Re: No more X10 at Radio Shack?

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Bill Kearney" <wkearney99@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:5fCdnWxe_MWgffPYnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > That's not true, Bill.  Having that many codes and my new Control-linc
> Maxis
> > all housecode consoles (AHC) I can use the extra codes as macro
addresses
> to
> > queue specific actions, etc.
>
> And how much extra are these devices?  The point is the underlying
> technology, not to mention it's shitty implementation, is so worthless
that
> it can't even handle queueing or collisions reliably.  You have to cobble
on
> other devices to make up for it.

There aren't many collisions in a two-person household.  It's basically a
non-issue for us, although I'd be quite willing to agree it wouldn't be
acceptable for others.  I like the option of having 256 possible addresses
for real devices, virtual ones and things that might come along in the
future.  It's pretty strange that Lutron limited itself to 32 loads without
addition equipment.  After all, 30 years ago X-10 had decided that 16 was
enough - and provided for 256 total codes just in case.  While X-10 only
recently begun to address all-housecode devices (long after guys like Dave
and Dan did the pioneering work) they still provide pretty easy,
off-the-shelf control of all 256 addresses.  That's important to me and puts
a big plus on the side of X-10.

> > As I said, it's probably not likely, but who's to say the RF world won't
> > have changed out from under the RA designers the way the powerline
changed
> > out from under the X-10 designers?  Only time will tell.
>
> X10 was shite when it was first shipped.  Powerline noise has plagued it
> from the BEGINNING.  This is not some new 21st century phenomenon.

Powerline noise really wasn't any sort of issue for me until the advent of
switching power supplies, PC equipment and surge protectors.  That occurred
from around 1985 on.  I had a problem was with an APC UPS that was my first
"black hole."  Up until then, I had remarkable success using X-10 and their
wireless, eight button belt clip controller, the precursors to the RR-501's
from RatShack and Maxicontrollers that are still in use today.

> > I live in the same sort of house not too far away and agree - it take
> > special care to get RF *into* the house. (-:
>
> Yeah, damnedest thing isn't it?  Don't need to head to a fallout shelter!
>
> > And that's where Jeff's XTB shines.  It compensates for the very real
> > limitation that you have identified.  Without it I would be quite
willing,
> > as you are, to declare X-10 basically unworkable in the modern age.
>
> My point is, and as a warning to newbies, that without cobbling up such
> workarounds there's no way to use X10 reliably.

That's reasonable.  But it should also be pretty easy to understand why lots
of folks like me who have dealt with X-10's admitted many foibles resist the
characterization of "total shiite" since it does work for them.  I might
still recommend it to newbies just to get their feet wet in HA at very low
cost or if their need was very limited (turning on a porch light from the
bedroom, for example).  I'd be reluctant to recommend any current protocol
because I think that there will be soon big losers in that arena, and
perhaps sooner than later.

> > > X10's RF "sucks less" than their powerline crap, I'll give you that.
> But
> > > barring use of someone else's RF transceiver even that's a pain in the
> ass
> > > to get working reliably.
> >
> > The RF protocol allows me to put $5 credit card controllers in a lot of
> > different places so I never have to get up to turn on a nearby light,
etc.
> > Actually, with the XTB, at least in my Faraday cage from WWII, RF has
> become
> > the dicier of the dual protocols.
>
> Yes, the X10 RF is susceptible to noise.  My X10 RF receivers can't be
near
> the equipment rack.  My RadioRA repeater, however, is right in the middle
of
> it.  So much for that argument.

Dude, I've admitted the probabilities are quite small but the physics are
this: if someone fires up a powerful enough transmitter on the same
frequency as RadioRA near enough to your house, it's hasta la vista baby.  I
won't bother looking up the articles about the people whose radio-based
garage door openers got wiped out by a new Air Force radio system - I've
posted it twice before.

