Envisalink monitoring satisfaction?

I am considering Envisalink monitoring. They are reasonably priced, UL certified and appear to be a viable option. Has anyone used them or heard of someone who has? And would you recommend them?

Thank you for your thoughts.

Reply to
Starpilot
Loading thread data ...

Yes, we use this device for DSC panels in our business, although to use the m with other than the designated monitoring station, they must be unlocked by paying EyeON an unlocking fee. If you do use this device, make sure your router/modem is a quality product, and that you buy a separate UPS for the modem and router. Note that these cannot be used with the newer DSC NEO se ries panels; DSC has encrypted the keybus in a typical self serving fashion to keep third party applications from being useable with this line of pane ls[I hope they learn they cant be doing this kind of selfish, self serving thing if they ever plan to be part of the Internet of Things in the future. ...]. This is being done to force installing companies to give up some of t he RMR that normally would go to the end dealer....]although I'm sure they have some other excuse.

Bottom line, it's a good device, but difficult for an end user to set up pr operly without a measure of experience with it....

Reply to
tourman

Thank you for your comprehensive reply. I have three systems that I think I will now convert over monitoring by Eyezon. I've been using their card f or quite some time so I am familiar with their functionality. Using their monitoring should save me a portion of my current costs, plus provide me gr eater flexibility with my ability to deal with the monitoring service direc tly.

I presently use them with Vista 20P's.

I do appreciate the idea of battery back ups on the modem and router. Good chance I would have forgotten that until an episode called it to my attent ion.

Reply to
Starpilot

hem with other than the designated monitoring station, they must be unlocke d by paying EyeON an unlocking fee. If you do use this device, make sure yo ur router/modem is a quality product, and that you buy a separate UPS for t he modem and router. Note that these cannot be used with the newer DSC NEO series panels; DSC has encrypted the keybus in a typical self serving fashi on to keep third party applications from being useable with this line of pa nels[I hope they learn they cant be doing this kind of selfish, self servin g thing if they ever plan to be part of the Internet of Things in the futur e....]. This is being done to force installing companies to give up some of the RMR that normally would go to the end dealer....]although I'm sure the y have some other excuse.

properly without a measure of experience with it....

I've been on a search for products similar to the Envisalink that are compa tible with other alarm panels. This whole new "intrusion" of alarm equipmen t manufacturers on the RMR business of installation companies has really go t me pissed off.

There is no reason in the world why the company that I buy my equipment fro m has to intrude upon my income stream that I've worked for with my clients . Any alarm panel will do anything that any other alarm panel can do so the re's no exclusivity of functions as far as any particular manufacturer goes . So they think by providing these chargeable services they can lock in the people who use their products.

The closed circuit TV camera manufacturers can provide servers at no charge (Yes, I realize they include it in their pricing) so there's no reason why alarm equipment manufacturers have to charge the fees that they do just to "forward" information to a central station. Yeah, yeah, I know, Control 4 and all these other "service providers" charge their fees but for the alarm manufacturers to jump on the same band wagon and charge the companies who have been loyal to them for years, what I consider exorbitant pricing for m inuscule service ..... just because "they can" is just too much for me to a ccept.

There are ways around it and as time allows I'll be experimenting with some of the "other" technology that will circumvent them. The Envisalink is a t hird party device that works with DSC and Honeywell. There are other device s that work with other manufacturers and as time will tell, I think that th ese opportunist alarm equipment manufacturers will not be as happy as they think they'll be in the future.

These manufacturers are still living in the past where every new idea was c onnected to an exclusive "franchise" or "dealership" So they think they can make their products "exclusive" That only works for the dummies who can't make it on their own and depends on the turnover of people who try it and fail and a constant supply of new dummies to take their place.

Today, we live in too dynamic a technological age ..... There's and App fo r everything and a device that can do whatever it is that you want to do an d .... the Internet of Things is directed towards the end users not profe ssional installation companies. You would think the alarm manufacturers wou ld be providing installers with ways to offer similar or better capabilitie s to their clients at lower prices rather than providing them with the same things at the same prices that they can get by doing it themselves or goin g with the mega companies.

As long as I've been in this trade it seems the manufacturers are always a day late and a dollar short.

