It's not focused! Could somebody with macro on his digital camera take a new photo and replace it?

-- Miceagol 2006 Dec 8

I suspect this article's flow would benefit greatly from the introduction of section headers. I'd suggest starting with "Function" and moving on to "History". Any other ideas?

-- Ventura 23:49, 2004 Nov 22 (UTC)

Are console controllers i.e. Xbox, Playstation, Nintendo etc.. considered to be remote controllers?

-- Unrelated, 2005 Feb 05 <USA>

Not really, they're better classified as input devices. --GalFisk 17:10, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

shouldn't the "wiimote" get a mention?

Info about standards for consumer remote controls is missing. RC5 and RECS 80 appear to be some?

-- Bypasser

"To that end, designers of the TiVo remote control replaced the standard columns of buttons on a black rectangle with a distinctive peanut shaped design that has been well received by its users [2]. This design, which has spawned several imitations, is likely to change the way consumer electronics designers approach the remote." So the Tivo has a different shape. How does this address the button issue? --Gbleem 17:33, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• TiVO astroturfing? 68.147.242.17 09:46, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add example of bits and bytes sent to do a command like change to channel 54.

After looking at the article, it seems like a "Telecommand" is a much broader term than "remote control", especially in American English. A "remote control", or simple "remote" is usually used only to describe a simple device used to control home electronics. You would hardly call a device that launches missiles a "remote control". If you have a remote that can do that though, please let me know ;-) (Patrick 08:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Are you advocating a merge? I believe that making "Remote control" part of the "Telecommand" article is inadvisable. Try searching Google for "by remote control" (with quotation marks) and see that there are plenty of non–home electronics uses there. President Lethe 14:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think the two articles should be merged at all. A remote control is a type of telecommand, so to speak. Telecommand is the broader term, and it can be described further on its article page, even if it is only to list the different types of telecommands, and perhaps provide a history and the most common uses, etc. At any rate, "remote control" should definetely be separate. (Patrick 17:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Oh, O.K., then. Sorry I misunderstood you earlier. Now I see that some someone at "Telecommand" has suggested a merge. Yes, I think they should be separate. President Lethe 17:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We should take a vote on it and either proceed with the merger or remove the merger request templates, so both articles can be cleaned up, any suggestions? (Patrick 12:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I've recently had an experience that made me think that votes/polls aren't such a good idea. In that experience, I suggested a poll, which occurred; but, shortly after my suggestion, I happened across Wikipedia:Voting is evil.

I think the articles should stay separate. There is some logic of putting "Telecommand" into "Remote control"—but, then, we could start putting in radio-controlled toy vehicles and a zillion other aspects of remote controls. Actually, maybe that's not such a bad idea. Another idea is that "Telecommand" could become part of an article about missiles.

I'm not absolutely sure what to do; but it seems that this "Telecommand" stub's most appropriate place is in a missile article.

None of these articles is 'my baby'; so I'm not gonna get into it very deeply.

President Lethe 15:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. A TV remote control is deserving of its own article, and a Telecommand device has a much wider scope than controlling a TV. Some notes etc. - 1. Over a month has gone by and no one has been discussing this proposal. 2. The only people that have discussed it have opposed merger. 3. The proposer User:Skysmith has not given a reason for merger (as far as I can see), so I'll put a note on his/her Talk page. 4. If no one gives a good reason in the next few days why the articles should merge, I'll just go ahead and get rid of the tags. --A bit iffy 14:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No objctions, so I've now removed the merge notice. --A bit iffy 08:21, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I remember having a Zenith Commander remote in the 60's, and we also experienced the problem of interference -- the bell in our old telephone could trigger the On/Off/Volume sensor, and our dog's choker chain jingling would change the channel. I don't know if I can formulate this kind of personal anecdote into acceptably "encyclopedic" form, though I wonder if the current example of the xylophone interfering was also a personal anecdote? --Birdbrainscan 19:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]