A mentor / Advisor ?

Dean,

I'm more hardware oriented.

Shortly after the ACT/HS Z-Wave USB interface was introduced, I speculated here that, since the Zensys reference design was RS-232, the ACT/HS USB design likely merely grafted an FTDI chip onto the serial interface. Someone who had bought the hardware opened it up and confirmed that I was right. I see that Chris Walker discovered this over a year later. ;)

?p=681339#post681339

snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

That was uncalled for. For what it's worth, I don't sell Zwave. The one Zwave component I offer is an ELK interface for people who buy their Zwave stuff elsewhere. Mr. Houston has repeatedly criticized Zwave without ever having so much as seen it, let alone tested it. As best I can tell, his objection to Zwave stems from an argument he had with another person who does sell Zwave in his online store.

While Insteon might be a useful solution, it lacks one major thing that is essential to its continued success, even its continuing availability. There is virtually no third party support. One company manufactures it. No one else is making Insteon wall outlets, dimmers, switches, etc. When (not if) that company decides to drop the product everyone who bought it is going to be SOL.

By comparison, Zwave has the support of the following companies, all of whom are manufacturing or developing Zwave compatible products:

Danfoss, Intel, Intermatic, Leviton, Monster Cable, Wayne Dalton, Zensys, A-1 Components, ACT, Allion, Ascendek Electronics, Boca Devices, Bulogics, Casa Works, Control Think, Cooper Wiring Devices, Crayon Interface, Cybertan, Digital Media Research, Destiny Networks, Eldat, Electronic Solutions Inc, ELK Products, Embedded Automation, Emergency Power & Automation Specialists, Exceptional Inovation, Goggin Research, RCS, Werner Reitz, Semilink, SMK, Superna, Techniku, Tell It Online, Tridium Software, TwisThink, uControl, Viewsonic, Visualize Inc, Xanboo, Zykronix.

He is, but I was implying not that you just believe what he says, but that you debate what he says, and that there will be plenty of Z-Wave users in those same threads giving their opinions.

--------------------- Dean Roddey Chairman/CTO, Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd

I should have made it *very* clear I wasn't looking to be fair. I merely wanted to dispute the claim that particular thread consisted of "mostly positive" comments.

Quite an option. Along the lines of the old saw: "It's not a bug, it's a feature." What's that Monty Python line: "but I don't want ANY spam!" Nor do I want to run around the house registering any modules for any reason.

I helped a very non-techie set up a peer-to-peer W2KP network recently. "Static controller" would glaze her eyes over as quickly as any pull down in the Network dialog of Control Panel. One of the reasons HA hasn't penetrated the masses is that it's too techie.

Running around with anything (my remote, my laptop or my johnson) registering modules is, on the face of it, a step backwards. What I found particularly damning about this method of network configuration is that it appears when a module fails, you get to do the re-registration dance all over again. Perhaps they've fixed that but it seems to have been a ritual too oft repeated for my tastes.

That's damning with faint praise! It works out, IMHO, to saying "I'd choose death by hanging instead of electrocution because hanging doesn't leave burn marks." I'd choose neither because, at the moment, and with the help of Jeff Volp's XTB, my X-10 things are OK the way they are, maybe for the first time in ten years. I'm still remarkably impressed by how much the XTB has improved my HA setup. It's like comparing a 40MB full height Seagate desk-shaker of the late 80's with new 500GB SATA drive. See this site for a tour of some golden oldies:

For folks that love scenes, dimming, macros and lots of other HA curlicues, these new technologies offer substantial improvements over X-10. Not for me. Especially not when it comes to having to torture nearly 70-year-old wiring once again to switch switches in and out.

I'm in total agreement. However PLC interference *usually* can be stopped far more readily than RF interference so I'd go PLC over RF if those were the options. Next time around I probably will go with a hardwired technology, especially if I build new.

For now, X-10's dual mode approach once again serves me quite nicely. If RF ever becomes a problem, I can install PLC controllers where I am currently using RF ones without heartbreak. Since I was able to buy a carton of minicontrollers for under $3 each, I could even wire up my own tiny pushbutton at the side of the bed and lead the wires to a remotely hacked minicontrollers. That would replace the credit card controller I have velcroed under the nightstand to control the porch lite. I think it will be a long time before ZWave becomes popular enough to offer a $3 controller.

So far, neither Insteon, ZWave, UPB or anyone else comes within miles of X-10's breadth of product offerings or their price. When that equation changes, or when the XTB can't muscle its way through the noise anymore, I'll look around again.