Reply to
Jim

Hi,

The trend of companies locking their security systems is counter-productive. I attended last year a DSC "NEO" new product presentation by one of their regional reps. I lasted about 45 minutes waiting steadfastly and impatiently for the coming break. The rep kept going on and on about Alarm.com and how their new NEO products had locked out "their" bus- so no one will be able to use it except whom they choose. It was reported that negotiations were still underway for them to license their bus to Alarm.com. I was only interested in the specs of the new system. I quickly came to find out that NEO is not backward compatible for anything; not keypads, not wireless, not fobs, not anything. That was a very grave error on their part-NUMBER 1. Their bus being locked out so that add-on fobs cannot be used, nor IPdatatel, nor anything that you can think of that is made by other companies. Another very serious error-NUMBER 2. And then, if you looked at the pricing for the dealers, it was just about twice the price of the PC 1616 kits. And that is the last nail in the coffin-NUMBER 3. Oh yes, now you can see some lower pricing for their "kits" -they took out the keypad in it so that they could sell the kit cheaper. They have now become a joke in the industry. Just lately, I was talking to one supplier. He was not even aware that the bus was locked out.

This was not a decision made by DSC, this is more of a decision made by the parent company TICO. DSC has had good products reasonably priced for quite a while. I cannot imagine that after a long track record of good accomplishments, that the same folks would suddenly destroy their company. They have thoroughly painted themselves into a no-return corner. Greed has a way of making you blind, so they say. And the new folks at DSC have just proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

When DSC does away with their Power-series line and only has NEO to sell, we will end our relationship with DSC and go with our second-in-line being Networx. And I believe that there will also be a great rushing stampede by very many security companies out the DSC doors also.

Manufacturing companies need to wake up and pay attention! Security companies want and need affordable inter-operable products! And, that is because the customers-who are the true end-buyer, want their "free" "cheap to operate" "give me a lot of extras for free" security systems!!!

Wake up and smell the roses manufacturers. Get out of your stale-aired, greed-intoxicated, power-hungry cubicles and breath the fresh air of the real folks!

e dawson

P.S. I don't give a "Wam" that your new wireless can communicate up to one mile. Will the moron who thinks that this is important please stand up....please!

Reply to
E DAWSON

I'm still waiting for Wade (Elk & Moose Products) to return with a simple, hearty, BA.. His company made an excellent product back in the 80's, the Z900 & z1100e

Of the several hundred customers we've sold to over the last 35+ years NOT one has ever wanted a "Do-it-all" control system. Simple on and off, that's what they all wanted.. No fancy auto arm auto bypass whole house tie-ins, none of that "selling point" crap the manufacturers want to push...

One of the toughest BA's I ever installed was the MPI-50 I had several survive Lighting strikes which destroyed every piece of electronics in the same building. To this day I still have 3 MPI-50's that still work just like they did the day they were installed..

Granted there are some new ideas and equipment that bear including in any system but as a whole the large manufacturers, in my opinion, have dropped the ball.. Not everyone wants a "Lexus or Lincoln" some just want a Simple Hearty "get-er-done" system.

Now that my two minutes are over I'll get off the soap box..

RTS

Hi,

The trend of companies locking their security systems is counter-productive. I attended last year a DSC "NEO" new product presentation by one of their regional reps. I lasted about 45 minutes waiting steadfastly and impatiently for the coming break. The rep kept going on and on about Alarm.com and how their new NEO products had locked out "their" bus- so no one will be able to use it except whom they choose. It was reported that negotiations were still underway for them to license their bus to Alarm.com. I was only interested in the specs of the new system. I quickly came to find out that NEO is not backward compatible for anything; not keypads, not wireless, not fobs, not anything. That was a very grave error on their part-NUMBER 1. Their bus being locked out so that add-on fobs cannot be used, nor IPdatatel, nor anything that you can think of that is made by other companies. Another very serious error-NUMBER 2. And then, if you looked at the pricing for the dealers, it was just about twice the price of the PC 1616 kits. And that is the last nail in the coffin-NUMBER 3. Oh yes, now you can see some lower pricing for their "kits" -they took out the keypad in it so that they could sell the kit cheaper. They have now become a joke in the industry. Just lately, I was talking to one supplier. He was not even aware that the bus was locked out.

