Magnum Alert 900 and Touch Tone Dialing

Hey... you're catching on...

Next Alarm is nothing more than an online Alarm Dealer. They're not a CS and never will be. Read their FAQ!! Oh.... I forgot... You don't read well...

I particlarily like how they'll "take over" an alarm system that's been "locked out" with their own stand-alone dialler. They basically give a "scum-bag" non-paying customer the means to "switch" their monitoring from the guy that sold them their service and to whom they still may owe a contractual obligation. Robert would (of course) utilize a service like this because it "fits" into marketing mantra perfectly.

You missed the most important point... The customer's alarm equipment is unable to communicate through VOIP. A lot of alarm panels aren't able to either...

Uh-huh... sure...

Jim's already pointed that out, thanks... My bad...

I agree on the VOIP thing. If a customer chooses to go that direction, they still have a contract that says they shall provide a phone line. What I was refering to was the panel, chip situation. Alot to companies buy accounts that they can monitor but cannot support the system. That is why I ask if they were just a monitoring company or a service company as well. If he has just a monitoring contract that is one thing, however if the monitoring is based on servicing the system as well that could be another.

Yah......sure.....lead another unsuspecting vic....er newbie into your web Snidley! VOIP is unrealiabe for security communications, period. There is no "work around" to someones property and life safety. Another one for the "Best of Bass".

You just said earlier that you would help the OP get into this "work around' senerio and now here it sounds like you haven't even investigated it much less have any confidence in it. You must see a fast buck somewhere, Snidely.

I'm

What in the hell does this have to do with the discussion! Drinking to much of that bath tub hootch down there?

Then why are offering to help this guy get through on it instead of telling him it is unrealiable? You have really shown your true colors on this one Robert!

Even though you won't see this, your comment still needs a slap on the hand, again.

I don't know about YOUR contract but if you're "committing" in your contract that the alarm system will do eveything that it's supposed to do, you're in for a shock when the time comes when a loss of life or property occurs when :

The panel was struck by lightning and can't communicate. The power went out and the battery hadn't been changed. The chip in the panel went bad. The client went into programing and screwed it up because you gave him the dealer code. The Police don't show up The fire truck goes to the wrong address. The central station send the police to the wrong address The telephone line is out. The static on the phone line wont let it communicate reliably. The police showed up but didn't see anything suspicious. There's an impassable snow storm. The police or fire truck had an accident on the way. The central station missed the call, new operator. Your new employee screwed up the programing on yesterdays service call.

If you don't have exclusionary clauses to cover events such as these,I'll bet every one of your clients are VERY happy.

Mike, after all of the extranous chatter, my original post still holds true.

The chip can be reprogramed so that the panel will dial touch tone. Whether it can communicate with your central station or not has to be tested. And ...... once tested successfully, there's no way to gurarantee that it will continue to communicate. You can offset this unreliability by having the panel programed for periodic check in with central station and that YOU be notified by central station if it fails to check in.

I have panels working under these conditions with my clients understanding that the possibility exists that it may not work. I've asked them to sign a waiver to that effect. It's their choice to not upgrade their equipment.

That's the bottom line.

To those who believe that 4/2 format wont work on Voip, ...... it works here. The problem, as stated above is ...... will it work reliably. If it doesn't work in your area, I'd suspect that it is due to the cable company protocols in your area, which they can change (even here) at their whim.

I don't think "alarm manufacturers" are all that anxious to jump on the VOIP bandwagon. There isn't a cable company out there that can guarantee 100% "uptime", and until they do, the service is subject to interruption from power failure, modem failure, "service upgrades" and other irregularities. There are some alarm panels that will interface with VOIP already, but even they are subject to to the problems I've already outlined. A POTS line is still far more secure. A POTS line backed up to a cellular communicator is even better.

Keywords: "less secure than a conventional line"

.... and further reducing already shoddy service levels.

You have your priorities all screwed up (as usual). You should do more toward taking care of the numerous complaints filed against you at the BBB.

Ah, yes... The infamous Elk panel you have set up for your "office". Did you order a M1XEP for it yet??

"Frank Olson" wrote in message news:FKv0f.90830$tl2.86115@pd7tw3no...

