Time for HA, finally. Thinking Insteon. Mulling this for 20 years. What is best?

was waiting for CeBus, but that petered out. Meanwhile X10 kept going,
and going. Then this Insteon system popped up, with the Powerlinc
controller that does not require an always-on PC. Could do the PC, but
maybe that powerlinc is good enough. What do you suggest?

Goals:

lighting control, mainly
fluorescent and incandescent, eventual LED
hot water heater
GUI, but downloadable to a controller
Reliable across phases, low susceptibility to powerline noise
Not susceptible to external signals, nor emanating to other homes
As reliable as a plug-in light timer
Randoming
Responsive to sensor signals
Time of day/available sunlight ephemeris
Longevity for good future expansion

There are a few desired capabilities. How would you satisfy them?
X10, Insteon, something else?

Thanks.

From reading my posts, you probably know I'm partial to X10. Properly
installed, it can still give you a lot of bang for the buck. However, X10
will not meet at least one of the items on your list. I don't know anything
other than hardwired control that is totally immune to external signals.
And power line control signals can couple out to other homes sharing the
same transformer.

Will Insteon still be here 25 years from now?

BTW, I don't recall those plug-in light timers being very reliable. That's
why we went with X10 in the first place.

Jeff

"Greg" <gharrison2@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1167801592.293597.195420@k21g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> was waiting for CeBus, but that petered out. Meanwhile X10 kept going,
> and going. Then this Insteon system popped up, with the Powerlinc
> controller that does not require an always-on PC. Could do the PC, but
> maybe that powerlinc is good enough. What do you suggest?
>
> Goals:
>
> lighting control, mainly
> fluorescent and incandescent, eventual LED
> hot water heater
> GUI, but downloadable to a controller
> Reliable across phases, low susceptibility to powerline noise
> Not susceptible to external signals, nor emanating to other homes
> As reliable as a plug-in light timer
> Randoming
> Responsive to sensor signals
> Time of day/available sunlight ephemeris
> Longevity for good future expansion
>
> There are a few desired capabilities. How would you satisfy them?
> X10, Insteon, something else?
>
> Thanks.
>

None of my neighbors have X10, as far as I know, but, someone could
plug into an external outlet and mess around with the signal. This is
far-fetched, of course. But the Insteon has some kind of protection
against this, if I recall correctly.

25 years of longevity would be great, but isn't X10 near the end of
it's usable life? Or is it being refreshed? I think the Insteon
people would like to believe that it would pay for their retirement,
but the current offering does not look like it will pay for that. It
seems to be a good system, but is it as "High Concept" as X10? I think
not. X10 sounds really cool. Insteon is hard to type.

I would like a wall-outlet replacement. Insteon does not have this.
X10 might.

But I like Insteon, they are still there after a couple of years. And
they are X10 compatible, apparently. I am leaning that way, but, after
20 years of watching the market, X10 is still there.

Such a dilemma.

"Greg" <gharrison2@cfl.rr.com> wrote:

>was waiting for CeBus, but that petered out. Meanwhile X10 kept going,
>and going. Then this Insteon system popped up, with the Powerlinc
>controller that does not require an always-on PC. Could do the PC, but
>maybe that powerlinc is good enough. What do you suggest?
>
>Goals:
>
>lighting control, mainly
>fluorescent and incandescent, eventual LED

CFLs can render both X-10 and Insteon useless.

>hot water heater

Why?

>GUI, but downloadable to a controller

Either X-10 or Insteon can meet this requirement. I think Insteon's
controllers may have more memory7. The software available for configuring
and downloading is equally abysmal for either system.

>Reliable across phases, low susceptibility to powerline noise

Insteon uses RF to couple the phases. It's simpler and more reliable than
standard X-10. Both are susceptible to powerline noise (see above re CFLs).

>Not susceptible to external signals, nor emanating to other homes

As far as operating your lights and appliances, Insteon is immune to outside
signals. It is not immune to jamming from a continuous signal whether RF or
PLC. X-10 is susceptible to outside signals and interference.

>As reliable as a plug-in light timer

Both Insteon and X-10 are far more reliable.

>Randoming

I'm not sure whether either can do this when operating standalone. I really
don't use their controllers as they intend them so can't answer specific
questions like this.

>Responsive to sensor signals

Depends on the sensors. You need to be more specific.

>Time of day/available sunlight ephemeris

Could you rephrase this in plain English? If you mean dawn/dusk, both
systems do this. I think X-10 requires you to download a table annually
(maybe the CM15A does this internally?) - I don't know how the Insteon
controllers handle it. It's a simple calculation that's well within the
capabilities of the microcontrollers used.