By then, ZigBee might come to life. Bluetooth was once frowned upon here as never going anywhere but ironically, now it's everywhere. The HA race will go to the protocol that gets embedded in appliances *at the factory.* Current sensors wrapped around TV cords and washer cords just aren't going to cut it for the non-technical users of HA.

The basic problem of X-10 technology in the new age of CFL's and switching power supplies has been signal strength. Jeff's invention solved that very neatly for me. My only complaint is that X-10 hasn't tried to boost the signals on stock modules, although they may be size constrained if I understood Jeff correctly. The components needed to generate a strong signal are too large to fit in a standard transmitter casing like the maxi/mini controllers and the CM11A. But that's a minor issue since I can "turbocharge" my existing transmitters for a price that's very attractive compared to switching to a new protocol.

I've not had any device failures using the XTB other than the failure of a Decora AHT RF module, but that probably had to do with it taking a nasty fall from the top of a bookcase to hardwood floor! It was a blessing in disguise because a very nagging "turn back on" problem with the bathroom lights disappeared when the Decora unit died. Maybe Jeff's XTB's are like STNG's "exocomps." They realized the Decora was screwing up the works and they pushed it off the shelf. Maybe I've been watching too many repeats of "Small Soldiers" with my nephew. (-:

-- Bobby G.

One bit of propaganda oft repeated by a certain strident, incompetent and dishonest fool is that Insteon is proprietary and only manufactured by a single company. In fact, Insteon is no more and no less proprietary than Z-Wave. Neither specification is published for all to see but the Insteon SDK was initially available for $100 (including about $90 in hardware) while the Zensys SDK cost $10K (although I suspect that not all developers were required to pony up that amount). A company that bought the Zensys SDK has since released a less expensive "SDK" of their own which appears to be a wrapper for underlying Zensys SDK functions - a neat marketing ploy as a tie-in to the devices they make but not something many serious developers would consider.

Insteon devices and/or Insteon interfaces are under development by a rather wide variety of companies, most of which even have some experience in Home Automation and some of which are also working with Z-Wave. You can find a partial list of members of the Insteon Alliance here...

And there are Insteon-based products being manufactured and sold by other companies. A few have been announced in Smarthome's Insteon forum. For example...

*

• Looks like I was wrong about there being no Insteon thermostats although this will not interface with the ELK serial adapter.

Now, as any one who pays much attention to CHA knows, I've reported both good and bad things about Insteon. I think the jury is still out on whether Smarthome can deliver a reliable system. I don't believe I've ever gone further than to say that for someone just starting with HA who cannot go hard-wired, it's worth investigating and more reliable than X-10 since it has ACK/NAK. In fact, since I did spend the $100 for an Insteon SDK the inane terms of their ambiguous license forbid me from saying anything good or bad about any performance tests I may or may not have conducted. ;)

As for Z-Wave, all I've done is point out weaknesses in the original design

- weaknesses that we are now told "might" be fixed in newer designs but without any supporting evidence.

snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

I have to wonder how often the average user will need to remove a module from his system. Just about any system will require initial registration of all components. I can see a DIYer periodically adding a component or three. But removing modules should be a rare exercise for *most* users. If it takes 30 minutes in a big system and you have to do it once every few years, that doesn't seem much of a problem. For the vast majority, even adding modules isn't going to be a frequent event.

On the down side of Inteon is the serious lack of third party manufacturing support. Any proprietary product that is available only through a single source is a ticking time bomb. Sooner or later they *will* drop the line. When they do, every Insteon project becomes an over-priced X10 kit.

BTW, I resent the implication of Mr. Houston that my recommendation of Zwave are profit-motivated. He deliberately misled the other poster since he is aware that I don't market Zwave.

Dean,

I have very little respect for cocoontech. I think it is far too "gee whiz-ey" and "wide-eyed boosterish", consisting mostly of press releases from manufacturers and run by techno-incompetents.

Never-the-less, I spent a few hours slogging through this thread...

It seems to end abruptly a few months ago but I cannot tell whether that's a problem with my browser (Firefox 2.0) or a problem with the site. The participants are ill-informed. For instance, one says Z-Wave is new to the US while it's actually the oldest of the 4 protocols discussed.

The thread is dominated by one individual who says he wrote Insteon software but became disillusioned and switched to Z-Wave.