This was not a decision made by DSC, this is more of a decision made by the parent company TICO. DSC has had good products reasonably priced for quite a while. I cannot imagine that after a long track record of good accomplishments, that the same folks would suddenly destroy their company. They have thoroughly painted themselves into a no-return corner. Greed has a way of making you blind, so they say. And the new folks at DSC have just proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

When DSC does away with their Power-series line and only has NEO to sell, we will end our relationship with DSC and go with our second-in-line being Networx. And I believe that there will also be a great rushing stampede by very many security companies out the DSC doors also.

Manufacturing companies need to wake up and pay attention! Security companies want and need affordable inter-operable products! And, that is because the customers-who are the true end-buyer, want their "free" "cheap to operate" "give me a lot of extras for free" security systems!!!

Wake up and smell the roses manufacturers. Get out of your stale-aired, greed-intoxicated, power-hungry cubicles and breath the fresh air of the real folks!

e dawson

P.S. I don't give a "Wam" that your new wireless can communicate up to one mile. Will the moron who thinks that this is important please stand up....please!

Reply to
Rocky

On Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 9:21:45 PM UTC-5, Rocky wrote:

...

although I agree with you for the most part, unfortunately advertising and marketing dictate what the public will want .... and that comes from the na tionals and other large companies with the deep pockets. What with the "Int ernet of Things", Free Apps for everything, the ability for end users to do their own systems .... I think that the handwriting is on the wall. Not in the very near future, not while I'm still active but the mid to new-comers in this trade are going to eventually be squeezed out of a good portion of what we do now. The "There's an App for Everything" mentality surely leads end-users down the path of DIY, self monitoring or cheap equipment and int ernet remote monitoring .... which will eventually be "good enough". Unles s central stations get on the band wagon and begin offering "cloud" storage services, remote control services and such .... in the future the majorit y of their monitoring will only be large commercial burg and fire alarm sys tems. Residential will diminish over time. The residential end user will be satisfied with "good enough". That's how this trade has been evolving for decades. First there was direct wire and McCollough, then the tape dialer w as "good enough". Then the digital dialer a brief respite in the "good enou gh" decline. Then came DTMF dialing. How long did it take for that to be tr usted over rotary dialing? Then came VoIP. Fire marshals were "NEVER" going to accept that kind of communication .... yeah .... sure" Then came long r ange radio.... who was EVER going to trust THAT? Then redundant radio and l andline. Now we've got Cellular or radio and Network monitoring with no re dundancy ...... that's acceptable???

So now they've jammed down our throats the erroneous concept that it's Ok f or some combination of a long range radio, cellular network and land line w here only one is used for a primary transmission technology and the "backup " technology never gets actually tested until and unless the primary techno logy fails. "What do you mean?" they say. "The back up technology sends in periodic "supervisory" signals." I say, how do you know it will send in "al arm" signals unless it's tested every time an alarm signal is generated? Ho w do you know that something hasn't been disconnected at the installation a nd the radio isn't just sitting there disconnected for the last 5 years ... since the primary has never failed, and the "backup" is just sending in su pervisory signals but not able to send in alarm signals? If you think it ca n't happen, Ask DSC about the time their network went down and nobody knew about it for weeks and weeks because their network could only receive super visory signals but not alarm signals ..... and nobody was notified!!!!

Which ... by the way is the main reason I don't and never will ever use DSC anything, ever again. They NEVER tell anyone when a failure occurs. Anothe r reason is During Sandy I had a customer who was without power for weeks. When they were back up I went back to power up their system and couldn't ge t the cellular radio to work. When I called tech support they asked if the battery was left connected after it died. I said "of course". The tech had the nerve to nonchalantly say, "Oh, that's a problem with those radios, if you leave the battery connected and it dies, the cellular radio has to be r eplaced. That's a little problem we have with those units." ..... WHAT!!!! !!

They just play the numbers. If you have "the" problem .... then you've been notified otherwise ... why do you need to be informed? Why should they sp end all that money replacing or repairing units that dealers never have the problem with? Recall? WATSA RECALL????

