Re: 1-wire to USB converter that can use 1820s directly

[Robert L Bass <sales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> You're all clearly unaware that we've received a personal
> visit from a legendary internet personality, Rod Speed.

Oh.

> "USB Only" is obviously a much higher priority requirement
> for the OP than most replies have acknowledged.  If there's
> anything that's typical about Usenet in this thread, it's that
> a lot of answers that fall under the heading: "not *exactly*
> what that user wanted."

It would seem so.

> If my mate's read of Speed is right, we can be sure, if
> nothing else, that RS knows *exactly* what he wants.
> That's probably pretty clear by now, anyway.

That can be either a good or bad thing.

> The state of PC and HA wiring is such that it's easy (for me
> at least, and especially my wife) to understand how someone
> could finally say "not one more f'ing wire!"  I, too, am
> struggling with cleanly implementing similar systems and
> have no serial ports to spare nor a desire to add additional
> ports via PCI cards.

I'm not trying to argue that serial ports are better than USB -- only that they
may be a viable option.

> This sort of approach is fraught with peril, as the cliche goes.
> You are limited to what PC can talk to your net (got have a
> special board installed), gotta learn another OS (Theos or
> some other proprietary OS).

Actually, the THEOS operating system was a requirement of the central monitoring
station automation software we were running.  At the time there were no USB
ports (or at least none that I was aware of).  We were running a package called
BOLD which automated the handling of incoming security signals on a multi-line
alarm receiver.

> A machine failure is a crisis...

Due to the critical nature of central alarm monitoring, everything in the office
had a backup.  We set it up so that I could throw a few switched, swap a few
cables and be up and running after a total meltdown in less than 10 minutes.
Our central station receiver, printers, terminals and computer system were all
redundant.  We even had two 4KW UPS units and two gensets though the backup
genset was smaller and simpler than the primary unit.

> Rod obviously wants something he can maintain easily.
> Anything that requires a special board in a PC means
> "maintenance issues" and I've supported enough of
> them to know.  USB-based means he can plug it into a
> laptop, a Mac, a PDA and lots of other things and *hopefully*
> run his sensor net without having to crack open a machine
> or buy cards or adapters.  I can see why he's so hard over
> on demanding that as a requirement.  It's incredibly
> important for CPU device "independence."

That makes a lot of sense.

>> The entire system was extremely simple to set up and use.
>> The hardware ran 24/7 for many years without a hitch.
>
> Know why?  You probably never tinkered with it once it was
> set up and running.  Those sorts of systems work fine once
> you've put in the time to set them up.  But if they fail, you
> either need an identical spare or lots of qualified spare parts
> to really assure 24/7 performance.  I think that's one thing
> the OP, Mr. Speed, has in mind.

In my business identical spares are pretty much the industry standard.  Not only
that but they have to be capable of being turned on immediately -- no time to
swap cards inside the PC, etc.  A lot can happen in a few minutes when you're
down.  Larger, better financed central stations take this a step farther.  Their
backup systems are kept running 24/7.  In the event of a breakdown the system
has to give an alarm and "fail over" to the backup without skipping a beat.

>> We sold the business and the computer system
>> with it six years ago.  To the best of my knowledge it's still
>> running today.
>
> Compaq, at its zenith, was selling wonderfully overbuilt machines
> with connectors rated for 10X what was then "industry standard
> practice."  I marvel at the sturdiness of some of the old PC "iron."
> It doesn't, however, have a whole lot to do with the OP's USB
> requirement.

Agreed.  I can see the validity of what you're saying.

>> I wish I could say the same for some of my other PC
>> equipment.
>
> Still, performance doubles every few years so longevity isn't
> as big a factor as it would be in a car.  I would love to see
> my gas mileage improve the way PC clock speeds and
> peripheral throughput has.  I would buy a new car as often
> as I bought a new PC if it did...

Oh, you don't?  Hmm.  :^)

> IMHO, longevity is not a big requirement of the OP.  I
> would say his USB requirement is actually a way of
> factoring in getting a new PC and being able to use it
> to control the net right out of the box, without adding
> a serial IO card.
>
>>> Serial ports done that way arent that easy to support in VBA
>>> either, support for non standard serial ports is pretty poor.
>>
>> Anything is easy if you know how.  I don't write code . . .
>
> You should have stopped right there.  I know how to rebuild a VW engine.
> That doesn't make it easy in the slightest.  If you don't write code, it's
> really a stretch criticize his code-writing ability...

I didn't mean to criticize him at all.  In fact, I specifically said that was
not the point.  I was only trying to say that "easy" and "hard" are relative.

