Re: Why cling to old X10?

[nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston)]

RickH <passport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>My wife and I teach ballroom dance on the side and I DJ at some local
>ballroom dance studios, so the basement evolved into a dance floor
>instead of your more-typical billiards room.  Yes, all the devices are
>to control lights, with Insteon there are no more dedicated wall
>transmitters, even the keypads can control a single load.  With 55
>devices and growing I am sure I'm probably loading down the line for
>good PL transmission already, so most of my communication, I would
>gather, is taking the RF route instead.  But I like the concept of
>having the same mesh network living in both the RF and PLC physical
>domain, and the backwards compatibility with X10 (but that part was
>marketing genious that probably a certain other company wished they
>had followed, namely UPB).

Except that the duality is all marketing hype with little to no substance.
The SignaLincs (since replaced with a new model due to flaws in the initial
design) only send/receive RF with each other - there's no RF mesh network -
the other switches and modules neither send nor receive RF.

Very little necessary communication is taking the RF route. It's only needed
to couple the phases although some people may choose to add RF points to
overcome PLC propagation problems which could probably be fixed with filters
on signal sinks in the same manner as with X-10.