Re: Request Input on new Project

["mark_harrison_uk2" <mph@xxxxxxx>]

Frank,

Do you mean "complete installations" or "devices".

Plenty of devices out there, some available commercially. As for
complete installations, as far as I'm aware, every xAP installation
in the field has a PC _somewhere_, simply because people want to be
able to do things like chuck data onto web pages and into databases.

The most complex installation I know of has a ratio of about 30-40
embedded devices per PC.

Certainly, my home installation is nothing like that complex, only 1
embedded device in regular use (the Rabbit-based controller for my hi-
fi, reviewed on automatedhome)... but several wireless PCs dotted
around the house that do web control.

Regards,

Mark

--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, Frank Mc Alinden <fmcalind@b...> wrote:
> Hi Mark
>             Are there xAP installations out there that are not
using pc,s??
>
> Frank
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: mark_harrison_uk2
>   To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>   Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 9:22 PM
>   Subject: [ukha_d] Re: Request Input on new Project
>
>
>   Gavin,
>
>   In addition to xPL you should consider xAP 1.2
>   (www.xapautomation.org).
>
>   xPL and xAP are both forks from xAP 1.1 which have both moved a
long
>   way. Indeed the two founders of xPL worked on the Specification
of
>   xAP 1.2 before leaving because they had a different vision.
>
>   There are a number of technical differences between them. In my
view
>   (and others in both worlds will have different opinions), then
key
>   difference is that of the central controller model.
>
>   xPL is bound up heavily with xPLHal as the centrepiece. xPLHal is
1:
>   Good, and 2: Free. I am not aware of any xPL implementations that
>   don't use it.
>
>   xAP envisages a far more distributed world where a central
controller
>   is not inherently required by the architecture at run-time, since
end-
>   point components can have control logic pushed to them at install-
>   time. In practice, most xAP (90%?) installations in the field
have
>   ended up with a central controller, and no small number of them
use
>   xPLHal (which has good xAP 1.2 support.)
>
>   Scalability is good: the largest xAP installation in the field
has
>   about 120 "devices", a mix of "virtual devices"
such as
connectors
>   for computer-based stuff, and hardware devices such as
temperature
>   sensors, PIRs, relay controllers etc. I don't know what the
biggest
>   xPL implementation installed is, but I would be very surprised if
it
>   didn't scale up to the needs of 99.9% of homes. Some of the more
>   complex xAP installations are commercial not domestic.
>
>   Regards,
>
>   Mark
>
>
>
>   --- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, Gavin Kistner <gavin@r...> wrote:
>   > SUMMARY
>   > I'm about 6 months away from beginning construction on my own
>   house,
>   > and I have extensive automation visions. I need lots of solid
urls
>   and
>   > recommendations from you experienced folks for my research, and
>   would
>   > like your feedback on an open source project I'm contemplating
>   > beginning for this effort.
>   >
>   > Despite the length of this post, I'm *not* asking you to design
or
>   > build my system for me. I'm looking for feedback.
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > HEY THERE
>   > So, first, if cross-posting to all three of these lists is a
bad
>   idea,
>   > please wonk me with a stick of Rightness and tell me which is
the
>   > correct group to continue this discussion on.
>   >
>   > Second: Hey there! I'm excited to join the world of home
automaters
>   as
>   > more than a spectator, though the circumstances daunt me. :)
>   >
>   > You may look at the below and say "Uhm, this seems like an
insane
>   > amount of work, when solution _____ would work just as well. I
>   wonder
>   > why he's decided not to do that." The answer to those
sorts of
>   > questions is probably "Because I'm an impatient idiot who
hasn't
>   done
>   > his homework and research properly."
>   >
>   > Please feel free to yell at me and tell me a far easier way to
>   achieve
>   > my goals, though please read as much of the following as you
can
>   before
>   > doing so, because if you propose solution _____ which actually
only
>   > covers 80% of my goals, in my naivete I probably won't realize
that
>   > it's not the right solution until far later, and then I'll be
>   cranky :)
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > ROUGH GOALS FOR MY PARTICULAR HOUSE
>   > I'm a geek, but despite that my goal is to make the automation
as
>   > transparent as possible. No ugly wall warts, almost
no 'attractive'
>   > master control wallplates, no text-to-speech computers
announcing
>   > trivial things. The interior should look like a non-automated
>   house,
>   > and work like a non-automated house, with the exception of how
it
>   > reacts to its use, and the exception of a few wall-mounted
control
>   > touchscreens.
>   >
>   > Here's roughly what I'm aiming for:
>   >
>   > * Every (almost) light switch in the house should be able to be
>   > computer controlled, with about 2/3 of them dimmable. (Rough
count
>   is
>   > 23 dimmable light 'zones', and 10 non-dimmable.) This includes
4-6
>   > table/floor lamps.
>   >
>   > * 7 zones for music (speaker sets). Any zone should be able to
>   listen
>   > to any audio source, in an n-to-n matrix.
>   >
>   > * 6 audio sources.
>   >
>   > * 1 big TV, and the ability (hopefully) to route video signals
to
>   the
>   > wall LCDs and/or any computer in the house.
>   >
>   > * 5-6 video sources (3-4 of which are security cameras)
>   >
>   > * 3 watering zones
>   >
>   > * Light, Temperature, and Humidity sensors in 5-6 locations,
and a
>   full
>   > weather station outside also hooked in.
>   >
>   > * 7 radiant floor heating zones, controllable by the system.
>   >
>   > * A few motorized blinds.
>   >
>   > * All doors and operable windows with open/closed sensors.
>   >