Having tried his Insteon software (and exchanged e-mail with him) many months ago, I suggest anyone who is interested d/l and try his Insteon software before deciding how credible he is. I suspect he had difficulty stacking one block atop another back in kindergarten. You might also wonder why he continues to post warm fuzzy messages to the Smarthome Insteon forum (even as late as today). Methinks there's something rotten in Denmark (or is Zensys in The Netherlands?) And, even he says he would have stayed with Insteon except for Smarthome quality issues (which I've noted elsewhere).

Chris Walker jumps in several times. It's unclear to me whether the $49.95 SDK he refers to is the same SDK that Zensys wanted $10K for. I surely hope not! Can you enlighten us?

It's also unclear to me whether the various controllers mentioned interoperate. I've read that they do not.

Finally, can the devices from various manufacturers send instant level feedback and can the various controllers import the routing tables created by the latest controllers?

To be frank, I don't think you understand any of this!

snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

It is unfortunate that Mr. Houston (who claims to have me filtered) cannot engage in a discussion of the merits without resorting to name calling.

There is but one manufacturer of Insteon. That company holds the patents. Their SDK allows folks to develop interfaces but no one else makes Insteon wall outlets, switches, etc.

The SDK does not allow anyone else to manufacture the components -- only to develop interfaces. Zwave (actually Zensys, which is the patent holder) has licensed the production of Zwave hardware to scores of major industry players, such as Intel. Those manufacturers have neither the option nor (apparently) the interest in developing anything for Insteon.

Zensys was not interested in selling their original developer's kit to DIYers. They went after major league manufacturers. There is now an affordable SDK which homebrew *software* developers may want to investigate. It retails for about $70. I don't sell it but it's readily available through other online merchants.

Agiain, Mr. Houston disparages the SDK without ever having seen it. He says it "appears to be" but has no idea what it contains. Houston contribute useful information on subjects he actually knows. However, on this and several other subjects he has repeatedly posted opinion as fact. Unfortunately, many times his opinions are wrong. It is a disservice to the reader to continue denigrating a product without any knowledge of the product.

Interfaces, yes. Lighting devices, no.

Not one of these is a wall switch, dimmer, appliance module or outlet. Those compose better than 90% of the controllable devices in most HA projects.

You've also made numerous uninformed statements about Zwave, none of them positive. You've also wrongly accused me of nefariously supporting it for profit. You fail to mention that you've got a chip on your shoulder concerning me since Marc and I disagreed with some rather absurd comments you made on another subject.

One sage poster has said that Smarhome won't sell poor quality product unless it has their own name on it. :^)

engage in a discussion of the merits without resorting to

That goes way back, bonehead.

Your recent posts are based solely on personal animus.

They have a .Net based class framework that is a much simplified interface to the Z-Wave hardware. It is 'built over the SDK", but you have to realize that all the SDK is (for non-hardware building folks like us) is just the definition of the messages that you send over the serial/USB port. So it's not that they are layering their software over some SDK software, since there is no SDK software really for folks just wanting to talk to the Z-Wave controller from a PC. They are just using the information documented in the SDK of the message formats to create an easier to use framework that hides a lot of the details.

Of course, if you don't use .Net, then it's not terribly useful to you. I think that they should have used a lower level language so that it would have wider applicability.

I'm not completely sure if the first generation modules can do this or not. They using a trick that gets around the Lutron patent. I cannot imagine how someone got awarded a patent for sending the status of a device over RF, and I find it ludicrous, but they have it, and so no one can send direct status feedback from a lighting module via RF without running into Lutron's patent. Z-Wave uses some trick with links. I guess non-light switch devices can send status directly without patent problems, but I don't know if any are or not.

I've just not been able to put in the time to keep up with the recent developments. The SDK is not $10K for software only developers, but it still multiple thousands. I think that this was a bonehead move myself, but it's their company.

--------------------- Dean Roddey Chairman/CTO, Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd

If it's based on the pseudo-USB of the FTDI chip then it's useless to anything that doesn't run under Windows, Linux or OS/X (e.g. embedded µControllers like ELK) as an FTDI driver is required to interface with the FTDI chip. That's rather silly given that it is an RS-232 interface with the FTDI chip added on - the data has to be translated on both ends and it's slower overall than it would be if they just used RS232.

The inability of secondary controllers to register changes occasioned by the master controllers (changes in dim level or changes to routing tables) was a frequent complaint from early adopters. While there were 3-4 companies supplying Z-Wave hardware, the only differences in their first generation hardware was the color of the plastic enclosures - all were merely using the Zensys reference designs. Perhaps that's changed but I doubt it.

