Re: No more X10 at Radio Shack?

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jeff > and >>Robert L Bass wrote

<stuff snipped>

> > Even experienced users frequently start
> > lengthy threads here about problems with lost signals, failed
> > components and stuff turning on/off for no apparent reason.
>
> Back before I really understood X10, I would have agreed with you.  There
> was a time when I was tweaking to make it work.

I think Robert's point is that an X-10 setup is in a constant state of
tweaking.  To that end, anyone highly concerned with tech support or SAF
should be aware of its potential for problems.

> Back then everybody was
> talking about interference and how noise sources had to be filtered.  Well
> it turns out that the major problem for X10 isn't from noise sources, but
> "signal suckers".

Respectfully disagree.  The "major problem" for X-10 is actually a
constellation of problems that arise from slow transmission speed, primitive
error detection and poor signal strength.  If it was faster, there would be
fewer collisions, if there was better error detection, you'd know when a
targeted device failed to operate and if the signal strength was greater, it
wouldn't be so easily knocked out by a noisy CFL or a signal-sucking UPS.

> They are usually devices with a simple capacitor across
> their power input to meet the FCC conducted radiation standard.  Those
> manufacturers don't care if their devices corrupt other signals on the
line.
> They just use the cheapest fix possible to meet FCC regulations.
>
> The most important thing I did to increase reliability was to get an Elk
> ESM1 signal level meter.  Then I could really see the major problem was
low
> signal levels, not noise.  It can take some time to go through the house
to
> identify and isolate those signal suckers.  The important thing is to
> provide decent signal levels throughout the house.  Unfortunately, an
> inexpensive X10 transmitter can't provide the drive necessary for a larger
> house, and some type of booster may be required.

While I agree a meter is an important thing to have (so much so that I
bought the Elk and the Monterey) the need for it troubles me.  It's one of
the things that makes me classify X-10 as "it works if you know the
secrets."   Using X-10 successfully means analyzing *every* stinkin' piece
of equipment you buy with the X-10 meter to make sure it's not a black
holer.  That's a damn bother.  I must confess I haven't bothered doing it
since I've implemented the XTB's if only because I am curious to see when
they'll become overpowered by signal suckers and noise.

> Yes, there are noise sources too.  Prime candidates are compact
fluorescent
> bulbs, and "wireless" intercoms such as baby monitors.  I reported
elsewhere
> that 4 generic (cheap) CF bulbs radiated enough noise to cause problem.
> However, that is easily solved with a $25 filter.

I bit the bullet and bought 10 for a quantity discount.  I think they came
out to about $175.  Add that to the cost of meters and the XTB and it adds
up
to money I wish I didn't have to spend, but I am glad that I did because the
alternative was spending an awful *lot* more money on a new system.  Since I
want that to be hardwired, it's going to wait for the next house which will
be built with HA in mind from the ground up.

> > No doubt you're able to successfully maintain your X10 stuff.  But
> > most people, even most DIYers I know, just don't want to put up
> > with the quirky behavior of X10.  The goal in designing a system is
> > to make it work "out of the box" and continue to function,
> > regardless what new PC's, UPS's or other gear one acquires down
> > the road.  In this respect, IMO X10 fails miserably.  I don't use it
> > and I won't recommend it to customers.
>
> When you buy a car, you understand it needs oil changes and periodic
> maintenance.  Some of them don't even work perfectly "out of the box", and
> have to visit the dealer several times to get their quirks ironed out.  So
> if one accepts this from a $20,000 item, why bitch endlessly when one has
to
> do some maintenance to keep X10 running?    Provide a decent signal level,
> and it works fine.

I'm not sure of the correct analogy, but I don't think the car one fits.
X-10 has lots of issues that have to be worked around, and they range from
the trivial to the serious.  I'd say one of the worst "features" is how many
things turn themselves on after the right kind of power blip.  It's
infrequent enough to be lived with, and it's possible to work around
(inconveniently by plugging one appliance module into another and using two
ON commands to get it to work), but it's BAD.  There are many others.
They're not enough to make me stop using X-10, but they do make me wish
there weren't as many problems.

--
Bobby G.