> The OP is really the only one capable of commenting on the mix of factors
> that dictate his choice of SW.  He's reiterating how important "standard" is
> to him in his design specs.  Still, you're not listening!!!

I'm listening.  You've explained this point clearly and as I said above it makes
sense.

>> but folks I work with develop software for industrial PC's
>> and they don't seem to have much of a problem.  I'm not
>> trying to belittle your skills, friend.
>
> Perhaps you aren't, but I'm betting he'll take umbrage.

One sage poster includes in his sig line the statement, "Umbrage is free.  Take
all you want".  Usenet has something in common with driving a car.  Participants
often feel anonymous.  That lends ease to expressing anger at lesser slights
than "normal" folks do in other social situations.  We've seen that in the
visits of certain folks from another newsgroup.

> He's explained his requirements to the point of perseveration.
> (-:  Disparaging his programming skills, however "gently"
> isn't likely to get a positive response.  I'll bet it contains the
> "F" word at least.

There was no disparagement.  For me it's probably easier to maintain a wiring
system than for you (even assuming your skills in that area are above average)
because that's what I did for a living for so many years.  That does not mean
that your skills are inferior.  It only means that what is easy varies from
person to person.  What I really hate doing is integrating and maintaining PC
hardware.  :^)

>> But I think you're unnecessarily constricting your project
>> by ignoring other possible solutions.
>
> And he should care what you think about his project
> exactly why?  (-:

He doesn't have to give a rat's derriere about my opinion.  Nor do you.  I
shared an idea as have you.  After reading your comments I can see why he's
adamant about USB.  No problem.  This isn't a race to see who gains the most
points.  It's an open discussion forum where people with varying backgrounds,
skills and opinions can share what they know/think/whatever.  IMO (which doesn't
have to matter to you either), this is a good thing.

> I don't want to sound mean, but I see so many newsgroups
> where the responses just get farther and farther away from
> the specs that I feel I have entered the twilight zone. I hear
> that "doo doo, doo doo" music right now.  He wants a USB
> solution that he can program in VBA in a non-exotic sort of
> way.  Pretty simple.  It may not be realistic, given some other
> constraints on the project, but that's what I expect he came
> here to find out.  There have been a number of posts that I
> think have been very helpful, but in the end, he's the one
> who gets to decide if they were.

Well, yes.  But threads have a way of morphing, not so much because of Rod
Serling's influence but because that is how conversation works.  Unless there's
a strict moderator tapping his podium with a ruler, most conversations tend to
wander all over the place.  As long as the subject matter is related to HA, I
don't see that as a bad thing.

> [snip because the point has already been made]

No argument here.

>> On another note, I haven't followed this thread very closely
>> so forgive me if I got it wrong but did you indicate you plan
>> to use telco cables (the flat "satin" stuff) to wire up this system
>> in multiple rooms?  If so, I'd strongly advise you to reconsider.
>
> This may indeed be an area where the OP should test
> assumptions before going much further.  I suspect he
> may have already done the testing, but my experience
> with cutting and soldering those cables has been bad...

Same here.  The design of the cable is intended to enhance tensile strength and
flexibility with little or no thought given to compression, extension
(soldering, punch down, whatever).  They also are not expected to live very
long.  Many of them et replaced long before the phones to which they are
connected die.

> Maybe Ozian RJ11 cables are different or he's got a batch
> of cables he knows he can work with.  I suspect by the time
> he gets this far down, you've already lost much of your ability
> to persuade him.  :-)

I made it clear enough that my comments were not intended as a slight.  If he's
so sensitive that he can't accept that, he loses.  I'm not trying to gain
anything.  He is.  I prefer not to assume the gentleman is as easily offended as
you say.  If I'm wrong, that's unfortunate but for his sake it would be good for
him to take my (and your) advice about running wire.

>> That's an area where I have extensive knowledge and hands-on
>> experience.  You really don't want to try to use that kind of cable for
>> permanent wiring of any sort.  More importantly, you don't want to
>> run it through walls (code violation).  It's a royal PITO to splice, does
>> not take well to being stapled in place and is not robust enough for
>> anything other than it's intended purpose -- as a flexible cord to plug
>> telephones into nearby wall jacks.
>>
>> If that is not your intention, ignore the above paragraph.  :^)
>
> If he's got a solution to what I have found were to be the most
> unsolderable wires on earth, I'd like to learn it.

I rarely curse but when once I broke out one of those cables and tried to solder
it to a broken, cheap-o telephone I made an exception.  :^)

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

Bass Burglar Alarms
The Online DIY Store
http://www.BassBurglarAlarms.com

--

Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups.