Re: Mini-ITX PC's a the future of HA (was Re: X-10 Mister House Motion sensor problems)

["Group-Moderator" <Group-Moderator@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Robert L Bass" <robertlbass@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:xLmdnSXLu_bUhxPZnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> HomeSeer *could* have looked at the Elks and Omnis of the world and
>> created
>> a panel that handled not only security, but lots of routine automation
>> tasks
>> as well.  After all, if panels are better suited to security because they
>> are more reliable, then wouldn't that same sort of reliability be good
>> for
>> home automtion too?  HS, then, would seem to be taking an unreliable
>> course.
>> But we both know that's not the case.
>
> Agreed.  They are a software developer -- not a hardware manufacturer.
> They realize, as I'm sure you also do, that there is a market for
> PC-centric, software based automation systems, another market for
> hardware-only systems and yet another for hybrid, PC + dedicated panel HA
> solutions.
>
> HomeSeer was born a software program that interfaced with the Napco Gemini
> P9600 security system.  Rich said at the time that his goal was to develop
> an app that would add features to a panel-based alarm system.  He chose
> the P9600 because it had a reasonably easy to manage (if poorly
> documented) serial interface which allowed 2-way communication and
> control.
>
> This isn't a guess on my part.  We discussed the issues at length at the
> time because I provided HS with hardware and tech support on the Napco
> system.  HS has followed their initial business plan all along, developing
> in-house and 3rd party plug-ins for a number of different panels and
> ancillary systems -- lighting, HVAC, irrigation, etc.  They have offered
> fully loaded HA servers in the past.  I'm sure they'll contimue to test
> the waters with various PC platforms but I doubt they'll come out with a
> hardware panel any time soon.
>
>> What's really happening is that the years of proprietary
>> panel protocols, inability to access networks, inability
>> to interface with home automation and AV gear and
>> lots of other issues have put the mark of death on
>> panels...
>
> As a genre?  If that is what you mean, I disagree.  Some panels will
> certainly fall by the wayside.  Some already have.  Others will contimue
> to evolve and prosper.
>
>> Vendor's panels (let's take Omni because I own their
>> gear) have been steadily "growing" in size and
>> complexity and add-on modules to account for these
>> shortcomings.  I claim it's an unsustainable task in the
>> long run because competitors can enter the market
>> using a mini PC as their foundation HW and have both
>> a cheaper and superior product as a result...
>
> If the system isn't mission critical, that is true.  However, if the job
> includes physical security (access control), electronic security (burglar
> alarm) and/or life safety (fire alarm, medical alert, etc.), there will
> continue to be a growing need for dedicated hardware panels which will
> function for many hours during power outages, won't hang because the
> latest upgrade to Acrobat uses up 99.997% of the CPU time (argghhh!), etc.
>
>> A more powerful CPU gives you lots of options a
>> panel can't.  Lots.
>
> That is true.  HS offers a hybrid solution which allows one to take
> advantage of the PC's flexibility and power as well as a solid panel's
> reliability and load handling.  IMO that's the best of both worlds.  I
> like HS but from what I've learned so far, CQC might be a better choice
> for my own next project.  Whichever I choose, it'll have to work with the
> ELK-M1G panel.  If Dean would give me the courtesy of a reply the choice
> would be easier. (hint)
>
>> No one building a custom board can possibly compete with the horsepower
>> and
>> flexibility of the modern PC, particularly as embodied in Via's mini-ITX.
>> That means Elk's competition can produce a PC-based alarm and HA system
>> for
>> the cost of designing some interface peripherals and some software.  The
>> expensive custom board design and manufacture drops out of the equation.
>
> True, but not many PC's can connect, monitor and control over 200 inputs
> and outputs, run for a couple of days without 110VAC after a storm, and
> pass muster with the local building inspector as a fire alarm control
> panel. Your points are well taken but they don't make PC'based systems a
> complete *replacement* for panel based systems.  There is and IMO will
> continue to be a strong market for both.  At present, panel based systems
> own the major portion of the market.  How much of that they will give up
> to PC-based systems over the coming years is anybody's guess.  My bet is
> the two will merge somewhat as panel makers start to incorporate PC-like
> architecture. Only time will tell, eh?
>
>> ... Just as security panels grew PC-like parts, I predict
>> HomeSeer *will* be producing other, specialized
>> hardwire like sensor interfaces that would remove a lot
>> of the incentive to buy an Elk or Omni...
>
