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

["BruceR" <br@xxxxxxxxxx>]

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?