Re: No more X10 at Radio Shack?

[nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston)]

ddl@danlan.*com (Dan Lanciani) wrote:

>That seems to explain the behavior I remember.  At first I thought it
>was being helpful by saving the state from off to on and was just buggy
>or getting latched up later.  But it sounds like it is consistent firmware
>bug. :(  It's too bad because I know they could do better.  I coded the
>load detection in my replacement RR501 firmware, and the hardware is pretty
>much the same.  For that matter, I guess anything that could get local control
>right must also be able to do load detection when the relay is off...

The RR501 does even better - it reports status even when the relay has been
removed and sent to the landfill. ;)

http://davehouston.net
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/roZetta/
roZetta-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx