3 ms·
Totally agree that an ergonomically well designed remote with a small number of functions will provide a superior 'eyes off' UX. But it has sadly been quite som
by stevetrewick 11y ago
Totally agree that an ergonomically well designed remote with a small number of functions will provide a superior 'eyes off' UX. But it has sadly been quite some time since that description applied to any of the remotes I regularly actually use.
- swsieber 11y agoI have a Roku 3 and I like their remote - small and simple.
- IgorPartola 11y agoYou know, I think the Roku remote comes close: https://image.roku.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Roku-3-remote-with-headphones.jpg https://image.roku.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Roku-... Unfortunately, their remotes are inconsistent between Roku devices. For example, some come with this layout: http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41WCaJRUARL._AC_UL320_SR180,320_.jpg http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41WCaJRUARL._AC_UL320_.... Why the hell is it a good UX to include these proprietary buttons on there? I have an older version of it that includes Block Buster! They also have a phone app that I use frequently. It's not bad, but lacks the * button, making it impossible to turn off subtitles. Lastly, their remotes really need a way to control the TV power and volume. I hate having two remotes, one of which is just to turn the TV on/off. I believe the new Apple TV does have this feature, but of course it doesn't have Amazon Video so that's a no-go for me.