Re: Which system is better?

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 6, 9:15=A0pm, too fat for a ladder <alarminst...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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...@xxxxxxx> 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 meaning). =
=A0I have
> > > > > > yet to see a client disarm a system within 30 seconds of an ala=
rm,
>
> > > > > That's a joke right? Most customers I've seen have no problem
> > > > > 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 would start
> > > > using 2 way voice, but why spend a few extra bucks on something tha=
t
> > > > might save a life or reduce false dispatches?
> > > > Dialer delays further expose the end user's safety and security 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 push 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 logic
> 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 response
> before jumping to conclusions. When properly installed it is 1000x
> better than digital could ever be. 2 way puts the operator in the
> house with you. The operator is able to monitor the situation even if
> you can't get to the phone. I'll finish this later because the wife is
> pitching a bitch.

RHC: Come on...get serious...LOL. If this is such a great thing, why
is the only company (Alarmforce) using it a complete scam. Even if it
was something that a serious company would actually consider, how can
a voice listen in feature be anything but confusing to an operator.
Besides, assuming someone is home, the only difference is a fraction
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 which
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 newsgroup
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 his
opinion on the pluses and minuses of this sort of response
methodology.