Re: XTB - the Future of X10 has arrived!

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4483df3e.118869328@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> UPB uses a ~40V pulse they get by rapidly discharging a capacitor. This
> causes a "ringing" at the natural frequency of the system in much the same
> way as a triac turning on and off. The ringing dies down after 5-10
cycles.

You'd have to ask Jeff about how he generates his higher-than-stock X-10
pulses.  There is a whopping big 25V capacitor inside the case, so I'm
assuming his method is similar.  I don't see anything wrong in putting 20
volts of signal on the line if UPB puts 40.  The voltage limitation in the
original spec was probably based on the assumption that in 1980, a 5 volt
signal could have very easily reached the neighbor's house.  That's no
longer the case.  Using an amplifier like Jeff's is really the only logical,
simple way to account for the growing issues on home power lines.  It's like
the Gordian Knot that stumped the wisemen for years until Alexander came
along and cut it with his sword.

> Insteon uses a much LOWER signal level. Their spec says "3.16 Vpp into 5
> Ohms" is the minimum level. I haven't seen a maximum level spec but the
> scope screenshots I made when testing the starter kit were about 5-6Vpp
> IIRC.

OK - it uses less power but that's because each unit is a repeater and it
couples phases via RF, correct?  Unfortunately, Insteon interferes with X-10
in subtle but certain ways.  It's become clear that it's not a realistic
migration path, except, of course, unless the X-10 controller is boosted via
the XTB.  Insteon also seemed to have inherited their "Whoops, I lost my
settings" problems from the previous generation of Smarthome modules.  What
was it that Rye said: "these protocols are too new to even *know* if they
have problems yet."

> Both get their reliability from the fact they use two-way protocols with
> ACK/NAK.

Interesting enough in the article you cited Rye talks about how poorly
two-way X-10 modules sell compared to the other stuff.  I'm also glad that
he mentioned how many homes use X-10.  Five million.  I had once calculated
two million plus users based on their most recent SEC filings but that was a
bare minimum.  5,000,000 users is a pretty impressive installed base.  I
suspect that as word gets out, a lot of them will be interested in Jeff's
device because they've got significant amounts of time, programming effort
and money in X-10.

I'm also fairly certain the number of people that can afford to pull their
entire X-10 system for Insteon, the way Bruce did, is a small one.  Even
Bruce had special pricing help and is unwilling to abandon the X-10 based
Stargate.  David Rye sounds like he's got it pretty well scoped out.  The
battle is mostly over three things:  Price, price and price.  I think once
the reports start to come in about the XTB, it's going to revitalize X-10
and present serious problems for some of the other protocols.  Why switch if
you can address the primary weakness of the current system?

> Philosophically, Insteon is elegant while XTB is brute force. UPB is
betwixt
> and between.

Financially, Insteon and UPB are unfeasible, but the XTB fits right into the
budget.  Alexander's solution used brute force and he went on to conquer
most of the known world.  Sometimes, it's the right solution.

> I think we'll have to wait and see whether Jeff's XTB has unforseen
effects.

There's no doubt that something will show up but I made a point of throwing
everything I could at it.  The simplicity of its design doesn't leave lots
of room for problems the way Insteon's coupling through RF but acting
through mesh networked PLC does.  The more complex, the more prone to
failure.

> Try roaming about with an AM radio tuned to a harmonic of 120kHz.

I only use AM radio in the car, during blackouts and to find stuck
transmitters.  Since it's mostly sitting there passively, I don't think it's
going to be an EMI nuisance, at least one that affects me.

> And, I'd like to hear from someone who tries it with a TM751
> or RR501 that's prone to the "endless dim syndrome". I think it
> can only exacerbate that.

That may be true.  I did experience an issue with the Robodog, but I believe
it's defective so I didn't test it thoroughly.  You have to remember that
the 20+ volt signal from the XTB falls off rapidly.  You won't see more than
2 or 3 volts as you move away from it and that's well within the spec and no
more challenging than a maxicontroller on the same branch as a TM751.

Figure out a way to reliably induce the "endless dims" and I can rig up some
sort of test to see if the XTB's a problem.  From what I read in Google, the
endless dim problem is still an "open issue."  If it's a problem, users
might have to switch to a BX-AHT or some other transceiver.

> And we'll have to wait and see whether Dave Rye is correct in his
analysis.
> I think he's whistling past the graveyard. X-10 appears to be betting the
> farm on cheap and one-way. Dave's probably nearing retirement anyway. ;)

He's spot-on when he talks about having buried Echelon and CeBus.  I'm
absolutely certain that in another five or ten years, X-10 will have another
dead protocol or two buried under it.  I'm equally certain that it will
still have millions of users, happily turning lights on and off just like
they always have.  The 110VAC powerlines are not likely to change for
another 20 years and maybe even 50.  As for two-way, it's nice, but it's not
really necessary and it induces another set of issues related to retries and
fatal embraces.  Besides, if you want two-way, X-10's got them.

> Again, don't get me wrong. If your X-10 works, I say stick with it. If
> you're new to HA, look at Insteon & UPB.

Why?  Who wants to be stuck with a dead protocol.  Sure, once you're all
installed and buy some spares you'll be safe from a belly-up manufacturer
for a while.  But get hit by lightning that knocks out only half of your
obsolete stuff and what do you do?  Take it in the shorts.  Or you build an
addition or want to finish a basement.  X-10's got lots of suppliers and an
aftermarket on Ebay that's flourishing.  Not so for any of the other
contenders.  None of them will even come close to shipping 50K units let
alone 5M.  You know about economies of scale quite well and can easily guess
the advantage a company like X-10 has because of their user base.

> The one mistake both made was in not encouraging third party software
> development. There's a dearth of good low price (or free) software for
> Insteon. I'm less acquainted with UPB.

Did I mention the lack of expertise, webwise, in all the new protocols?
There's tons of X-10 information everywhere you look.  Lots of it compiled
by YOU!  (-:  Where will you find Unix software for all this new stuff?  Add
on devices like your AHT or the various pool and spa controllers?  While a
lot of gear is beginning to appear for Insteon, the other protocols seem to
have very little in their lines that remotely approaches the breadth of
equipment offered in X-10.  Where would I get a deal like I did today.  A
nearly new RF controller that does both X-10 and all my HT for 99 cents.
I'm about as eager to switch to Insteon as I am to drill small holes in my
gas tank.

John XTB (apologies to John Henry)

John XTB said to his shaker, "Shaker, why don't you sing?"
"I'm a throwin' 20 volts from my caps on down, Just listen to that copper
wire ring!

It's good enough for me, lawd, it's good enough for me.

--
Bobby G.