Re: No more X10 at Radio Shack?

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Bill Kearney" <wkearney99@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ZsCdnWI0Ya84UezYnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > There aren't many collisions in a two-person household.  It's basically
a
> > non-issue for us, although I'd be quite willing to agree it wouldn't be
> > acceptable for others.  I like the option of having 256 possible
addresses
> > for real devices, virtual ones and things that might come along in the
> > future.
>
> Motion sensors swamp X10 quite rapidly.  But seeing as how the sensors
> themselves are crap anyway that's only adding to the disaster.

With only one Hawkeye motion sensor in the basement and another one on the
first floor using X-10, it's never been a problem for me other than the
occasional "fail to fire" or a turn off before the occupant has finished
their business.   We can live with that.   I'll agree it's NOT OK to use
more than one per area, and maybe even more than one per floor - and maybe
even less with more than two occupants.  For us, it works out just fine.
Even better was the fact I didn't have to string cable, rig power supplies
or do anything like what it took to set up the PIR that watches the front
door (where I want 100% reliability).

> > It's pretty strange that Lutron limited itself to 32 loads without
> > addition equipment.
>
> Yep, no argument there.
>
> > That's important to me and puts
> > a big plus on the side of X-10.
>
> Again, unreliable control of ANY number of devices is useless.

Again, that's your take on the matter.  It's reliable enough for me, albeit
only because of Jeff Volp's XTB.  I assume by others who have replied that
it's reliable enough for them, too.  I get tremendous flexibility from
having 256 codes.  Having only 32 would be a backwards step for me.

> > Powerline noise really wasn't any sort of issue for me until the advent
of
> > switching power supplies, PC equipment and surge protectors.  That
> occurred
> > from around 1985 on.  I had a problem was with an APC UPS that was my
> first
> > "black hole."  Up until then, I had remarkable success using X-10 and
> their
> > wireless, eight button belt clip controller, the precursors to the
> RR-501's
> > from RatShack and Maxicontrollers that are still in use today.
>
> Technology marches on, it's time X10 was left behind.

And saying that, you believe that LutronRA is immune from the same problems
that hobbled X-10?  Do they have a lock on how many RF devices are going to
appear in the average house 30 years from now?  I doubt it.  They are going
to be vulnerable to the same issues that X-10 faced - namely more and more
interference from other devices on their chosen transmission medium.  Tell
us your FCC ID number.  That way we can look up who else has access to that
frequency and what the potential for future trouble might be.  Again, to
fairly compare, we need a crystal ball to see what Lutron will be up against
in RF interference 30 years from now.

> > > My point is, and as a warning to newbies, that without cobbling up
such
> > > workarounds there's no way to use X10 reliably.
> >
> > That's reasonable.  But it should also be pretty easy to understand why
> lots
> > of folks like me who have dealt with X-10's admitted many foibles resist
> the
> > characterization of "total shiite" since it does work for them.  I might
> > still recommend it to newbies just to get their feet wet in HA at very
low
> > cost or if their need was very limited (turning on a porch light from
the
> > bedroom, for example).  I'd be reluctant to recommend any current
protocol
> > because I think that there will be soon big losers in that arena, and
> > perhaps sooner than later.
>
> I won't even recommend X10 just as a test for newbies.  It runs afoul of
so
> many disasters, so quickly, that it's not fair to aggravate them.

Yeah, it would be better to recommend one of the new standards so they could
suddenly find themselves stranded when they discovered they've chosen the
BetaMax of the HA world, whatever that turns out to be.   Not!  X-10 allows
an entry into HA that is very cheap, very well documented and very easy to
turn around and resell.  I surely would NEVER recommend a $200 per load
option like RA to a newbie who knew nothing about HA.

> > Dude, I've admitted the probabilities are quite small but the physics
are
> > this: if someone fires up a powerful enough transmitter on the same
> > frequency as RadioRA near enough to your house, it's hasta la vista
baby.
>
> And if I light off a thermonuclear bomb we're all fucked, so what's your
> point?
>
> You're arguing that it MIGHT be possible for an RF-based system to suffer
> interference, as if that somehow countered the fact that an X10 system
WILL
> SUFFER interference.  How is this comparable?

It's comparable because you bought a NEW system designed to CURRENT levels
of RF saturation.  When X-10 was new, it was designed to accommodate the
then CURRENT level of powerline interference.  Now, thirty years later, that
design wasn't good enough because all sort of new plug-in technologies have
appeared.  Even current home automation users are being swamped by sudden
changes in the RF environment affecting both car keyfobs and garage door
openers, the "automation" that most people are familiar with.  What protects
you and RadioRA from RF interference that hasn't come on-line yet?

> > I
> > won't bother looking up the articles about the people whose radio-based
> > garage door openers got wiped out by a new Air Force radio system - I've
> > posted it twice before.
>
> Find an article discussing how something was DEMONSTRATED to interfere
with
> currently shipping RF-based automation controls and you'd have a point.
> That a military transmitter might've interferred with a crappy garage door
> opener, again, does nothing to address the underlying disaster that is
X10.

For  God's sake, Bill, if you are really trying to convince me that opening
garage doors remotely ISN'T part of home automation, then this is a futile
discussion.  From my POV garage door and car door lock openers are one of
the primary entry points of the general public into the world of home
automation.

Here's an excerpt from an article from today's (!) NY Times on the subject
of RF interference and HA.  I didn't have to go looking for it - it hit me
right in the nose.  RF interference is clearly VERY disturbing to the people
it affects, and that number might be as great as 50 million:

In Colorado, Air Force Test Threatens a Glory of Homeownership
 By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: December 3, 2006

DENVER, Dec. 2 (AP) ? A test last week of a new communication system that
would be used in times of national emergency hit hundreds of Coloradans
right where they live.

When a secretive Air Force installation in Colorado Springs began testing
the radio signal, it knocked out remote control garage door openers around
the area. The communication system, intended to reach first responders, uses
the same frequency as an estimated 50 million garage door openers.

Capt. Tracy Giles of the 21st Space Wing said Air Force officials were
trying to figure out how to resolve the problem. ?They have turned it off to
be good neighbors,? he said.

. . .

Technically, the Air Force has the right to the frequency, which it began
using nearly three years ago at some bases. Signals have also interfered
with garage doors in other areas.

. . .

(for the entire article please visit: (registration required )-:))

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/us/03garage.html

If such a transmitter, working on your frequency, began broadcasting in the
DC area,  I think you would be SOL if you lived near enough to be affected.
I'm sure that Lutron's got some sort of error detection protocol, but would
it be enough to resist a powerful transmitter that began broadcasting
nearby?  I think you would be especially SOL if no one but RadioRA users
were affected.  The AF backed off in the above case because of the sheer
number of people affected.  How many RA users are there compared to garage
door opener users?  1 to 1000?  1 to 10,000?  My guess is that if a
government transmitter knocked out the few RadioRA installations around,
you'd be out of luck unless Dick Cheney happened to be using RA, too.
What's the likelihood of the feds setting up a new radio net at the seat of
the Federal government?  The answer to that would bother me if I had an
RF-only HA system.

What will be the impact of devices like this:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/22/aircable-offers-up-28-mile-bluetooth-rang
e-extender/

that allege to extend Bluetooth a whopping 28 miles on your setup?  What
I've been trying to say all along is that there's no guarantee the RF band
your device uses won't get eaten up at some time in the future, legally or
illegally or even by sunspots.  Both X-10 and Lutron, by necessity, designed
to the environment that existed at the time of design.  Get back to me in 30
years to tell me how well Lutron coped with the future.  Until then, the two
technologies really can't be fairly compared.

--
Bobby G.