[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]

Re: What a stupid way to design a panel SK

Subject: Re: What a stupid way to design a panel SK
From: mleuck <m.leuck@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:52:07 -0700 (PDT)
Newsgroups: alt.security.alarms
References: <fab695c2-c79f-4085-9c04-d18b9477858a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Apr 19, 6:08=A0pm, nick markowitz <nmarkow...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We all know panel take overs happen all the time why they would design
> the SK 5808 that only way it can be defaulted is sent back to factory
> and leaving a client with out protection is beyond me. at least the
> older panels you could change a chip or use a jumper etc to reset it.
> Typical stupid engineer thinking.

Ot's not Silent Knight's fault someone is dumb enough to pull a fire
panel out,  ship it to the factory for defaulting and leave the client
without protection

Follow-Ups:
- Re: What a stupid way to design a panel SK
  - From: G . Morgan

References:
- What a stupid way to design a panel SK
  - From: nick markowitz

Prev by Message: Re: "2GIG Go" Question
Next by Message: Re: What a stupid way to design a panel SK
Previous by thread: Re: What a stupid way to design a panel SK
Next by thread: Re: What a stupid way to design a panel SK
Index(es):
- Message
- Thread

alt.security.alarms Main Index | alt.security.alarms Thread Index | alt.security.alarms Home | Archives Home