> Some developers might, but I don't think Rich has the wherewithall or the
> inclination to do it.  We haven't discussed this in some time so I can't
> say for certain.
>
>> For security, as Bob B. pointed out, hardwired panels
>> still have some advantages.  They don't depend on MS
>> for underlying OS, for one thing.  PCs have become
>> incredibly robust over the last 20 years because they
>> have been constantly refined.  Yet because they have
>> been running MS software, they've taken the rap for
>> being unreliable and needing burping and booting every
>> day.
>
> Interesting aside -- While working with Edwards a few years ago on the
> development of their then-next (does that make sense?) series of fire
> alarm control panels, I saw the inclusion of some very PC-like
> functionality in the panel.  I'm not able to disclose exactly what but the
> innards reminded me of an older style computer I've worked with years ago.
>
>> ... they made "panel v. PC" decision a long time
>> ago and it's only with the arrival of the highly
>> reliable, fanless and very small ITX that they
>> could finally realize that choice in a HW product.
>
> Yep and yep again.
>
>> Year after year, more and more "modules" are being
>> added to these proprietary panels and they get more
>> complex (and thus inherently less reliable) and more
>> expensive as a result.  They are trying to communicate
>> like PCs and be as "smart" as PC's but they can't get
>> there from where they are and never will.  PC's are
>> developing too quickly to ever be "caught up with" by
>> a custom panel...
>
> Perhaps, but I view it differently.  IMO PC-based systems still need to
> catch up to panels in may ways.
>
>> The "whole house" PC is coming, and it's going to drive
>> panels into the museums.  People want event logs - panels
>> stink at that....
>
> The Napco P9600 does logs quite well.
>
>> People want networking and web-enabling and USB
>> and audio and video and lots of other things that are
>> all there on a PC but quite a bit more expensive in the
>> "panel centric" world.
>
> ELK already does all ove the above except video and that's coming as well.
>
>>> OTOH, a panel is a hugely simpler product, and
>>> simpler (as a rule) means less likely to break.
>>
>> I think that's an outdated assumption for two reasons.
>>  Every time I look, Omni's adding something to its
>> boards, as are the others.  They *have* to in order to
>> keep up with the expanding universe of home automation...
>
> Most panel based systems offer *optional* add-ons to interface with new
> hardware.  That makes for a more complex shelf at the vendor but doesn't
> necessarily comlicate the individual installations.  For example, ELK
> currently supports a fair number of lighting protocols but a given
> installation only uses one or two (perhaps X10 + Z-Wave).  One particular
> site isn't going to be loaded down with apparati for X10, Z-Wave, USB,
> CentraLite AND whatever else.
>
>> PC MTBF varies so radically between MS and
>> Unix that it becomes readily apparent that a lot
>> of the "unreliability" of PC's lies at the feet of
>> Windows, not the hardware...
>
> No argument here.  :^)
>
>> For that reason at least some believe that HomeSeer
>> made the wrong choice in going with Windows, and
>> not Unix.  I tend to agree...
>
> HS made a market decision (plus, IIRC Rich is an MSD).  There are many
> fold more potential customers with PC's running MS than Unix.  Regardless
> how flawed it may be, MS owns the vast majority of the market and any
> developer who wants to sell a SW product to DIYers has to give significant
> weight to that fact.  That is what Rich did and he was right -- not
> because MS is not problematic but because marketing a Unix-only SW product
> to a limited audience is financially problematic.
>
>> MS has not demonstrated that it can create a reliable
>> operating system suitable for "appliances" let alone
>> critical black-box functions...
>
> True indeed.  What they have demonstrated is the ability to own the
> marketplace.  Their tactics have been questionable at best but they do own
> it.  If you want to make a good living selling a SW based product you have
> to make some hard decisions about that.
>
> --
>
> Regards,
> Robert L Bass
>
> =============================>
> Bass Home Electronics
> 4883 Fallcrest Circle
> Sarasota · Florida · 34233
> 941-866-1100 Sales & Tech Support
> http://www.bassburglaralarm.com
> =============================>

            Bass Home Electronics
            4883 Fallcrest Cir
            Sarasota, FL  34233
            Telephone: (941) 925-9747
            Fax: (941) 925-9747


      www.BassBurglarAlarms.com

      www.Home-Automation.us.com

      www.Security-Alarm-Systems.us


      See the BBB report on line before you purchase from this vendor.

      There is a lot more to consider than just a low price when shopping on
the internet. Don't become the next victim.
      SEE THE REPORT BELOW

      http://www.bbbwestflorida.org/commonreport.html?bid=41001663



--------------------------------------------------------------------------