Re: Why cling to old X10?

["Dan Wright" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>]

"Jeff Volp" <JeffVolp@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:FeKFi.88259$ax1.38167@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "RickH" <passport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1189568250.420376.126830@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Why do so many here still cling to X10 when there are more dependable
>> mesh networks available like zwave, insteon, etc.?  Reading through
>> the past posts there are so many war stories with X10, at what point
>> are these headaches no longer worth it?  I waited 3 years to install
>> the switches/load handlers in my basement remodel, simply because I
>> had had enough with X10 and ACT's A10 and I knew other mesh products
>> were coming.  I'm glad I waited and wonder why others continue to
>> patch a leaky boat.
>
> X10 can be virtually 100% reliable.  It also offers a lot of bang for the
> buck.
>
> UPB was supposed to be a panacea, but recent threads indicate it may have
> a problem with line transients.  I recall reading something about a mod
> coming to address that issue.  Noise from CFLs can be a problem for
> Insteon as well as X10.  Insteon also seems to have a reliability problem
> with the hardware itself.
>
> It seems like every system has its own warts.  It may be reliability,
> cost, limited number of devices available, few sources, ...
>
> X10 patents have expired, so there is a rich selection of devices out
> there. There is also a range of quality from the low end devices made by
> X10 to the Leviton switches with gated AGC, which have worked perfectly
> here (even before I designed the XTB).
>
> Maybe there are more war stories regarding X10 because many more people
> are using it than the newer systems.

While I left X10 for ZWave, I do miss the richness of the product offerings
and the near perfect interoperability between vendors.  Zwave has been 100%
in all of our installations, but to keep it tight, I have to stick to one
vendor.