Re: Which system is better?

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 7, 6:27=A0pm, Jim <alarmi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sep 7, 8:31 am, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 6, 11:20 pm, too fat for a ladder <alarminst...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 6, 10:51 pm, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sep 6, 9:15 pm, too fat for a ladder <alarminst...@xxxxxxx> wrot=
e:
>
> > > > > On Sep 6, 8:04 pm, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Sep 6, 5:10 pm, mleuck <m.le...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Sep 6, 12:25 pm, too fat for a ladder <alarminst...@xxxxxx=
m> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Sep 5, 10:38 pm, mleuck <m.le...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Sep 5, 11:05 am, Frank Olson
>
> > > > > > > > > <use_the_email_li...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > If so, the operators don't even see the alarm if it's=
 turned off
> > > > > > > > > > > by the client within 30 seconds.
>
> > > > > > > > > > We don't use a dialler delay (if that's what you're mea=
ning). I have
> > > > > > > > > > yet to see a client disarm a system within 30 seconds o=
f an alarm,
>
> > > > > > > > > That's a joke right? Most customers I've seen have no pro=
blem
> > > > > > > > > disarming within that amount of time, if they can't then =
they've
> > > > > > > > > forgotten the code or something. <
>
> > > > > > > > 90% of the bullshit would be solved if these lemonheads wou=
ld start
> > > > > > > > using 2 way voice, but why spend a few extra bucks on somet=
hing that
> > > > > > > > might save a life or reduce false dispatches?
> > > > > > > > Dialer delays further expose the end user's safety and secu=
rity in a
> > > > > > > > true emergency. Dialer delays should be tossed out the door=
.
>
> > > > > > > I second the 2-way voice recommendation
>
> > > > > > RHC: Whaaaat....are you guys joking? This is what Alarmfarce pu=
sh in
> > > > > > their bullshit pitches.....Tom, this is NOT funny......:))) <
>
> > > > > Bob just because AlarmForce offers 2 way voice that doesn't make =
that
> > > > > particular quality of monitoring out to be bullshit. Using your l=
ogic
> > > > > then your company, and anyone else using digital monitoring must =
be
> > > > > pitching bullshit because that's what Crimebusters/ABC Security
> > > > > offers.
> > > > > I recommend you sit through a demonstration of 2 way voice respon=
se
> > > > > before jumping to conclusions. When properly installed it is 1000=
x
> > > > > better than digital could ever be. 2 way puts the operator in the
> > > > > house with you. The operator is able to monitor the situation eve=
n if
> > > > > you can't get to the phone. I'll finish this later because the wi=
fe is
> > > > > pitching a bitch.
>
> > > > RHC: Come on...get serious...LOL. If this is such a great thing, wh=
y
> > > > is the only company (Alarmforce) using it a complete scam. Even if =
it
> > > > was something that a serious company would actually consider, how c=
an
> > > > a voice listen in feature be anything but confusing to an operator.
> > > > Besides, assuming someone is home, the only difference is a fractio=
n
> > > > of a second between a house connection through the mickey mouse
> > > > speaker, and answering a phone call. And if there is no one home to
> > > > answer the phone, and the operator has to spend time "listening in"=
,
> > > > this delays calls to the balance of the calling list. Besides what =
is
> > > > he or she to do at that point, since it's pretty obvious that a
> > > > burglar on premises is sure as hell not going to answer any query
> > > > coming over the squawk box. She might hear him trashing the place, =
but
> > > > I very much doubt that if the speaker is in the keypad the burglar =
is
> > > > elsewhere in the bedroom. So what does dead silence tell the
> > > > operator ?
>
> > > > I can't believe this is anything other than a marketing gimmick whi=
ch
> > > > has great appeal to an uninformed consumer, but little value
> > > > otherwise. However, if I'm wrong I'm more than willing to listen to
> > > > valid arguments otherwise. If it's so great, why don't all the
> > > > monitoring stations push it to the industry.
>
> > > > There is a well informed gentleman who often frequents the newsgrou=
p
> > > > who is part of a large monitoring station made up of dealer owners.
> > > > His first name is Ron something or other....I'd sure like to hear h=
is
> > > > opinion on the pluses and minuses of this sort of response
> > > > methodology. <
>
> > > Are you sure you're not Sicilian? You are thick as a brick ya old
> > > buzzard. I'm letting Mark explain it because the wife is still up my
> > > ass. BTW check my damn websites and give your opinion ya fucking
> > > canuck curmudgeon.
>
> > RHC: Thick?...no.....cynical...absolutely! In our industry, the
> > allmighty buck takes the place of the right or wrong of any
> > situation ! With total scumbag companies like Alarmforce pushing it,
> > why wouldn't I be suspicious right off the bat? Wait until this sh*t
> > comes south of the border, and you'll see..........
>
> > BTW, I think that person's name is Ron Weiss and I believe if memory
> > serves me correctly, the company was called something like "Monitoring
> > America"-
>
> This is my take on it.
>
> In inquires on this subject that I've made in the past, it seems to me
> that it's a cyclical catch 22 problem. =A0The objection is, that it
> requires more operator time which the central has to devote to each
> call .... the increased cost would have to be passed on through the
> dealer to the end user which puts the dealer at a disadvantage
> compared to the competition. Even if offered as an option, the end
> user will go for the less expensive route. The dealers don't offer it
> because they know the end user doesn't want to pay for it so the
> centrals don't offer it.
>
> In my opinion though ..... if the centrals could afford to invest in
> the process over a period of time, I think that eventually they could
> create another revenue source.
>
> This speaks nothing as to the actual value of "listening in"..... "two
> way voice"
>
> Would it actually cut down on false alarms? =A0I don't think it would
> have a substantial impact but it's just a guess on my part. But you
> could say =A0..... every little bit helps.
>
> Would it deter burglaries? I don't think this would be substantial
> either. Once the siren goes off, the sound of a voice may make the
> intruder move a little faster but ..... depends on the nature of the
> intruder and the circumstances of the intrusion.
>
> Would it provide a greater "catch" ? =A0Same answer as above.

RHC: Well, if push comes to shove, I have to admit my view of 2 way
voice is coloured by Alarmforce and their idiotic advertising. I can't
see how it would involve much cost at the monitoring station end;
however, I can see lots of opportunities for confusion unless the
operators adhere to strict "rules of engagement", any of which would
basically nullify any real or perceived advantage to it. At the alarm
system end, companies like DSC sell a small speaker that sits
alongside the keypad, and you simply activate it in the programming
options. I haven't priced it out recently, but I do seem to remember
it was pretty inexpensive.

I do know that Alarmforce have turned it into what they perceive as a
major marketing advantage. And their customers are well sold on his
rubbish !! They seem to honestly believe it when he peddles his
bulls*it..." if you don't use Alarmforce, you've wasted your money on
anything else". But I've also had other people mention the concept
right out of the blue as a pretty good idea for an alarm system, so
I'd really like to hear from a monitoring station about this.