I've been using Dijit and Griffin's Beacon for several months now. Between the two, you get a very compelling universal remote control with outstanding content discovery and social mechanisms for the money. However, the current model Beacon leaves me wondering if the way it works is 100% perfect for my use case. If I were to build the next Beacon (or another Beacon sold along side the current models) here's the way I would do it and why.

Note: I'm certain Dijit will continue iterating their software, offering up new features and abilities as time passes, and Griffin will continue with firmware updates. I don't want to focus much on things that can be done through software; I'm thinking solely about the Beacon hardware here.

1. Beacon on AC Power Please!

As a father of two young children, I've learned that nearly every baby product sold takes batteries. I've even considered outright buying a battery company to save moneny powering the million electronic toys around the house. While I am already conditioned to watch for deals on AA cells, I'd rather not have another device that sucks up four cells at once (and I've found that as much as I use it, I go through batteries at a decent clip).

Yes I can use rechargeables, but it never fails that the batteries need to be recharged right when I want to use it.

I understand why batteries is appealing to some. With Dijit Rooms, you can simply grab the Beacon and take it with you around the house to control stuff in multiple locations. That's a lot easier than having to pull a wall wart and plug it back in on the other end.

The thing is, I don't really move it around. There's pretty much one place I watch TV, and that's where the Beacon sits. I'd much prefer the Beacon never slept and simply stayed plugged in all the time. There's another reason, too.

2. Ditch Bluetooth for IP addressing

I've been using Bluetooth devices ever since I got my Ericsson T-68 back in late 2001 (here's a picture of it in my gadget collection). What have I learned in that time? Bluetooth is great for device to device communication on the go, but it's finnicky and not always reliable. Now, thanks to Bluetooth, I can't use an Android phone and iPod Touch on the same Beacon.

So why is it that Beacon, a product in my home all day, is making a dedicated link to my device with a personal area network when both devices could be talking over my actual home network if Beacon had built in Wi-Fi?

Here are the advantages IP would bring to Beacon:

1. Universal device access - Regardless of the platform Dijit heads to, IP communication is pretty universal across devices. An IP Beacon ensures that devices today and tomorrow will be able to talk to it.


2. Always at the ready - Thanks to the nifty AC plug, Beacon could sit on my wireless network all day, waiting to receive packets, never going to sleep. Power consumption for an idle Wi-Fi device isn't bad, so power usage would be minimal.


3. Better for multi-user households - Moving to IP would elminate the need to directly connect a device to it, allowing all users access at once. It could cause some interesting remote control battles on the sofa, but it would elminate the constant connecting and disconnecting Bluetooth requires.


4. Better for mulit-room households - Right now you can have more than one Beacon, but it gets messy disconnecting from one and connecting to another, particularly if you have several devices. On an IP system there could be a Beacon in every room, and as you change rooms in Dijit, it could direct IR commands to a different Beacon seemlessly.


5. Household hijinks - When my sister and I were young, my parents got us each a 13" Magnavox TV set for our rooms. They were different colors, but to my delight the remote controls were identical. Ah, the fun I had sliding the tip of the remote under the crack of her door and changing the channel or playing with the volume. With IP based Beacons, you can share in the great fun I had as a kid, but now you can drive your spouse or kids crazy from another room!

3. Dedicated IR windows

The Beacon looks cool, but when I go to teach it commands I sure wish it had a dedicated IR learning window. Not only do I think it would improve the learning experience, but I would no longer have to flip it upside down to see which side I fire at.

At the very least, can you print marks on the top so I don't have to look at the bottom?

4. Smaller size

It's not that Beacon is big, but dropping battery support could make it smaller. Not having to make space to cram four AA batteries in there could certainly mean a smaller footprint.

5. Easy to press button

Even without Beacon ever going to sleep, there should continue to be a button to do things like power it off or reset it. However, I'd much prefer a simple to press, visible button over slapping my hand down on top of the unit. I may be in the minority here, but that's what I would prefer.

That's My Vision, What's Yours?

So there you have it, my dream for the next Beacon hardware product. I still see value in a battery powered Bluetooth model, particularly for those who take Beacon to other locations or don't have a home Wi-Fi network (if they still exist). There's nothing stopping Griffin from offering both solutions for different types of users, even though I think most would gravitate to the Beacon: Matt Edition.

What about you? Do you agree with my thoughts about how the next Beacon should work? If you were to design the next Beacon device, what would it be like? Share your vision in the comments below.