Any way, I think that the "alarm" installation trade as we know it is chang ing and if you don't diversify or adopt some of the new technology, (whethe r you like it or not) if your mid way or just getting into the trade .... y ou're going to be left behind.

Do I use some of the above technologies that I've complained about? Yep, Not because I think it's good, or right or secure ... it's just that I know if I hold out, my old fashioned alarm monitoring RMR market is going to sl owly diminish. End users are being charmed by the Telephone companies, Best Buy, Cable companies, National alarm companies, DIY self install it by DIY Web Site companies selling Chinese mfg'd systems ....... at $15.00 a month . Pretty soon Google and Apple will be "one upping" each other with their version of DIY systems and Apps. Think "DropCam", "Nest" and "SimpleSafe". OH and another thing, do you really think that your alarm equipment manufac turer of choice "ISN"T" providing their equipment to end users on the Inter net ? REALLY? The only thing separating them from dealing direct with the end user right now is that they haven't released a DIY version of the installation instruc tions.

This is why I say that the alarm equipment manufacturers are doing the wron g thing by "forcing" installers pay prices for equipment and services so th at we've got to compete with all of the above. If they want to keep their b read and butter customers, they should be providing us with equipment and control services that compete with all of the above but at lower pricing .. ...

Makes sense to me.

Reply to
Jim

On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 10:59:17 PM UTC-5, Jim wrote:

d marketing dictate what the public will want .... and that comes from the nationals and other large companies with the deep pockets. What with the "I nternet of Things", Free Apps for everything, the ability for end users to do their own systems .... I think that the handwriting is on the wall. Not in the very near future, not while I'm still active but the mid to new-come rs in this trade are going to eventually be squeezed out of a good portion of what we do now. The "There's an App for Everything" mentality surely lea ds end-users down the path of DIY, self monitoring or cheap equipment and i nternet remote monitoring .... which will eventually be "good enough". Unl ess central stations get on the band wagon and begin offering "cloud" stora ge services, remote control services and such .... in the future the major ity of their monitoring will only be large commercial burg and fire alarm s ystems. Residential will diminish over time. The residential end user will be satisfied with "good enough". That's how this trade has been evolving fo r decades. First there was direct wire and McCollough, then the tape dialer was "good enough". Then the digital dialer a brief respite in the "good en ough" decline. Then came DTMF dialing. How long did it take for that to be trusted over rotary dialing? Then came VoIP. Fire marshals were "NEVER" goi ng to accept that kind of communication .... yeah .... sure" Then came long range radio.... who was EVER going to trust THAT? Then redundant radio and landline. Now we've got Cellular or radio and Network monitoring with no redundancy ...... that's acceptable???

for some combination of a long range radio, cellular network and land line where only one is used for a primary transmission technology and the "back up" technology never gets actually tested until and unless the primary tech nology fails. "What do you mean?" they say. "The back up technology sends i n periodic "supervisory" signals." I say, how do you know it will send in " alarm" signals unless it's tested every time an alarm signal is generated? How do you know that something hasn't been disconnected at the installation and the radio isn't just sitting there disconnected for the last 5 years . .. since the primary has never failed, and the "backup" is just sending in supervisory signals but not able to send in alarm signals? If you think it can't happen, Ask DSC about the time their network went down and nobody kne w about it for weeks and weeks because their network could only receive sup ervisory signals but not alarm signals ..... and nobody was notified!!!!

SC anything, ever again. They NEVER tell anyone when a failure occurs. Anot her reason is During Sandy I had a customer who was without power for weeks . When they were back up I went back to power up their system and couldn't get the cellular radio to work. When I called tech support they asked if th e battery was left connected after it died. I said "of course". The tech ha d the nerve to nonchalantly say, "Oh, that's a problem with those radios, i f you leave the battery connected and it dies, the cellular radio has to be replaced. That's a little problem we have with those units." ..... WHAT!! !!!!

en notified otherwise ... why do you need to be informed? Why should they spend all that money replacing or repairing units that dealers never have t he problem with? Recall? WATSA RECALL????

nging and if you don't diversify or adopt some of the new technology, (whet her you like it or not) if your mid way or just getting into the trade .... you're going to be left behind.

