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

["BruceR" <br@xxxxxxxxxx>]

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?