Re: DSC 1555MX and PC1616 in alarm

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mar 20, 9:40=A0am, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mar 19, 10:52=A0pm, mleuck <m.le...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, March 11, 2012 7:52:30 PM UTC-5, tourman wrote:
>
> > > The 1616, 1832 and 1864 series of panels are another matter
> > > altogether. The bastards at DSC have deliberately engineered things
> > > such that it is at the moment, impossible to unlock. And the reason
> > > why they have done that has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the
> > > lockout feature or not; it's simply done for monetary reasons.
>
> > And you know this how? Which manufacturer told you this?
>
> RHC: Well, with no real value at all, there is no other reason why any
> company would take the deliberate action of blocking someone from
> entering the back door of the panel other than money !!
> Since YOU challenge my assertion, YOU tell us why a manufacturer would
> deliberately go out of there way to redesign the board so a few little
> guys like Jim and I can't crack the board any longer. They have no
> idea (nor do you) how many boards we actually default, so they, like
> most large companies today, simply put the bottom line over ethics,
> and deliberately re-inforce a software procedure which has no
> redeeming value. In all the years I've been in business, I can't think
> of a single valid reason for this feature other than to frustrate
> someone taking the board over.
>
>
>
> > > For
> > > every board that Jim or I unlock, that is one less board they
> > > sell....it's always money before ethics, and especially so for some
> > > companies like DSC !!!
>
> > Lets do the math, you and Jim unlock maybe a few dozen boards a year (o=
kay let's say 100 total) and DSC sells several hundred thousand boards a ye=
ar. Considering the low profit margin of an alarm board I somehow seriously=
 doubt they do it for revenue. If I remember there was a time they didn't w=
ouldn't take locked boards at all back in the mid 90's. A company I worked =
for was sending several hundred PC1500 v3 panels monthly at the time.
>
> RHC; I'm sure it had to do with the price of labour for them to unlock
> the boards. Plus what do they do with a used board once it's available
> for re-use.....same old reasoning, bottom line !! Plus, should our
> techniques become known out there in the world, and this activity
> become much more active, there goes far more boards than the number
> that Jim and I unlock. It's called "knipping it in the bud", all with
> a view towards the bottom line. They want to sell new boards, not
> allow a feature that keeps older ones working longer......
>
>
>
> > > A very strong case can be made for eliminating this lockout feature
> > > altogether from alarm boards since it serves NO legitimate purpose
> > > today. It was originally brought in to allow the "free system"
> > > marketeers some freedom from other companies "raiding" their accounts=
.
>
> > And you know THIS how? Which manufacturer said this?
>
> RHC: This is certainly the only reason I can see after 20 years of
> being in this business. And no manufacturer is going to come right out
> and advertise the availability of a feature which they know deep down
> shouldn't even be in their panels.They did it because of a large
> demand by these same marketeers !! If YOU think this feature is valid,
> YOU tell us why this feature is still used (even actively modified as
> with DSC) in these alarm boards ! You're always so quick to challenge
> others - now you put up or shut up !! =A0 And when you do, I'll give you
> the email address of the detective in Denver who was going to campaign
> to make it illegal in Colorado to do this....
>
>
>
> > If I recall old FBI and Ademco panels had that feature a long time befo=
re the free system guys arrived. Besides that most panels back then were ch=
ip-programmable with no reason for any lockout feature.
>
> > And doesn't Paradox allow locking peripherals to a particular panel?
>
> RHC: Yes, but only with one line of boards - the Digiplex. AND, I do
> know one installer who wires in the circular loop, with all
> addressable components locked as you describe. When approached about
> it, he clearly laid out that it was to keep others from taking over
> his accounts !! (and screw the customer). After I told him in no
> uncertain terms what I thought of his practices, we are no longer on
> speaking terms.....
>
>
>
> > > More often than not, it simply serves to discourage any new homeowner
> > > from using the board in "local" mode (minus monitoring), since it
> > > cannot normally be defaulted without the assistance of the original
> > > company who in turn won't assist unless the new client signs on to on=
e
> > > of their atrocious, overpriced contracts.
>
> > Actually that isn't true either, in most cases the new company will eas=
ily replace the panel with a new board or whatever complete system they nor=
mally install.
>
> RHC: Exactly, and in doing so, the manufacturer sells another
> board !!!!
>
> I can't count the number of times this has been the situation...take
> off your rose coloured glasses. I've had it happen many, many times
> (and know it was for those reasons, by listening over a speaker phone
> as the old company tried it's extortion techniques.....)
>
>
>
> > And as far as discouraging the homeowner from using the board in local =
mode ask any central station how many signals they get from systems they ha=
ven't monitored in years, the customer cancels the service but the system c=
ontinues to call (and be ignored) by the central station.
>
> RHC: Yes, but this has nothing to do with the discussion here !
>
> > > Bottom line, it's like someone selling you a used car with a non
> > > removeable padlock on the hood...holding you hostage to them for
> > > service !! It should be illegal frankly, but that's not likely to
> > > happen with all the other bad things going on in life and business...=
.
>
> > > There is a lesson here for potential buyers of alarm systems though.
> > > Get it in writing in the contract that the board will remain unlocked
> > > from the start. Unlocking it at the end of the contract is NOT
> > > satisfactory, since a lot of smaller companies simply disappear, or
> > > get sold to another larger conglomerate who may not even know it is
> > > locked.
>
> > > Either way, as this homeowner is finding out, you're screwed !
>
> RHC: I would seriously like to hear from those who think this is a
> good feature ! Over the years I've brought this up many times, and all
> I get is complete silence.
> Those of us in the industry that really care about making it better,
> have a duty to bring up the nefarious and outright dishonest practices
> that we all face. If we don't, who the hell will !! We talk about the
> usefulness of a newsgroup, well here you go.....
>
> It sure as hell won't be the large corporations who always put money
> first. Companies like ADT who should be the market leader, simply
> aren't when it comes to hazy practices that affect our industry
> (although in all honesty, I've never found a locked ADT board that
> wasn't locked by some some subcontractor unbeknownst to them....).
>
> So, you first Mark....


RHC: It's been a week now and the silence is deafening. To me that
says a lot about the state of our industry....:((