less configuration =&gt; less setup time, less confusion =&gt; better. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />I only mentioned it because you seem to have added that function definition. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="mm1352000, post: 1118002, member: 82144"] Anybody is welcome to write a blog etc. If you need help with posting the text etc. then just ask. :) Sorry, I think you may have missed my point. I'll try again... :) My point is that somebody who is using MCE + old generic HID now will have MCE + new HID enabled after upgrade. It isn't that people would necessarily apply that configuration intentionally. Rather, it will be the natural consequence of a standard upgrade for people who currently use that [potentially common] configuration. That's why I asked what would happen for them. Suddenly having many/all button presses repeated would not be good. Like I said, people use them together because sometimes MCE alone isn't enough to get all the buttons on their remote working. This may be a sign that the MCE implementation is incomplete, or that certain "MCE" remotes are not actually MCE-compliant. I don't know. I'm simply trying to look out for the interests of people that currently use MCE + generic HID. If the legacy implementations are not required then I'm strongly in favour of removing them as fast as possible. Less configuration => less setup time, less confusion => better. :) I only mentioned it because you seem to have added that function definition. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification