Is ESPN's new Wi-Fi universal remote the ultimate?
We got an e-mail Tuesday announcing that ESPN's Wi-Fi remote was going on sale just in time for Father's Day. The remote is simply called ESPN The Ultimate Remote, which shouldn't be confused with another heady remote, Logitech's The One.
While The Ultimate Remote did make an appearance at CES in January, we really hadn't heard anything about it. It looks somewhat like one of Logitech's last-generation Harmony remotes, but it's apparently made by tvCompass, "a provider of digital media solutions."
On paper anyway, ESPN The Ultimate Remote looks like a serious contender. The release notes that the remote not only "manages your home-theater components, set-top boxes, and IP equipment with intuitive 'location-free' setup using a standard wireless connection," but you also get one-touch access to Internet content with an electronic program guide (EPG) for TV listings, a weather widget, mobile Internet browsing, and e-mail and text messaging. The only thing missing seems to be an RF option for accessing components hidden in a cabinet or a closet.
The remote's list price is $300.
Hunkered down in New York City, Executive Editor David Carnoy covers the gamut of gadgets and writes his Fully Equipped column, which carries the tag line "The electronics you lust for." He's also the author of "Knife Music," a novel. E-mail David. Follow David on Twitter. 
However, Logitech knows what they are doing and their products are proven to be pretty good (I don't actually have one myself yet, maybe for my birthday which is coming up though). Isn't this what CNet is for? You guys should have one laying around on the couch next to a Harmony One and do a good fair honest review comparing the two for us couch potatoes out there looking for all in one remotes.
- by 015dollars4aZJ November 28, 2009 12:24 PM PST
- this thing would have to do all the things the Harmony can do...... XBOX 360, cieling fan, gas fireplace. $300 bucks? i need more info. anyone answer these questions?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(3 Comments)