Re: Insteon Review

[nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston)]

George Pontis <gpontis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>In article <42e4f0cb.52425589@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx says...
>> ...
>>
>> With X-10, I've used two transceivers to reach both sections and use a
>> Pronto (converted to send 310MHz RF), palmpads and stick-a-switches to
>> control things. Since Insteon takes more or less the same basic approach,
>> this should provide a good test bed.
>>
>
>It would be interesting to learn how Insteon performs in a purely X10 environment.
>Perhaps they have a better X10 implementation than many of the existing X10
>products, and would be attractive even for those with primarily X10 controllers.

Except that the RF units intended as phase couplers do not repeat X-10 nor
do the individual Insteon modules. I don't know the capabilities of the
Insteon PowerLinc unit (now available only with their SDK) - it may or may
not send/receive X-10.

Historically (e.g. SwitchLinc, PowerLinc, LampLinc, BoosterLinc), SmartHome
has not done a good job with X-10. I doubt that will change in their Insteon
devices. After all they want to switch the market to Insteon. I think
Insteon will be able to coexist with a limited number of X-10 devices but
the more Insteon devices installed, the more trouble you will have with any
remaining X-10 devices.

Insteon devices, being two-way, attenuate the X-10 signal so you may need
their BoosterLinc to compensate. You will need an X-10 phase coupler.

The Insteon specs and concept look very good. My trepidation is solely
because it comes from SmartHome and I have little regard for their
engineering prowess as demonstrated for the past several years. I suspect
that Insteon came from different roots.

I still want to try to generate some noise on the powerline to see how
Insteon handles that but so far, in my rather limited tests, Insteon looks
very good. Those who have troubles with X-10 might want to consider it. My
X-10 set up is reliable so I have no reason to switch. If I were starting
anew, I'd look hard at Insteon.

Now, if they were smart, they'd create a 418MHz RF to Insteon bridge and
publish the protocol so that Pronto owners could control it wirelessly. I
don't think they're smart. :(