Re: X10 -> UPB?

["Brett Griffin" <bret.griffin@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

What Kurt is referring to is there are actually 3 versions of the X-10
protocol.

The basic protocol used in X-10 and X-10 Pro has the basic command set takes
somewhere around .4-.5 seconds for transmission. The switches themselves are
dumb, in that they do not have memory for last dim level, the do not support
soft on (meaning they snap on, instead of ramp on to preserves bulb life).
These switches are basically a push button operation, the decora style
switches usually operate the same way as a toggle switch. Their cost is
usually $30 and under. They support the following commands:
    -On
    -Off
    -Bright
    -Dim.

Leviton introduces X-10 Extended code.  Their transmission is longer around
.75 seconds, but allows for additional functions. These switches have a
memory.  They will turn back on to the last dim level used, they ramp up to
the brightness in less than 2 seconds to preserve bulb life.  Their switches
actually perform like a rocker switch should. Smarthome MFG actually makes a
toggle switch, that moves up and down. Their cost range from $25 to $75
Supports:
    -On
    -Off
    -Bright (they work as go up 10%)
    -Dim. (down 10%)
    -Level (goto exact percentage brightness, I.E. goto 73%)
    -Ramp (ramp means the light ramps to the specified brightness over a
long period of time maximum I believe is 2 hours), Only a few manufacturers
support Ramp, I know PCS does not sure of others.
    -Toggle (change state)
    -Scenes, Leviton developed scenes so one transmission would turn on
multiple lights to preset brightness levels stored in the switch.

Lightolier has their own protocol called "Compose".  Rather similar to
Extended code, takes about .75 seconds for transmission, support the same
command set, but what makes Compose different, was Lightolier approached it
as a dedicated lighting control system where individual light switch control
was less of a concern as whole home scene control, or room scene control.
What really makes the protocol different is that all the light switches in a
room will use the same address.  Yes you read that right all switches in say
the living room would be set to E-3 for example.  Remember individual
lighting control was less of a concern and scene was more of a concern.
these switches would store up to 12 light settings, and from a control pad
you would issue a scene.  they would all respond to that scene based on what
was programmed.  Lightolier also made switches for areas not part of a scene
and would have a separate address than any other switch in the home.
Lightolier also developed a firewall to increase the reliability of Compose,
and virtually eliminate noise effecting the lighting circuits.  It was
expensive and required planning during new construction, but it was cheaper
than most high end lighting systems.

On a side note, UPB has trump both Extended and Compose by combining the
features of both protocols into their new protocol.

--
Brett Griffin, Technology Consultant
Architechtronics, Inc.
get to know home technology

*Home of "fidoh" for HAI/OnQ/Aegis
http://www.architechtronics.com/products_software.html

**keep up on cutting-edge technology... join "the EDGE" for free at
http://www.architectronics.com/edge.html
"Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:42d68991.20364279@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "Kurt Delaney" <kurt_dot_delaney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>"Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>news:42d67e53.17485864@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> I've also written that I expect UPB will likely prove robust (given that
>>> it's two-way with ACK/NAK) and be popular with installers. I think the
>>> question that is still unanswered is whether the higher cost is
>>> justified
>>> and that's really up to each user to decide.
>>
>>Is UPB really more expensive?  In comparing switches w/ similiar
>>capabilities (true rocker, scenes, etc.), I think the new UPB switches are
>>running right in the middle of the pack compared to PCS SmartSwitch,
>>SmartLinc, Lightolier, etc.  If you are saying that they are more
>>expensive
>>that stock X10 switches, then that is true.  But that is an apples to
>>oranges comparison.
>>
>>Note -- I am an end user w/ NO vested interest in any particular product
>>discussed here.
>
> Which of the switches you've listed have you used?
>
> All of the switches you listed (except UPB) use X-10's PLC protocol so all
> would appear to be oranges vs. one apple.
>
> NOTE: I use none of the above - I think they all cost too much. And I
> think
> the market differentiation from all of the recently new technologies is
> unlikely to result in lower prices. However, a HomePlug based technology
> (viable worldwide, no new wire) has the potential to be more robust and
> lower in cost than anything now available.
>
> I do use X-10 based modules.
>