Re: is x10.com dead?

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Bill Kearney" <wkearney99@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

> > Agreed.  A Lutron RA system is nice but when I consider the price per
load
> > it's not *so* much better than I feel compelled to switch.
>
> I totally disagree.  Since switching over to RadioRA last spring we've had
> absolutely NO control issues whatsoever.  They work, every time without
> fail.  From local wall switch controls to RS-232 computer interface and
the
> RF remote visor controls.  Rock solid.  X-10 was PLAGUED with trouble here
> (and in other, past residences).

Part of the great disparity between opinions on X-10 probably has a lot to
do with what people do with it.  There's no system anywhere near the price
that allows me to control so much of my house with a single handheld device.
It's just a great bonus that it's cheap and nearly indestructible, too.  I
control AV, CCTV and X-10 all through a single remote and there's one or
more in every room of the house, too.

There was a very high SAF for blowing away a table-top full of remotes for a
single one that not only controlled the house lights, but the stereo and
CCTV system.  If my next project is successful, it will also control the
door intercoms and allow us to use the remote to dial the speakerphone and
answer phone calls with it.  One remote.  One CHEAP remote.  Lutron can't do
that and it costs what, 10 times as much?  Clearly, there's more to the
equation than 100.00% reliability, at least for me.

> With RadioRA I just wired 'em up and they
> worked.  I would certainly like them to be less expensive and to offer a
> wall outlet and/or appliance module.  I think if they dropped the price
per
> wall swtich to an under $50 price point they'd see a dramatic increase in
> unit sales.  Ah well, at least they work!

Lacking appliance modules and wall outlets is a pretty serious deficiency in
my book.  And, unless Lutron is using high powered transmitters that can
blast through any interference, they are susceptible to RF interference.
Every few months you read about some poor group of car owners that can't use
their RF remotes because of interference from nearby military bases.  Who
knew plasma TV were going to cause so much trouble for high-end Xantech IR
receivers that they designed a new line to resolve the problems?  Who knows
what interference might lie ahead for Lutron or any RF-based solution?

> > There are few technical things that have lasted as long as X-10.
>
> This has as much to do with the hobbyist nature of the HA market more than
> anything else.

Disagree.  They had a protocol and managed to stick to it without too many
different flavors arising.  Think of all the standards that have come and
gone since X-10 arrived on the scene - 8 tracks, cassettes, vinyl LPs, 5.25"
floppies, 35mm film, BetaMax, carbon paper, typewriters, etc.  Yet I can
still go down to the RatShack and buy a minitimer for $15 on sale that
controls all the modules I own.

Not only can it control the old and new modules, it comes with a
battery-backed little microcomputer capable of maintaining two sets of
ON/OFF times for 8 X-10 addresses and even randomizing the ON/OFF times.
Plus it offers manual control of 8 units locally and is an alarm clock to
top it all off.  There's nothing like that in the Lutron RA world, at least
not for $30 list, $15 sale.

I put together a "travel kit" in 5 minutes that let me wire up a friend's
house to give it a "lived in look" in only 10 minutes.  Who else lets you
control 8 loads like that for a list cost of less than <$100 (and an actual
cost of $55 because I bought the stuff on sale)?

That's all the automation this person wanted or needed and since the house
was relatively tech-device free, the signal propagated quite nicely
throughout the entire house.  And, since she was moving out as soon as the
divorce was final, there was no time or expense wasted installing or
uninstalling wall switches.  The biggest issue was to explain how to use the
local light switch toggle.  X-10 was a *massive* improvement over her previo
us network of plug-in clock timers that made it really awkward to control
the lamp by its own switch.

> > The appliance modules from the 1980's work as well
> > as the ones made this year.
>
> More like fail just as randomly now as they did when new.  That's not the
> same as being "good".

Again, I think it's a usage pattern issue.  We don't do much dimming and I
think that's a real failure vector in X-10, both from the "endless dim"
problems and the failure from heat buildup.  So it's likely if you are a
"dimmer" you've got a different view of X-10's reliability than a
"non-dimmer" like me.  I also don't use the keychain remotes for anything
but really short range, in house work.  That may change after I install
Dave's new transceiver with a much greater range.  I perhaps have one
appliance module fail every two or three years, now.  That's a rate I can
live with.

I know that X-10 has weak points and I've tried to work around them as best
I can because the strong points (one remote for everything, cheap spares and
huge user base for support) are important to me and aren't really offered by
X-10 competitors.

> > No, it's not perfect, but it's good enough and it's impossible to beat,
> > pricewise.
>
> Crappy stuff that drives me and my wife crazy is not my idea of a bargain.

Again, if you expect more than it can give, you're going to be disappointed.
It can't give long RF range without modification.  It can't handle long
macros without the possibility of someone stepping on the transmission.  Too
many Hawkeyes can create collisions when used with TM-751s.  X-10 often has
serious problems with dimming lights.  If you need the above features from
X-10, you're going to have to do some serious work or work-arounds.  You're
going to need an X-10 meter and a box of X-10 filters, too.  With proper
care, X-10 *is* workable enough to have plenty of satisfied customers.

> I hear what you're saying, it's just not worth the aggravation.

That's clearly a personal choice.  It's interesting that the divide breaks
down so neatly along two categories: price and performance.

FWIW, my spell checker keeps wanting to replace "Lutron" with "Latrine" so
if you ever see it, I am not trying to be derogatory, I probably just hit
"change" without thinking!

--
Bobby G.