Re: Cause of some major X10 problems found

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"D&SW" <d&sw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0kGFi.6549$qV3.6092@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Yup, that would be correct. Not everyone can afford huge Z-wave
> systems...which have their own set of problems anyway.
>
> "Bill Kearney" <wkearney-99@hot-mail-com> wrote in message
> news:ZtidnTWt7O4VC3vbnZ2dnUVZ_qGknZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >>  The soultion was to simply plug the charger into an X10 Filter.
> >
> > As opposed to just junking the X-10 crap entirely?
>
>
Just to set the record straight, Bill's a Lutron Radio RA user.  They're
"the higher priced spread" and would likely be immune to Chinese switch-mode
power supplies.  The RA system is radio based and is susceptible to - you
guessed it! - RF interference.  The protocol they use has far superior error
detection to the RF used in X-10 and they also are very conservative when
estimating the operating range of their transceivers.  If you're mostly into
ultra-reliable lighting control and you have big $, the RA way sounds like
the way to go.  So far RF interference hasn't been a problem for anyone
outside of NYC, but the RF band is always getting more crowded, so when it
reaches the relative age of X-10, it may be in much the same situation.  I
doubt how either protocol fares 30 years from now will be of interest to my
cremated remains, unless eternal life is invented before then.  (-:

--
Bobby G.