I actually have cash in my pocket and looking to buy a RH this week. We are finally moving up to "Hog Class" from ETC Express/SmartFade boards. I really enjoyed reading this discussion to see what I am actually getting. It was a tough decision between this and a Pearl.
it seems there IS a market for somekind of upgrade to allow to remote focus if not anything else, also it seems there is a LOT of unhappy people and i feel it is just scratching the surface as to how let down people were to one day go on the HES website not long after purchasing a RH to see the new shiny RHFB, Artnet and the other fancy features are not needed for me and all i ask as i feel many others would like is the possibility of remote focus on the very good RH desk?? Is it too much for HES to listen and maybe make a lot of people a lot happier and take away the sour taste of not being properly informed of the RHFB being in the pipeline??? Im not familiar as to how it would be done but many people on here seem to think it could be done relatively easily with the ability to block the other features like ARTnet etc which is what the owners of the RHFB will have paid the extra for. Everyone would then be happy, RH users, HES for the extra income on the upgrade kit and RHFB as they are not cheated on a desk that does "nearly as much" for 5k less. Move with the times HES and listen to customers.
[quote=nunny]it seems there IS a market for somekind of upgrade.
Is there? How many people have you talked to off the forums about an upgrade kit?
[quote=nunny]RH to see the new shiny RHFB, [quote=nunny]Artnet and the other fancy features are not needed for me and all i ask as i feel many others would like is the possibility of remote focus on the very good RH desk??.
What makes you think that all people that bought RHs would have been able to afford the RHFB? The FB is more, because it has more features... Just because it had more features doesnt mean the customer could have bought it. I wanted a H3PC hardware system for school, but they settled for a jester ML24 because it was £1500 where as a H3PC system would have been double if not more than that. To the customer, it is all about price, sometimes things have to be sacrificed, no matter how much somebody wants it.
[quote=nunny]Is it too much for HES to listen and maybe make a lot of people a lot happier and take away the sour taste of not being properly informed of the RHFB being in the pipeline???.
HES are listening. But the 400 odd active users, (in the last 30 days), that have been looking at this thread isnt enough for HES to develop a kit. Maybe a petition of some sort with 2000 signitures of people that would buy the kit would be suficent. Also, this has been said before, if a kit DOES come out, HES could be swamped with "upgraded" consoles that have not been "upgraded" properly. This will cause problems. Like Brad has said, the console market is a big one...
[quote=nunny]Im not familiar as to how it would be done but many people on here seem to think it could be done relatively easily with the ability to block the other features like ARTnet etc.
The Wholehog software is essentially the same, for all consoles, im sure you know this. But what you are describing would require changing the software, this could spark other suggestions and before HES know it, peope are asking for this to be added, this to be blocked etc. This wont be good for them. Different console user suddendly want different software for this and that, all becuase of this thread.
[quote=nunny]Move with the times HES and listen to customers.
They are.. They listen to suggestions and log most. The current thread about the DP8k as an Art-Net node, is a good example. Eric said it wasnt likely, but Brad said he logged it because it was a valid suggestion never the less.
Sorry for the slight rant, but I think we are thinking "inside the box" here...
Your right Joe it is aimed at a price point. But that isn;t the only thing that is causing the issue. This forum is also for hire productions people who would have loved the choice. (bad luck on the jester) Some people say that it is a replacment for the hog 1k that is great but what is the big deal for the addition of remote focus. If you are going to make it better then go all out.Yes the software is the same for most of the consoles that is correct but they do limit options already. We are looking at buying more consoles in the non to distant future and the customers are asking for remote focus and we aren't going to pay for the full boar we look like the grand ma light or ultra light is going to be the way we go to look after thoes clients. I realy love the hog 3 software but being in Australia we are stuffed the the ever changing Australian dollar and cant justify the extra 8+k for the full boar.
There is arguments for and against the possibility of implementing the remote focus on the Rh, the way i see it is if it is a possibility, as i beleive it is and without much software changes then offer the upgrade on the basis it is done by the relevant service point, that way it would rule out any Tom Dick or Harry attempting the upgrade and swamping HES with. I feel that there is certainly enough interest in this post alone to make HES listen at least, im not one to do the PR for HES but if i was reading this may start to see what interest the upgrade to implement remote focus may generate thus possibly posting a vote on the relevant forum/website. I just feel its something that would certainly help me, and others and may make HES a good revenue.
[quote=Mika_Aus]We are looking at buying more consoles in the non to distant future and the customers are asking for remote focus and we aren't going to pay for the full boar we look like the grand ma light or ultra light is going to be the way we go to look after thoes clients.
Based on the MSRPs I don't see how that is cost effective at all as a new RHFB costs less than a new MA Ultra-Light......and the Ultra-Light only does 2 universes and only has one screen....Not to mention you can buy a new full Hog-3 for less than the price of a new MA Light.:dunno:
[quote=nunny]as i beleive it is and without much software changes then offer the upgrade on the basis it is done by the relevant service point, that way it would rule out any Tom Dick or Harry attempting the upgrade and swamping HES with.
For a product support specialist to come out to visit you can be quite expensive, and considering the amount of the consoles around, it would take HES a while to get them all upgraded, (the ones that want it anyway), Also to send a console to the PSS can be expensive depending on its weight and dimentions. I like the idea of HES doing the upgrade so it is done properly and professionally, but lets see what Brad has to say about this...
I think that as long as a network upgrade is Hognet only, and still locks the RH down to 4 universes, HighEnd as well as users can only gain by it. Owners with a little more cash and the need could buy a DP2000 and distribute their 4 universes over the network, and in this case it would also give them a backup solution with a laptop running Hpc as well. Not cheap, but in my experience a not unimportant selling point. ( and, now the 8k is out, it might give the dp2000 a longer life ;) )
[quote=nunny]There is arguments for and against the possibility of implementing the remote focus on the Rh, the way i see it is if it is a possibility, as i beleive it is and without much software changes then offer the upgrade on the basis it is done by the relevant service point,
Mike and all,
Consider for a moment the complexity of the software changes and testing required. Currently the networking abilities of Wholehog software allow multi-user and network expansion (DPs). In order to implement a method that one platform ONLY allows multi-user networking for a remote capability and disallows network expansion (DPs) is a major rework of the networking code. Furthermore, extensive testing would be required of networking on all platforms to ensure nothing was broken in the process. This is NOT a simple software change.
In addition, the Road Hog is designed for a certain market and price point. Multi-user networking for remote capabilities is one feature, but so is multi-user programming. This desk is sold at a reduced cost and feature set and purposely excludes multi-user networking capabilities. So to enable a new method that allows only a single additional networked client (for remote capabilities) becomes even more complex.
I am sure that given the work required to implement a remote capability for a few users in lieu of additional more requested features would be frowned upon by most. As I have stated before we carefully study the requests of ALL users and try to make the best decisions to please the majority of the users.
We appreciate all the comments and suggestions made in this and other threads. Please know that your comments do not go unnoticed.
without knowing too much about networking is there not any way of creating a pairing via a different method to connect the desk and a seperate remote focus machine?? even if it was cabled would be a great help, a lot easier than moving the desk from FOH which is offset and the power and x 4 dmx lines to get positions etc
I understand the issues of changing the network code and why it wouldnt be an option.
