Re: Request Input on new Project

["armagh_elect" <fmcalind@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Mark
I meant xAP systems that didnt have a computer as part of
the installation ...As you know i have dabbled in both protocols a
little and it seems to me they really need a computer as part of the
system...My thoughts are that for the small micro both are too
heavy ..although Patrick just mentioned there are pic based devices
out there....The only hardware that im aware of thats been developed
is Ians Relay Controller and Kevins C_Bus interface...are there any
other hardware devices talking native xAP..???...

Frank


--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "mark_harrison_uk2" <mph@a...>
wrote:
> 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]