Re: Which system is better?

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 4, 8:48=A0am, Frank Olson
<use_the_email_li...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Crash Gordon wrote:
> > we're processing signals within 35-45 seconds...client gets call in und=
er a
> > minute.
>
> API provides the same quick response, as does Counterforce. =A0I hear goo=
d
> things about Acme and Vancouver Alarms (they're both local ULC Listed
> stations).

RHC: What about cancel codes for the customer's protection. Do you use
them? If so, the operators don't even see the alarm if it's turned off
by the client within 30 seconds. The downside of this is the client
may think his alarm is not working, but it's better than an ADT type
dialer delay, and better than "instant" response, although clients may
not think so.

I'd be interested in hearing opinions on this point. Is it better to
give "instant" response with it's inherent risks for false alarms, or
build in a dialer delay, or cancel codes to ensure there is more
protection against false dispatches, but with the inherent "risk" the
client thinks he's getting poor response from his station.