Re: Product Idea: X10 to UPB/Zigbee/Insteon translator

[nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston)]

Let us know the outcome.

One potential problem will be speed. You'll have the time it takes for a
TW523 command plus the normal time for an Insteon (or UPB) command plus a
smidgeon for translation. Since the ZC signal will have to be simulated it
can be sped up by increasing the rate of the simulated ZC but how much may
depend on the device (e.g. JDS, Ocelot) it's interfaced with. I suspect the
1ms X-10 signal will be unalterable but the intervals between them can
probably be shorter than 1/2 a powerline period.

However, I suspect most people would willingly sacrifice a little speed for
the increased reliability of Insteon, UPB or HomePlug HA.

"BruceR" <br@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Excellent idea. I will send Dan an email and see what he thinks. Thanks!
>
>From:Dave Houston
>nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>> From a technical POV a TW523 emulator for UPB or Insteon is certainly
>> doable. A PIC or AVR would be sufficient to translate between the JDS
>> (or any other device that supports the TW523) and a serial interface
>> for either Insteon or UPB. Including a 310MHz RF receiver would allow
>> for control of the Insteon or UPB devices with palmpads, etc.
>>
>> The UPB serial protocol is published. The Insteon serial SDK is about
>> $100 and includes the protocol (although I still cannot recommend it
>> given the terms of their license).
>>
>> This might be something that would interest Dan Boone at ADI. It
>> would be a way for the Ocelot and Leopard to work with Insteon or
>> UPB. Why don't you send him an email or post a message to the ADI
>> forum.
>>
>> "BruceR" <br@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the quick response on this Dave.  I knew you'd be the "go
>>> to" guy for some good thoughts on this.
>>>
>>> Your assumption is correct in that I hate to scrap the $1000+
>>> investment in my JDS stuff; however I'd be willing to do so if I
>>> could find another stand alone device that's as capable. I spoke to
>>> SmartHome about how Insteon works with X10. My understanding is that
>>> if a device is set up to receive X10 then the Insteon benefit is
>>> lost. IOW, there is no ability to repeat an X10 signal as an Insteon
>>> signal.  He also told me that they did not have a translation bridge
>>> on the drawing board but thought it was a good idea.
>>>
>>> Even if the translation on such a bridge were limited to the standard
>>> "on-off-dim-bright" (I'd even settle for just "on-off") it would be
>>> enough to get me to scrap the X10 stuff and switch to Insteon (or
>>> another).  I see your point about the licensing of competing
>>> translations in a single box. That would be fine too as only one
>>> would typically be needed. I suppose different boxes could be
>>> produced for different protocols.
>>>
>>> JDS is working on a UPB interface but, at least in its first
>>> iteration, it will require removal of the phone board which is
>>> unacceptable to me as I use that function extensively. It's good to
>>> hear that someone is working on a UPB/X10 bridge.  I already have
>>> some UPB stuff and would love to be a beta tester if they're still
>>> looking.
>>>
>>> I think that whoever comes to market with an X10 bridge to any of the
>>> new protocols is likely to get a quick leg up in getting guys like
>>> me to switch everything out and topple X10 as the defacto standard.
>>> The availability of a bridge would get some vendor a bunch of $2500+
>>> module/switch orders in a heartbeat.
>>>
>>> From:Dave Houston
>>> nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>> Insteon already supports X-10 although not with a TW523 emulation.
>>>>
>>>> I think SmartHome would balk at supporting UPB and vice versa and
>>>> given that both licenses would be involved I doubt a ménage-à-trois
>>>> would get off the ground.
>>>>
>>>> I assume you want TW523 emulation so it would work with your JDS
>>>> gear, HomeVision, HAI, etc. but I think the TW523 protocol would be
>>>> far too restrictive to make best use of either Insteon or UPB.
>>>>
>>>> I can say that I was approached to be a beta tester for a planned
>>>> UPB/X10 bridge. I turned it down because of my health and I will not
>>>> say any more. I don't know whether the project had the blessing of
>>>> PCS.
>>>>
>>>> I was impressed with the reliability of Insteon. My brief tests were
>>>> not conclusive but others are beginning to post good reports also so
>>>> I think it's a potential winner. You may soon see HAI and others
>>>> offering an Insteon interface. I think PCS made a mistake when they
>>>> priced UPB at a premium level.
>>>>
>>>> There may soon be another player. HomePlug is working on a simpler
>>>> specification (and lower cost chip) for home automation. Yitran
>>>> already has a similar chip which includes the SCP protocol.
>>>>
>>>> "BruceR" <br@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't know how big a deal it would be but I wonder about the
>>>>> feasibility and marketability of a device that would accept the
>>>>> same connection & signal input that the TW523 uses to then
>>>>> translate and issue a command in one of the newer HA formats. The
>>>>> device could be specific to one translation or could be a more
>>>>> universal device that could do all three.
>>>>> I think that such a device would be helpful in propagating the new
>>>>> technologies while enabling a user to use their "legacy" controller
>>>>> and support multiple formats rather than having to scrap everything
>>>>> and start over.
>>>>> Opinions? Dave H?
>