Re: Insteon Review

[nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston)]

Ralph <no-spam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>We're having the same issues with this license as Dave Houston, in
>particular the actual license is much more restrictive than the quoted
>paragraph:
>
><<
>The distribution and commercialization of any INSTEON logo
>enabled/compatible applications and/or products developed by you will be
>required to pass certification testing and be subject to the terms of a
>separately executed agreement between you and SMARTHOME.
> >>
>
>This is saying that applications to be sold must be according to the
>terms of an agreement that Smarthome writes, otherwise you cannot sell
>them with the Insteon label, or maybe at all. So what's to prevent
>Smarthome from charging a substantial license fee for every copy sold?
>This is really completely open ended.
>
>We have no problem with a compatibility suite test, but aren't quite
>ready to sign a blank check.

Ralph,

Anyone considering development for Insteon should also look at the "SDK
Support Rates". They are charging for supporting the SDK, including by
e-mail. This is probably not a drawback for large companies but may be for
smaller ones.

The "Insteon: The Details" PDF released yesterday is worth studying. It
presents the overall design philosophy. It looks good (at least on paper). I
think it will be robust and especially like the plans for rolling code RF
devices.