While I have no doubt that RA uses far more sophisticated signalling
technology than X-10 and is likely to be much more resistant to EMI, (it
should be at 100 times the cost!) my understanding is that the low-powered
RF used by HA devices can be made non-functional if the RF interference on
the band in use is strong enough.  I've lived close to a 50KW AM station.
You can hear the radio in your teeth if you're unlucky - I had it coming out
of every speaker, phonelines and intercom whether powered or not.

Strong RF is like shouting in a hurricane.  There's too much noise to be
heard.

But again, I agree it's highly unlikely.  Lutron's probably designed it to
resist most interference generated in today's environment, just like X-10
was designed to cope with most of the issues that were present on the
powerline in 1980's.

The future?  Well, that's always in doubt.

> > > Had I the patience to put up with shipping all the crap I'd sell 'em
on
> > > fleabay.  Meanwhile they're just gathering dust.  I really don't feel
> like
> > > inflicting their pain on someone else.
> >
> > Dude, we must live within a dozen miles of each other.  Box it up and
I'll
> > come by can get it and sign a release than I know the horror I am
> inflicting
> > on myself.  If you've got stuff I really need, I'll even write you or
your
> > favorite charity a check for it.
>
> Heh.  There ought to be a Metro-area HA get together.
>
> > We clearly have very different lifestyles and spouses.  My house is
almost
> > completely lit by antique floor and table lamps.  My wife has gotten
very
> > used to the "jiggle the switch" local control - but even more
importantly
> > has learned to control the lamps just via X-10 so that they are always
in
> a
> > remotely responsive state.
>
> Mine's gotten quite used to the table dimmers for RadioRA and really likes
> them.  Hated the spotty behavior of the stick-a-switches and palmpads.

We use a lot of Maxi and Minicontrollers - the buttons on those are not
nearly as bad as they are on the RF gear.

> > Despite her protestations that HA is for me
> > only, my logs show me that when I am away, the "ALL LIGHTS ON" command
> gets
> > triggered at least once, and often many more times so I know she uses
it.
>
> Likewise, other than using the scenes on some switches most HA goes unused
> by anyone other than me.  But given the new Harmony remote I've picked up
> that might change.  Being able to integrate HA stuff into it's
"activities"
> might change things "some".

Changing remotes is about the lowest SAF thing I can do around here, other
than blowing my nose in the curtains.  I hope it works better for you than
it did for me.  I suppose I should mosey over to Ebay and put my OFA remote
up for sale.  The rating was:  Too big, too heavy, too poorly balanced, too
complicated.  I liked it, though!

> > To that end I mount either Stickaswitches or credit card controllers
near
> > the lamp and velcroed out of sight so she can sit at the desk and turn
on
> > the light.  That arrangement tends to negate complaints about the wall
> > switches.  We hardly ever use the overheads to which most wall switches
> > connect.  We use all push button switches now, which she likes better
than
> > the older-style paddle.
>
> Oy, the push-buttons are worse than the paddles.  But I'll agree they suck
> less than than the X10 paddles.

The paddles seemed to confuse too many people - although they always seemed
to get the light on because default human behavior *is* to jiggle the switch
if it doesn't come on right away.  The big issue with them is that when the
paddle's down, they won't respond to remote commands.

> > It's going to be an interesting few years, for sure, and my hunch is
that
> > someone's already investing in HA technology that will be as orphaned as
> > thoroughly as the PC Jr and the microchannel bus users of a decade or so
> > ago.  The question is, which "superior" HA technology of today will
become
> > tomorrow's Betamax?
>
> Well, in the three decades of consumer grade HA that holy grail's been
> promised many times.  I'm not holding my breath on that happening anytime
> soon.  But with the push Control4 is making to big box stores it might get
> more interesting.

I fully expect to move to something else in the future when the protocol
wars have shaken out.  As I've said elsewhere, what will drive that decision
will be appliances that come from the manufacturer with some sort of
*standard* control ability built into them (not just RS-232 or some
proprietary BS).  Until then, I'm very happy that Jeff''s made it possible
to wait out the protocol wars to see if a clear winner emerges.

--
Bobby G.