Re: Smartlabs...check it out!

[nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston)]

Insteon has published a rather thorough (and only slightly biased)
comparison of Insteon with most of the other HA (and potential HA)
technologies.

     http://www.insteon.net/pdf/insteoncompared.pdf

I've only skimmed through it but it has some devastating critiques of Z-Wave
and UPB. Since I've always found the UPB "noise as signal" approach suspect
I was amused to see my views verified. I think Zensys needs to float their
IPO ASAP. ;)

I'm not sure I agree with their dismissal of HomePlug and TCP/IP as HA
technologies although it's unlikely that either will ever be competitive
with $20 ICON switches.

"BruceR" <br@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>I agree with you wholeheartedly - the translator is clearly a beta and I
>expect some anomolies as it gets fine tuned. In looking at the competing
>technologies Insteon does seem to be doing things right in terms of
>getting this to mass market levels and replacing X10 as the defacto
>standard. I wouldn't be surprised if X10 and/or Leviton licenced the
>technology themselves and added it to their product lines.  I also agree
>that the best way to eliminate X10 conflicts is to limit the "migration"
>time to as brief a period as one can afford.
>
> With my order for additional units I will have enough to replace about
>a third of my X10 stuff which will cover my critical lighting needs.  As
>they warn in their documentation, the addition of Insteon modules can
>create X10 problems too as they act as little signal suckers themselves!
>I'm seeing this already so I'm motivated to complete the changeout as
>fast as I practically can.
>
>  Once those are installed I'm planning a little experiment. I'm going
>to plug the TW523 into the translator and plug the translator and an RF
>repeater into an isolated power strip so as to keep all X10 signals off
>the powerline. Translated signals will reach the powerline via RF to
>another nearby RF unit plugged into the powerline directly.  While my
>remaining X10 stuff won't work from the controller during this time I
>should be able to create a "pure" Insteon environment to evaluate it
>without the complication of competing X10 signals while still allowing
>my X10 controller to run most things.
>
> I took another look at the Development Kit's licence and I see what you
>mean about discussing Insteon. While I think it's a bit restrictive, the
>way I read it the first time is that I'd only be prohibited from
>discussing things related to use of the kit itself. IOW, if I develop
>something great (unlikely) or find a fatal flaw through my use of the
>kit I cannot go public with that info.  However, I don't see that it
>would apply to reporting on my use of the products publically available
>as long as that use hasn't been affected by my use or the results of my
>use of the kit.  After reading it in the light that you cast I would
>agree that it might be construed to cover ANY use of ANY Insteon product
>but I don't think that's their intent or even enforceable. I will ask
>about it though!
>
>From:Dave Houston
>nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>> For the benefit of those who tuned in late you should periodically
>> note that your installation is atypical, employing a (beta?)
>> X10-to-Insteon translator. I doubt you would see many mystery events
>> in an Insteon-only installation (although Insteon may be vulnerable
>> to spikes and brownouts).
>>
>> My brief testing was not nearly as extensive as what you'll be able
>> to do but it did convince me that the Insteon technology was very
>> promising. The $20 ICON switches and $1.60 chip (to be available
>> online with no minimum order) have to be bad news for UPB and Z-Wave.
>> The low cost chip and the speed of the Insteon protocol probably mean
>> we will start to see things like plug-in sensors for temperature,
>> humidity, current, etc. The $2.90 RF chip probably will likely appear
>> soon in handheld remotes. I'll certainly take a look at using the RF
>> chip with something like a Pronto TS1000.
>>
>> As those who've been around CHA for a few years know, my primary
>> interest in HA is its applicability for those with disabilities and I
>> think Insteon shows a lot of promise in this area, both in terms of
>> high reliability and low cost.
>>
>> Now if only they would change the license terms as they told Neil
>> Cherry they would do many weeks ago. Now that you have ordered the
>> SDK you will no longer be allowed to post anything (whether good or
>> bad) about Insteon without violating the terms of the license. ;)
>>
>> "BruceR" <br@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm glad to see that they're doing these things. After playing with
>>> Insteon for the last week or so, I'm encouraged by its performance so
>>> I've decided to go further with it and have ordered more components
>>> as well as the Developer's Kit. The system isn't perfect though
>>> although it may get better as more components are added.  I've had a
>>> couple of modules turn themselves on in response to unrelated X10
>>> OFF signals. It's not consistent nor easily repeatable so I don't
>>> know why it's happening.
>>>
>>> From:kelbelle25
>>> koloughlin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>> "SmartLabs Partners With Leading Electronic Home Control Software
>>>> Companies to Add INSTEON to Home Control Software"
>>>>
>>>> http://www.smarthome.com/pr06-05.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "SmartLabs Introduces the ICON Line of Affordable Home Control
>>>> Lighting Products"
>>>> http://www.smarthome.com/pr06-04.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "SmartLabs Announces First in a Family of INSTEON Chips"
>>>> http://www.smarthome.com/pr06-03.html
>>>>
>>>> "Smarthome Inc. New Parent Company SmartLabs Inc. Formed With Group
>>>> of Three Companies"
>>>>
>>>> http://www.smarthome.com/pr06-02.html
>