@davey: "The latest stage in my battle with Comcast:
The two TV sets that don't get the Main Box each get a DTA, which is a very
basic digital-to-analog converter. It has a remote control, which is
programmed with 5-digit codes. I have a Panasonic TV/VCR, which works just
fine with its own remote control. The photocopied instructions that come
with the new remote contain a list of codes, none of which, of those listed
for Panasonic, operates my TV set. There is a Code Search function, whereby
you enter this mode, and then press CH+ until your set turns off, which
then identifies the code. There is no indication of how many codes there
are, so you don't know when to give up. The remote works fine on a
different TV.
I went online to Comcast, I went to their office, and I have been e-mailing
them. To my amazement, but apparently not to their embarrassment, they can
neither tell me what the code is for my particular model of Panasonic TV,
they can't even tell me when to stop pressing CH+. So far, I have got up to
1,000 presses, and my finger is worn out. They distribute this stuff, but
they don't know anything about it.
"Made in China" might have something to do with it, of course. They keep on
saying that they will help me with any concerns, I tell them I will keep
badgering them until I can control my TV from their remote.
Fat Chance, I think, but I can make it a pain for them.
When I was at their office today, there were LOTS of people handing in
boxes as they gave up their service and went to satellite or U-verse. I
wonder why?
Davey."
    @abqabnemo: "<quote>
Be real, Davey. They said they would help you with
your 'concerns'. That does not mean they give a fig
about your remote control, your television, your
DTA's, your reception, your program lineup, your
buried cable, your dog, your neighbourhood, your
passions, hopes and dreams.
Put some ice on that finger.
Alastair"
    @davey: "<quote>
They admitted in an overnight message that they could not "answer my
concern". I do indeed have to use the two remote controls, one to control
the TV, one to change the channel.
Progress is great, for some. Not for the crowd of people turning in their
boxes and their service yesterday, though.
The ice was already in the screwdriver, so it became "finger-lickin' good".
Davey."
    @Grumpy: "<quote>
You can thank the guv'ment for this analog to digital conversion fiasco.
I bought two of them thar' el cheapo converter boxes neither of which 
works a crap!  #1 goes haywire whenever the signal gets a little weak 
and creats echoes and other noise.  The second works much better but all 
of the functions with its remote are the reverse of most other remotes 
and an annoying black box appears at randome times that normaly provides 
the signal information when you first tune to any given station.
And you wonder why the nation is going to hell in a handbasket...
Bah!
JT"
    @davey: "<quote>
Actually, this conversion is Comcast's own, they didn't have to do this,
but it clearly is better (i.e. makes more money) for them.  They have given
me extras that I don't want, and taken away the intended use of my VCR. Now
I need two remotes to watch TV in bed.
Clearly, lots of folks are as p....d off as I am with the whole thing. 
Also, this allows Comcast to get out from under the Court Order that was
imposed when they tried to move the Local Access channels to digital-only,
only to be ordered to leave them right where they were, thank you very
much. Now they are giving everyone digital for free, this becomes moot.
Davey."
    @john: "<quote>
Yuse guys ain't missin' nuttin' on the telly. It's all garbage and crap.
Kinda like the Nation too. <eg>
John"
    @davey: "<quote>
But when there is something worth watching on one channel, there is always
something worth watching on another channel at the same time. Sod's Law.
That's what the VCR was for, until recently.
Davey."
    @john: "<quote>
I can't think of any program that is "worth watching."
'Cept maybe "LOST."
Then it is a no-brainer about looking for something else to consider. ;-)
There are NEVER two programs on 200 channels at the same time worth
watching.
John"
    @davey: "<quote>
I'm afraid the charms of 'Lost' are lost to me, never could understand what
the fuss is all about. But hen, I don't watch Big Brother, The Great Race,
or any of those so-called reality shows.
Of course, the fact that we get CBC TV increases the viewable broadcasting
quota considerably! They have news programs, as opposed to commercials with
snippets of news thrown in, and they cover the world, as opposed to the
world according to ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN, which is very different, and
limited.
Davey."
    @edantu: "<quote>
I estimate I have watched six hours in the last year total
movies played on the computer don't count <grin> if they did my total 
would be something like 12 hours a week <grin>  no commercials anyway"
    @abqabnemo: "<quote>
One important afterthought. It is difficult to say the
words 'efficiency expert' after three screwdrivers.