There are FCC requirements for Part 15 devices (I think the 904MHz used by Zensys falls under Part 15) that require reduced power (about 50%) for any non-human operated device that sends _data_ via RF. Basically, anything beyond the simple "all's clear" status reports of wireless alarm sensors must use lower output power. This is why there are frequent complaints about the poor range of wireless weather sensors. (A 50% cut in power causes a much greater than 50% range reduction.) I would expect this might be a bigger factor than any patent although I've been through the patent process a few times and the creative writing skills of the patent attorney are frequently more important than the technical merits of a device.

I hadn't heard of the Lutron patent before. I wonder whether it is a factor in the lengthy delays for the ZigBee based systems from Eaton and Hawking.

snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

engage in a discussion of >>the merits without resorting to name calling.

Graham,

It goes back much further than that. Before Future Standard went out of business I usually listed them as a source for home automation hardware. There were few online stores then and Brian Karas had reasonable prices and was very knowledgeable. This fishy fellow sent me an email demanding that I also recommend his online store. I told him to get lost.

At about the same time, he sent me an email asking me to evaluate his online store. I responded that anyone who required Java to view his online store was an idiot who was clueless about computer security and told him to get lost.

He has gotten more sophisticated over the years. There used to be a lot of unsolicited posts to CHA saying warm fuzzy things about him from people posting from the same machine he posted from. "They" have since learned to cover their tracks a bit better.

He sent me an email asking if he could sell Commander-X in his online store. I told him I wasn't involved but that my recommendation would be to tell him to get lost.

His "FAQ" included a lot of material taken from my web pages, infringing on my copyright. I called him on it.

He then deep-linked to _every_ page on my web site and I had to take steps to block that.

He frequently bashes me but you won't find him arguing anything on merits because he is technically incompetent and unable to understand merits.

I keep him (and his tag team partner) in my killfile and seldom see his crap (unless someone quotes it) because I don't want to be tempted to respond and further corrupt CHA but now and then his distortions, fabrications, libels and slanders are so egregious as to require a response.

I am sorry I called him "sub-human slime" but, since there are no words to accurately describe how low he is, that will have to do.

When the indigenous people in the interior of Brazil realize those "missionaries" are funded by the current administration and directed by the CIA, they'll make some fish stew. I imagine Lucifer is eagerly awaiting him.

snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

Martin Custer of AutomatedOutlet (who sells all of the various technologies) posted here about a year ago that Z-Wave had the highest warranty return rates (and shortest warranty).

And, another dealer who sells "all the above" posted here that Z-Wave lamp modules were blowing when the lamps burned out although I wonder whether he confused cause and effect.

So I suspect that the problem of removing dead soldiers from the controller routing tables was (is?) both real and frequent.

snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

That is an outright lie.

That is another lie. I never asked Mr. Houston to do anything for me, especially not to evaluate my online store.

That is yet another lie. Since Google is such a reliable record, I challenge Houston to back that up.

Another lie.

Yet another lie. The only thing from Houston's site on my FAQ was a frame ( I used to use frames extensively) which displayed his website intact with all attributions. I had links to several other sites in my FAQ and if one clicked them the page would display inside the frame. Houston's understanding of HTML is so poor that he mistook that for copying, but his pages were never copied on my server.

That is absurd. There was but one link to your home page. It was in a frame with "Target="_self'" and another link to exit frames with "Target='_top'".

More lies. I have occasionally disagreed with Houston and once or twice poked a little fun at his absurdities a few years ago but almost never bashed him.

What Mr. Houston conveniently forgets is that after several years of his animosity (over a disgreement or two about some technical issue or other) I responded to his plea for assistance. He had a page on his website where he explained that his health and his finances were in difficulty, making it hard for him to continue with a pet project. I saw an opportunity to reach out to him, turn an enemy into a friend. I sent him an email offering to host his project for free on one of my servers. I asked nothing in return. Admittedly this would not have been a major expense to me but I thought it was a nice gesture.

Mr. Houston did not reply immediately. I figured he was ill (so he said in his online plea) so I left it at that. Mind you, this was a private email. I said nothing about it in USENET so as not to embarass him. After a while, instead of politely declining in private, Mr. Houston posted a vicious attack on me here, claiming that I had tried to snooker him out of his project. It was unprovoked and, worst of all, in response to an attempted act of kindness.

Nice job, Mr. Houston. What was that you said about bashing?