Re: I think they've done it again

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"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.

--
Bobby G.