, Not because I think it's good, or right or secure ... it's just that I kn ow if I hold out, my old fashioned alarm monitoring RMR market is going to slowly diminish. End users are being charmed by the Telephone companies, Be st Buy, Cable companies, National alarm companies, DIY self install it by D IY Web Site companies selling Chinese mfg'd systems ....... at $15.00 a mon th. Pretty soon Google and Apple will be "one upping" each other with thei r version of DIY systems and Apps. Think "DropCam", "Nest" and "SimpleSafe" . OH and another thing, do you really think that your alarm equipment manuf acturer of choice "ISN"T" providing their equipment to end users on the Int ernet ? REALLY?

t now is that they haven't released a DIY version of the installation instr uctions.

ong thing by "forcing" installers pay prices for equipment and services so that we've got to compete with all of the above. If they want to keep their bread and butter customers, they should be providing us with equipment and control services that compete with all of the above but at lower pricing .....

Oh, and one more thing. Take a look at some of the DIY help websites.

By far, the most popular panels ..... by the thousands ..... in the hands of DIY'ers on EVERY DIY help web site is ... yep ...... DSC .... with Hone ywell a close second.

In return, please tell me how much loyalty do you think they actually deser ve ?????

Reply to
Jim

I can't comment on DSC since I have not touched their stuff in 10 years. I assume they are worse than ever, they were bad when I quit dealing with them so long ago.

In fairness to Honeywell, at least they take a stance about not helping end-users with installation issues. Its been a while since I've called support, but they would always ask my name and company before assisting and keep a record of how often I called. You're right about end-user installation manuals too - they are not "dumbed-down" for the masses like a Home Depot sold DIY system might be. Alarmnet radios have to be programmed with proprietary programmers, or OTA (not something an end-user can initiate).

The problem I see is online outlets selling professional parts to DIY'ers

*and* offering cheap monitoring. No competent technician has inspected the system, now online, and it's capable of summoning emergency response to any location (even an incorrect location if the account number is wrong!). No one checks to make sure the appropriate signal is programmed for the device(s). If a smoke detector trips; it may send a trouble, supervisory, or burglary signal. That's a mistake that could be deadly and not caught until its way too late.

I think there should be a national standard that all local responders adopt which states that no emergency response will be summoned unless the system has been certified by a competent & licensed company. That certifying company *should* be in a contract with the monitoring company to complete the liability chain. The monitoring company should (shall) require the DIY'er to undergo re-certification every time programming mode is entered. I suppose a remote panel connection would be good enough for that, after the initial physical inspection. Also, require periodic (annual?) physical inspections for DIY installed & monitored systems.

I guess you've seen the TV commercials for SimpliSafe

formatting link
. It shows the DIY'er 'mounting' a PIR by placing it on his fireplace mantle! WTF? I almost spit out a mouthful of coffee when I saw that.

Reply to
G. Morgan

"G. Morgan" As much as I agree with your assessment of the current situation, I DO NOT think Fed or Even State involvement will cure the problem. Not sure how it is in your state/local area, but here in Kentucky all the government uses regulations for is revenue collection.. Safety is very low down on their list of concerns. ie... they passed a law that restricts Emergency Aid Buttons that are remotely monitored to just one company.. (unless you?re a Hospital and self monitoring your own equipment) (I'll let you guess who makes most of the money on that little caper ...) ie... fire alarm monitoring is only allowed under the NFPA 2002 edition.. No allowance is given for VoIP or Cellular, POTS only.... (AT&T has already told the state PSC regulators they plan to drop POTS in

2014/15)

I guess we're all just waiting for the "@#$% in a Hand Basket" to come swinging by.. ;-)

RTS

Reply to
Rocky

I think you're right. Security is not the concern of politicians or any of the recent players jumping on the latest security system bandwagon. It's al l about the RMR. And without the politicians placing restrictions on the ga rbage that's being offered now and only looking for more revenue producing laws, the garbage will just pile higher and higher.

