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

["BruceR" <br@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Good points, I've saved this post.  I'll try to reach Dan tomorrow or
Tuesday and post the results.

From:Dave Houston
nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx

> 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?