[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
The SWMBO is RIGHT! RE: Power triggering
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: The SWMBO is RIGHT! RE: Power triggering
- From: "Ian Lowe" <ian@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 15:18:16 -0000
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Guys I have had growing un-ease here...
Can I just stress that this is my own personal view.
If you have a SWMBO who doesn't "get it" you have a perfect
opportunity..
It's a simple enough principle. if the SWMBO doesn't see *instantly* that
the HA setup offers something worthwhile,
then it probably *isn't* worthwhile.
Time and again, occupancy detection seems to be "it" the
insurmountable
problem. I think, though, that control is more of an issue than most people
realise.
We started out looking for a proto, but I am now thinking much more
seriously about ditching the whole "intelligent remote" idea as
an
incredibly bad idea for most things.
having implemented an IR transceiver, and girder, I am now looking at using
One for All "zapper-1" single device remotes as the main home
controller,
using smarts at th *other* end to do the business..
I am also thinking of ripping the guts out of an HR10, and fixing it up
behind some nice M-K switches, to make the X-10 control interface as close
to normal operation as possible..
I think our house is about as "simple" as can be, but visitors
still have
problems. Tony's joke about handing visitors a leaflet showing how to work
the doorbell is funny, but just think.. how many pages of instructions
would
you have to give to a housesitter if you went on a long break, of a month
or
so? How many support calls would you get for your house?
I think we need to consider these issues.
Ian.
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|