Posts: 1,197
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
garyi
Posting Freak
Posts: 1,197
I love the abilities of XBMC and the fact I can use my Harmony remote at all is enough.
But on the occasions I need to use the keyboard, what a revelation!
Using the harmony you think XBMC is sluggish, and slow. Use the keyboard and its like a cat quick and agile.
I wonder how other users are finding theres? Is there anything I can do to improve performance of the harmony? I notice my apple remote on ATV is also many times more responsive, so I am prepared to accept its the harmony. I have a 1000.
Posts: 1,197
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
garyi
Posting Freak
Posts: 1,197
Really sorry I put this in the wrong bit, I wanted it in the support for apple XBMC, opps.
Posts: 26,215
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation:
187
Yeah, the plain Apple remote is also nice and quick. The problem is definitely the Harmony.
I'm not sure if it's due to it being learned incorrectly/inefficiently or due to it waiting too long after broadcasting or whatever.
There's a user elsewhere on here that started re-learning it and hinted that he was getting better results - can't recall offhand which thread it was. You might want to try checking that thread out?
Cheers,
Jonathan
Posts: 1,197
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
garyi
Posting Freak
Posts: 1,197
There was certainly a tip on reducing the amount of time between commands being sent on the harmony. of which I reduced, it seems to have deteriorated though, there was a period of time where it felt very snappy.
Right now though its really druggy. The odd thing though is that say you are scrolling on the main menu, with the keyboard the scrolling of the menus is nice, smooth and quick. If you use the harmony, the menus suddenly feel like the computer is having to much stress put on it, they start 'jerking' along. This does not make much sense to me, in as much as the move from one menu item to the next, once instigated by what ever remote should be smooth.
All I can guess is, the processing required to interpret harmony commands is quite processor intensive?
Its certainly even druggier in snow leopard 10.6.2, although I have no way to prove this.