Most end users and/or DIY'ers will forego the possibility that they've done something wrong .... willing to take the chance as long as they don't have to pay anything (or very low rates) for anything. After all, they don't kn ow what they don't know. What if they don't get the call from their self mo nitored alarm system? They'd rather take that chance then pay for monthly m onitoring. Why "isn't" it alright to put a motion detector on a mantle? It' s a lot easier than having to mount that ugly thing on a wall. Here's one for you ...... "A cat is not going to set off a motion detector because it isn't a person." That's what's out there. There's no effort by the alarm in dustry to educate the public about what the failings in these systems are b ecause the manufacturers are profiting regardless. It would be nice if the industry had a national association who would run educational adds to educa te the public .... right? But .... wait a minute .... we DO have a national association ...... but alas, it's made up of alarm manufacturers and Natio nal Alarm companies that all profit from the lack of education to the end u sers. OH WELL ...... guess there's no help there.

When you're dealing with that kind of ignorance ..... and the seller isn't concerned about it ..... you know where all this eventually leads. To the t otal commoditization of security systems that offer worthless security whic h will reach the point that authorities will no longer respond to any kind of residential alarms.

I say again, if you're just starting out or midway in this trade, you'd bet ter diversify something fierce in the coming years. Security as you have kn own it is going to disappear.

All I can say I'm glad I was in it during it's heyday.

Reply to
Jim

f the recent players jumping on the latest security system bandwagon. It's all about the RMR. And without the politicians placing restrictions on the garbage that's being offered now and only looking for more revenue producin g laws, the garbage will just pile higher and higher.

ne something wrong .... willing to take the chance as long as they don't ha ve to pay anything (or very low rates) for anything. After all, they don't know what they don't know. What if they don't get the call from their self monitored alarm system? They'd rather take that chance then pay for monthly monitoring. Why "isn't" it alright to put a motion detector on a mantle? I t's a lot easier than having to mount that ugly thing on a wall. Here's on e for you ...... "A cat is not going to set off a motion detector because i t isn't a person." That's what's out there. There's no effort by the alarm industry to educate the public about what the failings in these systems are because the manufacturers are profiting regardless. It would be nice if th e industry had a national association who would run educational adds to edu cate the public .... right? But .... wait a minute .... we DO have a nation al association ...... but alas, it's made up of alarm manufacturers and Nat ional Alarm companies that all profit from the lack of education to the end users. OH WELL ...... guess there's no help there.

t concerned about it ..... you know where all this eventually leads. To the total commoditization of security systems that offer worthless security wh ich will reach the point that authorities will no longer respond to any kin d of residential alarms.

etter diversify something fierce in the coming years. Security as you have known it is going to disappear.

Let me take a lesson from your book and give another hard opinion on this w hole idea of self monitoring. Anyone who thinks that self monitoring using his cellphone as the main contact is a MORON and truly doesn`t understand s ecurity other than what he thinks he knows. Unfortunatly with the current m ove to selling simplistic DIY alarm and self monitoring systems, this is on ly going to increase.

But that`s the beauty of a free market; one can make all the mistakes you w ant without anyone calling you to task for it. Luckily for them, real alarm s are not common relative to the 99 percent of alarms that are false. This might be the only thing that saves these folks (in an ironic twist of fate. ...)

Reply to
tourman

Have you heard of the class action lawsuit filed against ADT for using non- encrypted wireless communications. The NEO is one of a very few wireless se curity systems that use encrypted wireless sensors & fobs with spread spect rum technology. If you continue to install all of those non-encrypted syste ms (2GIG, GE, Honeywell, DSC Power Series, etc.) you may be decreasing the re-sell value of your monitored accounts.

We use this as a selling point and the customers are willing to pay more fo r a better system - even in an ultra competitive region like Dallas.

I don't like paying more for the panel & keypads either (the sensors themse lves are actually little cheaper than power series wireless devices).

Also, NEO has a place in larger warehouse installations. We have used it in a number of jobs this year where we otherwise would have had to pay $300-$

400 for renting a lift to run wires. Conventional wireless would not have w orked in those installs.

I am working on a quote right now that the customer does not want monitorin g but does want remote smart phone control. He now knows about the encrypte d NEO wireless versus the non-encrypted systems and wants a NEO. I will hav e to break the news that an Envisalink will not work on that system. That w ill NOT break the deal and he might even decide to go ahead with monitoring and then I will get another monitored account.

