Re: Alarm systems

[Chris Hunter <cjhunter@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

interesting .... 'no feel for what the increase in 'premium is for
not having a NACOSS alarm ... is it a big issue ?   'guess
reliability should be better if the alarm system is separate, but is
that the case, in-practice ?   'just wondering !

Chris


On 15 Aug 2007, at 01:58, Kevin Hawkins wrote:

> I use an Ademco/Microtech/Honeywell  "Galaxy" system -
several other
> names it's offered under. too. ( I think latest versions may now no
> longer be called Galaxy)
>
> It's  a great mature system used by many professional installers with
> well priced extras available on eBay - including installer manuals
> etc.
> Several models with differing zone capacities and wireless options
> etc.
> Mine is a Galaxy 60.  Very powerful programming capabilities as the
> product family is used in residential through to large commercial
> installs.  I have wired inputs and outputs to this going into
> HomeVision
> and a Netiom as well as a serial and Ethernet connection and it
> satisfies almost all my HA needs as I have put together a xAP
> interface
> to it.   Zone activations (PIR's etc) can be reported via 'linking'
> the
> zones to outputs or via serial/Ethernet.   It may be 'awkward' to get
> the full serial/Ethernet protocol but typically its not needed.  It
> doesn't have any integrated  HA facilities persay beyond basic I/O
> - ie
> no C-Bus/X10 or programmable serial but my other HA controllers take
> care of that.   I'm a great believer in each box serving a specific
> purpose and doing that independently and well.  Hence not doubling an
> alarm up as a HA system. Others may differ.
>
> Main issue will be if you need a NACOSS install with maintenance as
> you
> will likely be excluded from all programming access and maybe some
> access via serial/Ethernet. You might have to relay/opto isolate
> inpust
> and outputs.    This is going to be true on any system though.
> Depending on your installer they may be happy with some extra
> facilities
> though .
>
> Comfort is another suggestion. I had one for a while ...  for me I
> really don't like the speech interface or the panels programming
> structure. The X10 interafce is OK but the C-Bus interface is rather
> limted (and expensive)  - but then I would say that I guess ;-)
>
> Kevin



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]