Re: Greater Toronto Area Recomendations?

["R.H.Campbell" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Matt Ion" <soundy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:w8Wef.523257$tl2.76766@xxxxxxxxxxx
> R.H.Campbell wrote:
>> Sir, I hate to burst your bubble, but this concept is just another
>> martketing version on the old "low down, megabucks a month" concept.
>
> $25/month = "megabucks"?

RHC: It is when you are only leasing the equipment, and never own a thing,
with never a chance that you can get reduced rates at some point in the
future
>
>> They use wireless components strictly because it's easy and cheap to
>> install, NOT because it is better.
>
> I never said it was "better."
>
>> Coverage is absolutely minimal, and they make a big issue of this two way
>> voice business, which is pure marketing hype. DSC sells the same ability
>> with their PC 5904 two way listen in add on module, but you don't see
>> most alarmcos rushing out to use it.
>
> And how much does that module cost?  How much is their similar monitoring
> service?

RHC: The module is minimal in cost, and doesn't add anything to the cost of
monitoring. Monitoring is whatever the local dealer chooses it to
be....usually from $15 to $25 monthly
>
>> It would also pay to remember this is the same company that made a big
>> public radio campaign in Toronto telling the thieves in the process one
>> way to compromise an alarm system.
>
> By cutting the phone line?  Anyone who's watched a movie or cop show in
> the last 30 years has already figured that one out.

RHC: Yeah, well interestingly enough, most are too stupid to actually
realize that. And most burglaries are crimes of opportunity where the young
thief sees an opportunity and takes it. He doesn't plan that far ahead. In
any case, you have to question the ethics of any company that would actually
advertise in that fashion to suit their own ends. I'm told just after their
ad campaign, there were a significant number of local robberies done after
cutting the phone lines, something that was not happening to any degree
beforehand.
>
>> few years. What kind of system, with training, can anyone legitimately
>> install in an hour. To do everything properly, plus train properly, takes
>> at least a full day, sometimes two !
>
> Really?  How complicated does it NEED to be, to be legitimate?

RHC: It doesn't need nor should be complicated to use. But it does take time
to install a professional system, hardwired OR wireless. One hour....that's
a joke !
>
> Attach sensor to door and frame.  Attach motion sensor to wall.  Plug
> brain into power and phone.  Enter your code to arm and disarm.  Does it
> HAVE to be more complex than that?

RHC: Yes, to do it properly !
>
> I don't think your average consumer would want an alarm that takes a
> day-long course just to operate.  The ones I've installed, most of the
> users have trouble grasping "zone bypass".

RHC: True enough; however, legitimate systems are very easy to operate. Any
one who can't grasp the fundamentals of alarm usage shouldn't likely have
one. The day long time period is for proper installation, training,
paperwork, passcards...all the things that Alarmforce don't seem to consider
as important as your name on a long term contract.
>
>> Again, just my biased opinion, but they are as close to a scam as any
>> company can get without actually crossing the line. Sad that a cop
>> actually buys into that crap about fewer false alarms ! And even sadder
>> still, is that a lot of consumers buy it as well......
>
> Well I'm sure you would have been happy to come install a panel, a couple
> sensors, and do all the wiring for a really low cost.  Being in a rental
> at the time, we didn't really want to invest in a big installed system
> that we wouldn't even be able to take along when we moved.

RHC: Actually, rental situations are where wireless equipment makes sense.
And that's what the "all in one" wireless systems were designed for. But the
rule still applies in this business as in all others...you pay nothing, you
get nothing !
>
> For our situation, it was the best option.  Even knowing what I know now,
> and having installed "standard" alarms myself, I know it would have been
> preferable TO US at the time.  Sorry if that offends you, but one size
> does NOT fit all.

RHC: It doesn't offend me. Consumers should have freedom of choice. I'm just
suggesting, in most homes, in most cases, this is just about the worst alarm
buying decision anyone could make. And you're right, one size doesn't fit
all, something Alarmforce clearly doesn't want to understand..

RHC