Reply to
ricklebo.ahs

I've used them for monitoring two medium sized systems for almost 2 years n ow, one a DSC and the other a Honeywell, and they are an excellent monitori ng company IMO. Not only am I saving a significant amount of money, but they are also more prompt in responding to signals in comparison to the company I paid 4 times the amount of money for monitoring before. I've purposely tripped the syst em to test this and the premise phone was ringing in less than 30 seconds o f the panels going into alarm. Other people may have different opinions (I am in Canada and they contract the service out to CML Monitoring, so it mig ht be different in the US) but I am happy with the service and find it an e xcellent value.

Reply to
ns4wiki

Make sure you check the EyezOn website to make sure it is compatible with y our panels.

The EnvisaLink setup with a DSC panel is plug and play (for the most part). With Honeywell panels, it is more advanced. You'll definitely need to have the installer code for when installing the card on a Honeywell System (and if you are discontinuing existing PSTN monitoring on any sort of system so that you can disable it as the primary monitoring communication method, ot herwise you will have a trouble condition when not connected to a phone lin e...it is preferable to have it handy no matter what and I know if the pane l is locked on a Honeywell system that there is a workaround to change it y ourself...outlined in the installers manual). The instructions from EyezOn are OK but it is a good idea to have the installer manual handy for referen ce (Available in PDF online). As Robert Campbell said, you need a reliable internet connection, and it might be a little more complex unless you are a fast learner, or are familiarized with low voltage security and how it wor ks.

If you are new to the stuff, have the time, and aren't afraid if you put yo ur alarm system out of service for a while if something bugs up and you nee d figure it out (highly unlikely IMO though) , then heck I'd tell anyone to give it a shot for the amount of money it could save you.

Reply to
ns4wiki

On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 10:59:17 PM UTC-5, Jim Davis wrote:

ET...

d marketing dictate what the public will want .... and that comes from the nationals and other large companies with the deep pockets. What with the "I nternet of Things", Free Apps for everything, the ability for end users to do their own systems .... I think that the handwriting is on the wall. Not in the very near future, not while I'm still active but the mid to new-come rs in this trade are going to eventually be squeezed out of a good portion of what we do now. The "There's an App for Everything" mentality surely lea ds end-users down the path of DIY, self monitoring or cheap equipment and i nternet remote monitoring .... which will eventually be "good enough". Unl ess central stations get on the band wagon and begin offering "cloud" stora ge services, remote control services and such .... in the future the major ity of their monitoring will only be large commercial burg and fire alarm s ystems. Residential will diminish over time. The residential end user will be satisfied with "good enough". That's how this trade has been evolving fo r decades. First there was direct wire and McCollough, then the tape dialer was "good enough". Then the digital dialer a brief respite in the "good en ough" decline. Then came DTMF dialing. How long did it take for that to be trusted over rotary dialing? Then came VoIP. Fire marshals were "NEVER" goi ng to accept that kind of communication .... yeah .... sure" Then came long range radio.... who was EVER going to trust THAT? Then redundant radio and landline. Now we've got Cellular or radio and Network monitoring with no redundancy ...... that's acceptable???

for some combination of a long range radio, cellular network and land line where only one is used for a primary transmission technology and the "back up" technology never gets actually tested until and unless the primary tech nology fails. "What do you mean?" they say. "The back up technology sends i n periodic "supervisory" signals." I say, how do you know it will send in " alarm" signals unless it's tested every time an alarm signal is generated? How do you know that something hasn't been disconnected at the installation and the radio isn't just sitting there disconnected for the last 5 years . .. since the primary has never failed, and the "backup" is just sending in supervisory signals but not able to send in alarm signals? If you think it can't happen, Ask DSC about the time their network went down and nobody kne w about it for weeks and weeks because their network could only receive sup ervisory signals but not alarm signals ..... and nobody was notified!!!!