>   > * All but one exterior door with computer controlled deadbolt,
>   > auto-opening using something like iButton.
>   >
>   > * An RF sensor for buttons activated from the car.
>   >
>   > * My own custom interface, designed by me.
>   >
>   > * The ability to set up complex triggers/macros *after*
>   installation,
>   > like: "If the average temperature in the livingroom is
above
___
>   and
>   > the heating is on, turn it off. If the heat is already off, and
the
>   > blinds are open, and the light level in the room is above ____,
>   close
>   > the blinds."
>   >
>   > * The ability to view graphs of historical sensor data
("show
me
>   the
>   > average temperature in the room over the last day").
>   >
>   > * I want to buy quality, premade components and hook them up. I
do
>   > *not* want to solder. (Not only have I never been very good at
it,
>   but
>   > primarily I want a solution that my friends can use just by
>   spending
>   > money themselves.)
>   >
>   > * If I can find them, I was really hoping to use touchscreen,
>   wireless,
>   > LCD thin network clients to both control the house and also use
>   other
>   > 'intranet' applications, and browse the web. Something in the
14-
>   17"
>   > range.
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > WHY CAN'T I USE EXISTING SOLUTIONS?
>   > I dunno, maybe I can. But so far, every system I've looked
suffers
>   from
>   > one or more of the following problems:
>   >
>   > * Covers a portion of the system, but not all of it. (Lighting
and
>   AV,
>   > but not temperature or watering.)
>   >
>   > * Have expensive components which try and do too much work
>   themselves.
>   > (I already have a DVD player with 2 video outputs, a receiver
with
>   6
>   > video inputs and 2 outputs, and a TV with 3 video inputs and 2
coax
>   > tuners. Every piece is trying to do the job of every other
piece. I
>   > don't want a lightswitch that stores complex lighting schemes
when
>   > that's what the computer will be doing.)
>   >
>   > * Are proprietary, usually in a silly way. I can't easily
extend
>   the
>   > system myself later, and probably can't program it myself.
>   >
>   > * Have horrific 1980-looking touchpad interfaces, which are
usually
>   > designed around the hardware's features rather than the user's
>   needs.
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > THE SOFTWARE SOLUTION - WHAT I'M (gasp) PLANNING
>   > So, what I'm thinking really needs to happen is to abstract the
>   various
>   > levels from each other:
>   >
>   > Interface <-- abstraction layer --> Control Software
<--
>   abstraction
>   > layer --> Hardware
>   >
>   > The project I'm planning (and dreading) is to write (open
source)
>   the
>   > middle component in such a way that people can develop their
own
>   > interface programs which communicate with it.
>   >
>   > More importantly, each type of hardware device (from different
>   > manufacturers and using different technologies) will have its
own
>   > 'plugin'/DLL written for it, which abstracts the implementation
>   from
>   > the control interface.
>   >
>   > For a far better visual representation, see:
>   > http://phrogz.net/tmp/HouseMouse_Block.png
>   >
>   > CoolTechnologyCompany will release a new bluetooth temperature
>   sensor.
>   > I (or you) will write the plugin for it that describes the
>   properties
>   > and methods it supports, and internally knows how to produce
the
>   values
>   > and perform the methods. I drop the plugin into my own
components
>   > directory, tell the Master Program to rescan components and
>   (without
>   > restarting the program and crashing the house) suddenly the
admin
>   side
>   > of the Master Program knows how to control that device.
>   >
>   >
>   > Note that when I mention this project a lot of geeks
>   say "Zeroconf!",
>   > "Embedded Linux!", thinking that I'm suggesting that
the
hardware
>   > device (the lightswitch) itself is supposed to expose its
>   > functionality. While this would be grand, this isn't the case
with
>   99%
>   > of the existing hardware out there, and that's what I want to
use.
>   I
>   > want a piece of software--the plugin--to provide the
abstraction.
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > HELP ME!
>   > Am I insane? Does this middle Master Program already exist? Can
I
>   > accomplish all my goals above without this level of
abstraction?
>   >
>   > If I had a solution like this readily available, would you want
it?
>   > Does your answer depend on what language it was written in, or
on
>   the
>   > hardware platform (Windows vs. MacOS vs. Linux vs. BSD) that it
ran
>   on?
>   >
>   > If I wrote this in Java as an open-source project, would you be
>   willing
>   > and able to contribute?
>   >
>   > I know so little about the amazing array of hardware choices
>   available.
>   > (X10 switches; X10 in-wiring control; Lutron RadioRA; Clipsal
>   C_Bus;
>   > etc.). My software wouldn't care which system I ended up using,
but
>   the
>   > electrician wiring the house needs to know. How can I figure
out
>   what's
>   > good and what isn't, and (more importantly) what the full
spectrum
>   of
>   > offerings is?
>   >
>   > In your experience, do professional automation 'experts' know
what
>   > they're talking about, or do they only know the solution or two
>   that
>   > they are a reseller for? Should I hire such a consultant to
work
>   out
>   > the system, or are they going to just say "You're
dreaming;
here,
>   just
>   > buy this."
>   >
>   > Am I dreaming? Is this project too ambitious to even think of
>   > attempting with ~1 year to go until the house should be close
to
>   done?
>   >
>   > --
>   > (-, /\ \/ / /\/
>
>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>   UKHA 2004: 15th and 16th May 2004
>
>   http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
>   Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>   Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
>   Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
>   List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
>
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]