Re: CBUS then?....

[Doogie Brodie <ukhad@xxxxxxx>]

Paul Gordon wrote:

>So I am thinking about putting in some CBUS lighting control, rather
than
>X10....
>
>
I think everyone was drooling over it :)

>First off, what's the absolute minimum requirements in terms of CBUS
modules
>that I need to buy?...
>
>
>Obviously I will need one or more nice switches... - very much liked
the
>look of the Neo....
>
>Also I guess I will need some dimmer packs, - I reckon 8 channels is
ample
>for the lighting circuits in the lounge....
>
>I presume that I will "want" (rather than "need") a
PC interface for
>programming?
>
You'll need a dimmer pack, a switch and a pc interface. Without a PC
interface (or at least access to one) you can't program anything to
control anything and it'd be useless!

>and most importantly, what will each of these cost me??
>
>
>from
answer. That'll get you a PC interface, a switch (maybe a Neo, maybe
not) and a 4 channel dimmer pack.  I've got the catalogue but not the
price lists, ISTR that everything was around the 100 quid mark, but
think that might have been trade prices, not sure what retail would be/
if you can wangle it as trade... ;)

>I imagine that I will also get a CBUS UCM to hook the CBUS into my
Comfort
>Panel, which I presume will allow me to run security lighting programs
when
>the alarm is set and so on...
>
>
Not 100% sure what the score is with that..... the board that Gordon
Solutions had in their Comfort was "somewhere in the order of 3
grand" -
not sure if that price would also apply to getting one, or if that was
just the first prototype cost.

>But what about integrating CBUS control into my wider HA system? - I
have
>both an Ocelot, and a dedicated HA PC running Homeseer, - how would I
>integrate CBUS into these? - I'd like to be able to keep the same level
of
>control as I have with X10 lighting, - IE be able to have all the
lounge
>lights represented as devices in Homeseer, and thus be able to use the
>Homeseer web pages to control them remotely... I seem to recall
constantly
>reading about Clipsals stupid attitude to protecting their protocol,
which I
>guess makes it extra-difficult for us to roll our own control scenarios
with
>it? (Perhaps now is the time for me to start looking more seriously
into
>xAP/xPL)
>
>
Looking at that is what has made me get more interested in the xAP/ xPL
stuff as well, especially Kevin Hawkins's xAP -> CBUS module.... looks
like that could solve a lot of problems.

--
Doogie