SC anything, ever again. They NEVER tell anyone when a failure occurs. Anot her reason is During Sandy I had a customer who was without power for weeks . When they were back up I went back to power up their system and couldn't get the cellular radio to work. When I called tech support they asked if th e battery was left connected after it died. I said "of course". The tech ha d the nerve to nonchalantly say, "Oh, that's a problem with those radios, i f you leave the battery connected and it dies, the cellular radio has to be replaced. That's a little problem we have with those units." ..... WHAT!! !!!!

en notified otherwise ... why do you need to be informed? Why should they spend all that money replacing or repairing units that dealers never have t he problem with? Recall? WATSA RECALL????

nging and if you don't diversify or adopt some of the new technology, (whet her you like it or not) if your mid way or just getting into the trade .... you're going to be left behind.

, Not because I think it's good, or right or secure ... it's just that I kn ow if I hold out, my old fashioned alarm monitoring RMR market is going to slowly diminish. End users are being charmed by the Telephone companies, Be st Buy, Cable companies, National alarm companies, DIY self install it by D IY Web Site companies selling Chinese mfg'd systems ....... at $15.00 a mon th. Pretty soon Google and Apple will be "one upping" each other with thei r version of DIY systems and Apps. Think "DropCam", "Nest" and "SimpleSafe" . OH and another thing, do you really think that your alarm equipment manuf acturer of choice "ISN"T" providing their equipment to end users on the Int ernet ? REALLY?

t now is that they haven't released a DIY version of the installation instr uctions.

ong thing by "forcing" installers pay prices for equipment and services so that we've got to compete with all of the above. If they want to keep their bread and butter customers, they should be providing us with equipment and control services that compete with all of the above but at lower pricing .....

Jim I agree with you. I have experience using both DSC Systems and Honeywel l Systems in service over the long term. It could possibly be due to some s ort of poor installation (done by an alarm tech since I was actually too yo ung at the time to even know about it...but maybe still not likely an insta ll problem), I've always had DSC Systems act up and just outright start get ting a mind of their own after 5-7 years or so of service. More random stuf f just starts happening out of the blue for no apparent reason, the system cutting out and sirens going off but a blank keypad (maybe a short somewher e), but happens on the DSC panels that have been in every time. The Honeywe ll System I had previously (I upgraded it to a Vista 20P 2 years ago) I thi nk it was a 16 year old Ademco Vista 15, ran strong for the full 16 years. My life was actually saved by a Vista 20P setup (in a house I was renting) because of a CO leak (some total goof replaced the water heaters and instal led Natural Gas Water Heaters in a house on LP and didn't install the conve rsion kit...) the owner had monitored CO detectors and the one time a honey well security system went into alarm, it wasn't a false one. Although they might be more difficult to set up, I kind of owe my life to them now and (a lthough I might be biased) I find their systems superior to DSC Systems. Th ey just seem better when it comes to being able to find it on Amazon and wh en expanding the capabilities of a system. I find their manuals much better written and easier to follow also.

DSC may have the market share but I am a Honeywell Man...for now

Reply to
ns4wiki

It is important to make sure the system is set up correctly though if you a re doing it yourself. Replicate a scenario where there would be some sort of smoke in the house or a intruder open a door to your house (and test all the components) and you'll have some peace of mind knowing it works correc tly, and if not, you can fix it until it is operating correctly. In my expe rience, not so much for Burglary (the cops take HOURS to show up and will j ust file the police report and stop no one), but more so if you have life s afety devices connected to them. Make sure you are using EOL resistors and that they are operating correctly (the alarm techs around my area are not v ery good and they just skip using resistors on everything they can, they ju st cross a resistor between the fire zone connections and on all other zone s they have to use EOLs and don't put an EOL anywhere including even smoke detectors!!!) but in a fire or CO detection scenario it can potentially sav e your life. Every second matters when it comes to a fire growing out of co ntrol. It's not rocket science, and if you are good enough with your hands, it's not that sophisticated to do. It's important to do it properly though and test your your components, especially life safety devices like smoke d etectors with some mock smoke and make sure the signal gets to the monitori ng station. Besides that it works well and is definitely worth it if you're looking for the internet functionality and want to save some money too

Reply to
ns4wiki

you installers are funny, anyone with a little research can install alarms as well , and much neater than you do. I respect that you make a living doing it but come on. For one if i install my own i don't have to worry about some crook installer (most are honest) or monitor not reporting a break in.

Reply to
abcascott

IIB

Reply to
Jim Davis

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.