I'm particularly interested in the section of programming where you can tell the M1XEP to send program strings/command packets to any open connection using standard ASCII protocols. After all, you *did* say Elk tech support told you how to do it, didn't you?? You *did* say you had a "close working relationship with their engineering staff and the sales and support folks" because you were an "Elk distributor", right??

Why are you talking to yourself Frank?

maybe he thinks that talking to himself is better use of his time then to talk to you? ;-)

Its a joke....just in case...

"Mark Leuck" a écrit dans le message de news: snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com...

Mark from the test I did,if you use the voip cable modem,it is much more stable then any network adapter connected to a HS internet connection,even cable..

this most be because of packet priority ..

a packet can have a priority flag,if the provider you have is using such thing as a samsung inforanger itcm or similar cable modem

it has an internal voip device,providing up to 2 separate phone line if so the isp can tag all the voip packet as top priority and manage that traffic as well..so about all the protocol can be used pretty reliably but in no way as reliable as a hard line can do

for gismo such as vonage the packets are not sent in high priority so there is a longer delay of transmission and in a case like our,transmitting sound witch need to be in good sync, we have big trouble...

if anyone want to test it.. use ethereal its a packets snifer(free) that will show you if your vonage device do send its packets in high or no priority mode..

"Mark Leuck" a écrit dans le message de news: cMadna2mW snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com...

Those actually retail for ~$255. They also make some "Databurst" models. I've had a requests for those and will add them to the website shortly.

It's probably a safe bet that some enterprising Canadian firm will come up with a similar program. Their business model looks like it should be quite remunerative.

I expect it will be the other way around. As more and more commercial and even residential customers switch to VoIP alarm dealers will start asking manufacturers for VoIP compatible control panels. That's what drives the industry and that's where the solutions will be found.

Sending data over the Internet, whether analog through VoIP or straight digital, is a relatively simple matter. The tough part (for now) is maintaining circuit integrity. As has already been noted, there really isn't any way to be sure that the signal will get through. But when you think about it, that problem is also present with POTS line signalling. There's no way to be 100% certain that a customer's telephone line won't be cut or simply fail.

Well, yes and no. Clearly, POTS is more reliable than VoIP but it is far from 100% secure. Phone lines can and do fail due to storms, tampering, etc. They're better than VoIP in that they don't require premises power to operate but they can be circumvented with very little effort if the thief wants.

That's because they don't sell anything that can reliably send signals to their CS over a VoIP connection. Saying ADT can't do it is not the same as saying that it can't be done.

I'll look at what can be done using a few systems I have on hand. In all probability none of them will be 100% reliable but perhaps one or another will prove better than the rest.

That sounds like a "Dear Abby" sig line. :^)

At the moment, this whole business of alarms using VoIp is a bit of a circular argument. No doubt that a solution of some sort will be found (or invented), but something tells me not in time for those people who need it now.

On the other hand, I have to wonder about the wisdom of giving up a land line to save $20 a month, knowing your alarm won't work properly on the VoIP connection. I doubt many businesses would do such a foolish thing but it's many of the residential consumers who definately will.

I don't know what the answer is, but I do know what the answer currently isn't. If you come up with anything let us know; however, for the moment, I'm simply going to follow ADT's advice (hmmm.....I do see the irony of that statement coming from me....:)))

RHC

They have no idea RH, most service calls on VOIP is after the customer has the service and gotten rid of the land line

We agree that something will be developed. As to needing it now, we also agree. Alarm users ought to keep at least one POTS line. There's a saying that goes something like, "Lack of planning and forethought on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part." :^)

I suspect most alarm users and probably even most installers have no idea that there will bwe a problem with if they switch to VoIP. They seem to find out after the POTS lines are already gone. As to the savings, it's a bit more than $20 for some of us. I've ordered a new system that turns sites in several states and two countries into a "virtual office building". This will be a major help in handling incoming and outgoing (least cost routing, etc.) phone calls, faxes, etc. The five new lines will each have the ability to handle one incoming and one outgoing call at the same time. Toll charges and 800-number charges will be halved. I'll be saving nearly a thousand dollars a month. That's for a relatively small business. Imagine what it can mean to a larger firm.

The problem is a lack of information. Very few consumers or businesses know there will be a problem until it's too late.

I'd meant to add the last bit to my response and pressed "send" before I'd really thought about it... It happens to guys "on the cusp" of 50... :-))