[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Comfort vs HomeVision
- To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: Comfort vs HomeVision
- From: REB.Barnett@xxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 15:37:57 +0100
- Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> I've not used HV at all (I just use Comfort), but I can maybe
> suggest some
> ideas...
Ditto, and I'll throw in some 2ps too.
If you want or need the security features then it makes sense to start with
Comfort first - you can then see whether you need the extra functionality
of
HV later.
If you are planning on using an intermediary PC between Comfort and HV then
IMHO HV is a bit redundant since you can do pretty much everything if not
more on a PC.
Another way to interface Comfort to HV would be to look at the BasicX
chips.
I know I've recommended them a couple of times now and I've yet to get my
app working (not the BasicX chip's fault), but their features support what
you want to do. e.g. one chip connected to the serial port of Comfort's
UCM,
outputting on RS485. Another recieving the RS485 and then either relaying
it
to HV via serial port, or via its digital IO lines.
In my experience Comfort has a high WAF provided it works and she can
override it when she wants.
HTH, Ray.
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Spend your money on the things you enjoy…NOT your bills.
Join beMANY! get LOW rates on your long distance TODAY.
Click for details.
http://click.egroups.com/1/6840/9/_/2065/_/967214095/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|