Re: X-10, IF, RF, Zigbee.. What to do?

[Marc F Hult <MFHult@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 13:02:09 -0400, Lewis Gardner
<lgardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
<4340129d_1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 14:20:30 GMT, Marc F Hult <MFHult@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in message  <79rvj1p3b6f7am49mokd9i2ejf9r354giq@xxxxxxx>:

>> "Annual subscriptions"?  This would seem to be completely unacceptable
>>for everyone except, perhaps, homebuilders and renters. So in my opinion,
>>it matters not at all how good/interesting their hardware is or isn't.
>
>A continuing revenue stream is very important to any business endeavor.
>The software business is even more dependent than most in this regard.

>Any serious "home control" system is at least a 50% software component
>that requires constant updating as new devices and technologies emerge.
>What Control4 is attempting to do is lower the up-front cost of a very
>powerful system that can be installed and maintained by a technically
>savvy person without "soldering iron" or "code warrior" type skills.

>While I have not checked out the details of their particular
>subscription scheme I have no serious objections to the idea as long as
>my system continues to run even if I am not "paid up". If you want
>enhancements you should pay for them. After all it does neither the
>supplier or customer any good if the system becomes prematurely obsolete
>due to stagnation.

There is a great need for a successful financial model for HA software. So
it is fundamentally jist fine by me for purveyors to try out different
approaches in the marketplace.

But in the case of the 4control 'model' (if we can use that term for a
product about which we know little and is not yet shipping ;-)  the hardware
is *also* proprietary with no obvious second source.

This is not so much of a problem with respect to HomeToys including many
audio visual capabilities. But it is absolutely a deal-breaker (for me) if
it applies to necessary infrastructure such as lighting and security.

I would use a working definition of an "unacceptable subscription" a
subscription that would be required for existing features to be maintained.

I would also be very wary of features that _require_ third parties such as
dealer/installer support, or a particular broadband supplier. For starters,
security issues would need to satisfactorily resolved including bonding.

We will learn more with time and perhaps the i4control 'model' will evolve
(or already is ) something less onerous than it now appears (to me).

Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org