Oh, and another afterthought. Go to Walgreens and purchase
a cheap-o universal remote. It will have "A" the instructions
and "B" the capacity to control both the TV and the Comcast
Box (prolly a Scientific Atlanta or Jerrold box).
Cheers  <-  Alastair"
    @edantu: "<quote>
I don't know
screwdriver
screwdriver
screwdriver
efficiency expert
no problems there
or did you mean
three screwdrivers
efficiency expert
no problems saying that either :)"
    @davey: "<quote>
That's worth a try, certainly. I have a year-old universal RCA remote,
first thing I'll try is, does it control the Panasonic TV?
The Comcast box is very small, but on a different floor of the house at the
moment. I do know it's made in China!
Davey."
    @cjsparhawk: "I have a RCA universal remote control for a Pansonic tv I bought about 
10 yrs ago..it worked for tv, the box and the vcr, dvd.
I don't use it anymore as Time Warner remote controls the RCA tv and the 
box.
My Panasonic is downstairs sitting quietly..I looked up the codes for 
Panasonic and they are 170, 054,062,003
On my Panasonic tv code 170 always worked.
Your remote is newer so maybe the codes are newer for your tv and more 
of them.
<quote>"
    @davey: "<quote>
(snipped)
Yes, this may be a problem. The new boxes have codes that are five digits
long, all my remotes have three digit codes. But I will try.
Davey."
    @abqabnemo: "<quote>
The 'codes' of which you speak are merely a "Number In
The List Of Machines I Understand". There are so many
different models of machine on the market now, the list
is more than four digits long.
Now the actual 'codes' which the infra-red transmitter
uses to control the TV (DVR, VCR, whatever) are based
on what the engineers of the TV said they would respond
to. So your old RCA remote control may see a machine
as a [Television]-[#367] and will spit out codes to
push the switches on the front of your 1952 Zenith B/W.
A new remote control may have your 1952 Zenith listed
as [Television]-[#82371] but it will emit the identical
code of 010011010110101110100 to lower the volume on
that model of Zenith (and all televisions using the
identical 'language' for remote operations).
So, it the long run, what I'm saying to you is, the most
important things about the remote controls are:
    1   Does it have a pamphlet
    2   Does it have the type of buttons you need
          (guide arrows, CBL/VCR select, and so on)
Yes, I know most of the 1952 Zenith B/Ws no longer
respond to any kind of digital coaxing.
Alastair"
    @invalid: ""Davey" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
Try googling: "comcast cable universal remote codes" and check out some of 
the hits. My son had to do that with a new TV we recently got. The code sets 
that come with the remote controls are not always up-to-date or complete. "
    @john: "<quote>
Those old boat anchors didn't use IR, which hadn't yet been invented
(well, LEDs anyway).
They used the classic "clicker" to transmit the single code per function.
Click  Clack  Cluck.
I built a Heathkit Color TV in 1974, and it had the old mechanical
clicker. A single steel reed per function button, like a Jew's Harp.
John"
    @abqabnemo: "<quote>
I remember those well. A cross between a tuning fork and a pipe
bomb. The programming was less obnoxious back then (not the remote
control - the stuff on the screen).
Alastair"
    @john: "<quote>
Yes. We had NBC, then later ABC, and CBS.
That is all. (There were those three Indian Chiefs who appeared at
midnight for one minute.)
Much better was hide and go seek, and kick the can.
We didn't even sweat back then. The Fifties must have been before Al
Gore's time.
John"
    @PmUiRsGcETtHlEvSpE: "On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:48:47 -0400, John F. Morse <email_address>  
wrote:
<quote>
Amen! The one program in the past 15 months that I thought
*might* be worth watching  the Pete Seeger 90th Birthday
Tribute program, on PBS  wasn't.
Cheers,  tlvp"
    @davey: "<quote>
On the other hand, Sod's Law dictates that if there is something worth
watching on one channel, then that is exactly when there will be something
else worth watching on another channel. Which often is the case.
At the weekend, Cpmcast sent a technician around to try to sort out my
remote control problem. He helped, in that he changed the volume control to
the new remote, (an option that was not described in the "manual" that came
with it), so that I now need the TV's remote only to turn the set on and
off. I can adjust volume and change channel with the new one now. But he
could not find the program code to make the new remote unit control the TV,
even though my RCA Universal remote has no problem. But that unit cannot
control the new digibox.
At least they tried.
Davey."
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 21, "forum_name": "alt.att.20141107.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-alt.att.parquet'}