Lobenn TCP/IP backup transmission device - RHC

I guess the first question would be "UL" status? Second, cost. Not only at the site, but inside the Central Station. Any insight on that Rob.

situations,

If the phone line is physically cut, so is the DSL, no? I'd like to know a little more about the polling.

situations,

That's true. You will receive a "panel not responding" at the end of the poll cycle. Could be from 1 to 6 minutes (UL) or what ever time you program in. (I'm using my equipment as example) Again, this is typically why you wouldn't eliminate a land line, and have only VoIP. If I get a "panel not responding", I can quickly attempt to contact the panel over land line. Obviously, if the panel doesn't answer, you follow whatever procedure dictates the level of security it's protecting. Of course there's always cell back up....right... Point is, you'll know exactly that the panel is not capable of communicating to the CS. Without it, you'd never know it was cut. Also, just because a panel is "not responding" does not necessarily mean the line is cut. Could just mean the connection is down for other reasons.

Ok, I'm no tech expert, but here goes.

The device is simultaneously connected to both the internet AND the phone line. So if the phone line is cut your IP connection is also gone assuming you're using DSL. If the polling rate is set sufficiently short (and I understand this is totally adjustable), the lack of a connection shows up on the server in the station in that time frame, and would generate action at the station end. However, if your cable carries the internet connection, then there would also be a normal signal received at the station of loss of connection on the phone line.

RHC

My understanding is they have applied for both ULC and CSA approval, and have someone on staff who is adept at manoevering things through those hopeless bureaucracies. At the moment, they intend to start sell sometime in Dec / Jan timeframe

The cost at the station end would appear to be about 10 grand, with each server capable of 1000 "connections", and fully rackmountable to suit station requirements. When I saw it demo'd this morning, they had a variety of receivers set up, interfacing with the older 1550 panels and the newer

One neat thing is the ability of the Central Station to program the end user unit with upgraded firmware etc. I'm hypothesizing here, but theoretically, the station could offer different levels of service to the end user at differing prices. However, competitive pressures might well eliminate those variables over time.

I don't see any issues with commercial applications; however, I can't resolve in my own mind how this will appeal to the low end consumer who has just rid himself of a $20 phone line to save a buck or two. Do you sell it to him, or keep it and add $X per month to the monitoring rate to cover it, or whatever....

Still lots of questions to be answered, but I do think they are on the right track...

RHC

I paid right around $4,000 to monitor 1,000 accounts using DMP. The receiver can do 2,500 supervised, and 65,535 unsupervised.

When I saw it demo'd this morning, they had a variety

DMP's iCOMsl costs right around the same ballpark, and can also be used on any manufacturers control panel, including fire panels.

theoretically,

I'm assuming you mean it's flash upgradeable? Or is that the ability to remotely program a control panel?

Ummm....well seeing how the residential industry was destroyed in the 90's, good luck hiding $250.00 somewhere. Although, If I told you what my average RMR using the Internet to route signals was.....It's grade "AA" service, so

I agree. I'd like to see this industry change for the better. 98 more steps to go. Thanks Rob

J: I'm assuming you mean it's flash upgradeable? Or is that the ability to remotely program a control panel?

RHC: Yes, flash upgradable with different options as I understand. You would have to advise the CS to switch the end user device to POTS line as first answer so you could upload/download in the normal manner, then advise them to switch back to IP as primary mode.

J: I think as some of you "old dogs" learn the ability to offer video verification along side the connection, you'll see the quality of service justify the costs. I'm living proof, it works.

RHC: Wow ! Me an old dog ? I thought I was the baby of the group with only

RHC: Still lots of questions to be answered, but I do think they are on the right track...

J: I agree. I'd like to see this industry change for the better. 98 more steps to go.

Thanks Rob

There is one track that's bad that they're (manufacturers) on ..... ONE MORE TIME!

How many years is it going to take before manufacturers get together and produce a product that isn't proprietary? They did the same thing with the digital communicator as they're doing with the IP communicator and we wound up with a dozen different formats. Every receiver mfg had to expended how much more R&D and developement funds to design receivers through the years? Central stations had to invest in half a dozen different receivers in order to accommodate their dealer base. A N D .... IN THE MEAN TIME ...... SIA sits there and waits until every manufacturer develops their own equipment and format and THEN it comes out with a standard. WHA?

LIKE they didn't know VoIP was comming down the pike? What the hell DO they do if they don't impliment or advance the need for standards? Is it the Mfg's that don't want to, or what?

It's like if you had 25 Pizza places within a mile of your home, None of them would make enough money to prosper and the pies would be poorly made. Reduce that to 3 Pizza places ..... everybody benifits.

Hmm, speaking of which I think I'll go get a pizza.

Nah, damn ..... too late.

Thats easy to answer, individual manufacturers developing their own equipment is what causes innovation, also each is developing for a particular segment of the market AND each manufacturer thinks their particular method is better than the competition.

With IP communication DMP and Radionics chose a more direct communication method between the client and central station whereas Honeywell chose easier installation with Symphony/7845i. GE allows direct communication with Osborne Hoffman receivers while also offering user configuring over the web via Premise Connect. Each has strengths and weaknesses but each manufacturer thinks they can do it better.

It doesn't work that way, alarm systems take years to come to market with the amount of design and testing involved and these aren't huge manufacturers with unlimited R&D, they can't develop something for VoIP when VoIP itself doesn't have a standard, With the current pace of communication it's very hard to predict what will come next. 5 years ago making phone calls on the net was mostly a dream, it took 8 years to develop the ITI Advent panel.

And you have what you have now, a pizza market with 3 or 4 big players making semi-crap fast-food type pizza, I prefer some no-name place that really knows how to do it right. Let the market decide how many players it wants

Unfortunately that's true for 99% of the Manufacturers. But then, why haven't other manufacturers designed their products backward and forward compatable? Clearly it can be done. Look at what having a product, and supposedly a professional one, being easily placed into the hands of every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a credit card has done. Look at the Residential Market.

Hopefully never! Do you really want anymore less trained/certified people installing alarm systems? More Bass companies peddling to the untrained General Public?

That's never going to change. Every Manufacturer has to feel special, or more advanced than the next. That's the niche they believe.

Some are slow to learn, and of course they have to be reactive, not proactive.

People in general don't give to s**ts about quality, they're more interested in the cheapest choice. That's why you'd only have three pizza places to go to in that mile.

Uh-huh. God forbid they allow competition. :^)

That's also one of the main reasons why competition is good for the public. Not only does it result in lower consumer prices. It also results in better product development.

If you want to see what happens when everything is standardized, take a look at the poor quality of Russian products. I hired an immigrant from Moscow about 10-15 years ago. He tried out one of my Milwaukee drills and said "If use drill like 'dis in Russia house fall down." :^)

On that we disagree. I've found that most people do indeed care about quality more than price. Obviously, there's a limit. Few folks will spend three times as much to get a 10% improvement, but most will spend a few dollars more if they know that what they're getting is better built or has better features.