I have a PS3 and the BT remote is annoying. Having said that BT is better than IR in many ways - its just that no-one else uses it. Because of the PS3, all of the all-in-one manufacturers will right now be designing BT compatibility in their future remotes, and once these are available, I can see BT being used alot more in TV's etc, as the other manufacturers wont have to worry about compatability. Its a pretty bold step by Sony, but in 10 years everything might be BT
Just no excuse for it. If they want to lead CE tech to move towards BT for remotes, that all fine and dandy, but they haven't even included it in any other CE product they make (except laptops). It was not a bold move, they were just too damn cheap to put it in for pennies.
I will get a PS3 regardless, but I refuse to give the PS3 a pass on the no IR fiasco. I will bitch about it until they finally decide to include it on future models.
I think the remote is okay. Not great, but not bad. In its favour, you don't have to even see your PS3, let alone point at it to control it. The controller is also nice and weighty and feels pretty solid. It's also not bad value. On the minus side, the battery life doesn't seem hot and no other devices have gone bluetooth. Still, I think on balance I'd still prefer it to be bluetooth than IR.
If you absolutely must have an IR controller, there is at least one IR remote for the PS3 but it uses a dongle. Lots of PS3 accessories seem to use dongles rather than bluetooth. It's quite annoying really.
If they really wanted to push the industry towards bluetooth tech instead of IR, or RF they would put bluetooth tech in their Televisions as well as their standalone Blu-ray players. I think this was a cheap way of getting out of including another hardware piece in an all ready bloated and costly console. I find that it works great, but suck for me and other all in one "harmony" remote users.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I have a PS3 and the BT remote is annoying.
Having said that BT is better than IR in many ways - its just that no-one else uses it.
Because of the PS3, all of the all-in-one manufacturers will right now be designing BT compatibility in their future remotes, and once these are available, I can see BT being used alot more in TV's etc, as the other manufacturers wont have to worry about compatability.
Its a pretty bold step by Sony, but in 10 years everything might be BT
Just no excuse for it. If they want to lead CE tech to move towards BT for remotes, that all fine and dandy, but they haven't even included it in any other CE product they make (except laptops). It was not a bold move, they were just too damn cheap to put it in for pennies.
I will get a PS3 regardless, but I refuse to give the PS3 a pass on the no IR fiasco. I will bitch about it until they finally decide to include it on future models.
I think the remote is okay. Not great, but not bad. In its favour, you don't have to even see your PS3, let alone point at it to control it. The controller is also nice and weighty and feels pretty solid. It's also not bad value. On the minus side, the battery life doesn't seem hot and no other devices have gone bluetooth. Still, I think on balance I'd still prefer it to be bluetooth than IR.
If you absolutely must have an IR controller, there is at least one IR remote for the PS3 but it uses a dongle. Lots of PS3 accessories seem to use dongles rather than bluetooth. It's quite annoying really.
If they really wanted to push the industry towards bluetooth tech instead of IR, or RF they would put bluetooth tech in their Televisions as well as their standalone Blu-ray players. I think this was a cheap way of getting out of including another hardware piece in an all ready bloated and costly console. I find that it works great, but suck for me and other all in one "harmony" remote users.