Re: I think they've done it again

["BruceR" <br@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think this is getting a bit carried away. They found the problem, they
fixed the problem and they're replacing the products that have problems.
As to the cost of an electrician, I'm guessing few were installed by any
but if they were, and the customer brings it up, who's to say that they
won't make some kind of adjustment or compensation? They can deal with
those requests individually. For most of us, the swap out will mean a
weekend of inconvenience - just like the many weekends of inconvenience
I've spent debugging X10 stuff.  Like I said earlier, pioneers have
arrows in their backs.



> "Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:44d0f843.1326363906@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> The author of those posts received one of the new "fixed" dimmers
>> and he seems to confirm what I wrote here in his post dated
>> 08/01/2006 : 1:35:25 PM where he says the SmartHome "fix" is a much
>> larger choke that merely masks the underlying flaw.
>
> There's a new post at:
>
> http://www.techmall.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=405
>
> which seems to be Smarthome's official forum but it could also be
> someone calling themselves that.  Anyway, here's the latest, with
> ["Mike's comments"] so marked.
>
> ["As previously stated the load flicker is related to INSTEON-enabled
> products and not the underlying INSTEON technology."]
>
> What is THAT supposed to mean?  We designed it right but built it
> wrong? That's nice.  It smacks of the SODDI defense,
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SODDI_Defense
>
> except that there aren't any other "dudes" around!
>
> ["Our engineers have been able to replicate these symptoms in our lab
> and in the field. We have found that a small percentage of units
> flicker due to slight variations in the triac."]
>
> Sounds like you and the guy with the huge triacs were right.  "Slight
> variations in the triac" means "some triacs are bad" in my downhome,
> low-tech comprehension of English.
>
> ["The component that was in question was the choke coil."]
>
> Could this also mean the cheapest way to fix the problem was not to
> replace the "slightly varying" triacs but to apply a cheaper patch
> downstream. Aren't triacs much more expensive (and harder to replace)
> than choke coils?
>
> ["Repeated INSTEON signals generated by the dimmer or controller were
> getting into the triac and causing the flicker."]
>
> And this wasn't noticed in the beta test?  It's certainly being
> noticed now. Bad beta test.
>
> [" We have increased the value of the choke coil to attenuate the
> INSTEON signals that go into the triac."]
>
> I wonder if that has any downside, like further attenuating X-10
> signals and creating problems for people with hybrid systems.  Any
> time you change even a single component, it can have unwanted side
> effects elsewhere.
>
> ["We are pleased to have received ETL approval sooner than expected
> and been able to roll this into production."]
>
> Read that to mean "all the chatter about bad Insteon switches spooked
> us so badly that we paid ETL a rush fee to get a fix out." They know
> they very much need to quiet what for them must be a most
> uncomfortable discussion in the midst of a home automation protocol
> war.
>
> http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/7/prweb410594.htm
>
> ["The following skus are the first that SmartLabs Design has been
> able to roll into production. We plan to roll these changes into all
> dimmable devices in the next few months. Please note the new rev
> codes on the front of the switches:"]
>
> Ah, so we know that if they plan to roll them into ALL dimmable
> devices, they are very likely ALL defective or will become so under
> the proper conditions.
>
> ["Products that shipped on or after Friday July 28, 2006 will have
> the new Rev codes."]
>
> Well, at least we know which ones to avoid! Anything BEFORE  #2476D
> SwitchLinc Rev. 2.5 and  #2476DH SwitchLinc 1000W Rev. 2.3
>
> ["If you have a unit or units that flicker prior to the rev codes
> above, please call tech support for an exchange (800-762-7846 Option
> 6). Exchanges will be handled as a standard product return with 2
> options to choose from, shipping will be free of charge for both
> options."]
>
> That's nice, Mr. Mike.  What Option do I press to get the free
> electrician's visit?  Oh, wait, there isn't any!  Oddly enough, when
> I went to look in Google for messages about how people with old and
> brittle wiring might find that settlement less than generous, I found
> this one:
>
>    > By the 1980's  both the copper and insulation had become
>    > brittle. It if came out of the conduit during remodeling when
>    > one pulled, it seemed like a good idea. If it broke, it was a
>    > nightmare. You could be trying to improve some minor thing
>    > and end up with no lights or worse and need to cut open the
>    > plaster lathe and start over all over.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.home.automation/msg/63d0551f2b029828
>
> "If something broke, it was a nightmare."  Well, that sums up why *I*
> think Smarthome is trampling their customers by making them absorb
> the foreseeable and consequential recall costs.  Or don't they know
> that over-twisting solid copper house wiring leads to metal fatigue?
>
> It's pretty general knowledge jacking switches in and out is neither
> free, easy nor without risk.  The "generous" terms Smarthome offers
> are what should have been offered during a beta test, not to
> purchasers who had no reason to suspect Smarthome continued to sell
> switches with either defective triacs or undersized chokes or both.
>
> Nothing I've seen so far expresses any remorse for selling switches to
> people who might NOT have bought them had they known they had "slight
> variations in the triac."  They did not have the benefit of making
> that choice - they had no say in the matter - Smarthome made the
> choice for them by deciding to keep selling the switches.
>
> Now, Smarthome should be placed in the equally bad position of not
> having in any say in paying for electrician's bills experienced by
> people who bought those switches between March 2006 and July 2006.
>
> I don't understand how people can support the actions of a company
> that would foist defective products on people and just "hope" for the
> best.