>Longevity for good future expansion

Your guess is as good as any.

>There are a few desired capabilities. How would you satisfy them?
>X10, Insteon, something else?

I would probably opt for Insteon and hope they "live long and prosper". Some
third party devices are beginning to appear but there have been some
stumbles and the designer has a poor track record.

Or I would wait to see how HomePlug Command and Control (HPCC) fares. It
should be more reliable but also more costly. The alliance has also
fragmented so there are now 3 (at last count) competing "standards" in this
area.

>Thanks.


http://davehouston.net
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/roZetta/
roZetta-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

The one thing X10 has going for it is that it is sourced by a bunch of
different companies. While a couple have abandoned the business, others
seem to be going strong. There is certainly a diverse assortment of devices
that can be controlled by X10. With its large installed base, I would give
it a better chance of being around than some of the newer technologies.

Yes, X10 does make a wall-outlet replacement. It has been reported that the
small plastic piece that toggles the contacts on/off often breaks. I had
one of mine fail that way too. It was the Leviton version that was actually
manufactured by X10.

Insteon does have some X10 compatibility. However, most of their modules
also significantly load the X10 signal. So X10 reliability will fall off as
more Insteon devices are installed.

Jeff

"Greg" <gharrison2@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1167808716.268439.114870@48g2000cwx.googlegro ups.com...
> None of my neighbors have X10, as far as I know, but, someone could
> plug into an external outlet and mess around with the signal. This is
> far-fetched, of course. But the Insteon has some kind of protection
> against this, if I recall correctly.
>
> 25 years of longevity would be great, but isn't X10 near the end of
> it's usable life? Or is it being refreshed? I think the Insteon
> people would like to believe that it would pay for their retirement,
> but the current offering does not look like it will pay for that. It
> seems to be a good system, but is it as "High Concept" as X10? I think
> not. X10 sounds really cool. Insteon is hard to type.
>
> I would like a wall-outlet replacement. Insteon does not have this.
> X10 might.
>
> But I like Insteon, they are still there after a couple of years. And
> they are X10 compatible, apparently. I am leaning that way, but, after
> 20 years of watching the market, X10 is still there.
>
> Such a dilemma.
>

Jeff, Right you are about X10 reliability falling off as more Insteon
devices are installed but you, sir, have solved that problem (at least
for me) with your XTB II product. I have about 60 Insteon devices right
now and untill installing the XTB II the X10 signals were almost
worthless evem with an ACT repeater. Now, with the XTB II installed at
a panel and in TW523 emulation mode, I have no X10 problems at all!

Jeff Volp wrote:
snip
> Insteon does have some X10 compatibility. However, most of their
> modules also significantly load the X10 signal. So X10 reliability
> will fall off as more Insteon devices are installed.
>
> Jeff
>
> "Greg" <gharrison2@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:1167808716.268439.114870@48g2000cwx.googlegro ups.com...
>> None of my neighbors have X10, as far as I know, but, someone could
>> plug into an external outlet and mess around with the signal. This
>> is far-fetched, of course. But the Insteon has some kind of
>> protection against this, if I recall correctly.
>>
>> 25 years of longevity would be great, but isn't X10 near the end of
>> it's usable life? Or is it being refreshed? I think the Insteon
>> people would like to believe that it would pay for their retirement,
>> but the current offering does not look like it will pay for that. It
>> seems to be a good system, but is it as "High Concept" as X10? I
>> think not. X10 sounds really cool. Insteon is hard to type.
>>
>> I would like a wall-outlet replacement. Insteon does not have this.
>> X10 might.
>>
>> But I like Insteon, they are still there after a couple of years.
>> And they are X10 compatible, apparently. I am leaning that way,
>> but, after 20 years of watching the market, X10 is still there.
>>
>> Such a dilemma.

On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:33:31 -1000, "BruceR" <razrbruce@NOgmailSPAM.com>
wrote in message <459d649d$0$8958$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>:

>Jeff, Right you are about X10 reliability falling off as more Insteon
>devices are installed but you, sir, have solved that problem (at least
>for me) with your XTB II product. I have about 60 Insteon devices right
>now and untill installing the XTB II the X10 signals were almost
>worthless evem with an ACT repeater. Now, with the XTB II installed at
>a panel and in TW523 emulation mode, I have no X10 problems at all!

Bruce,

Please refresh my memory. Why is it that you use INSTEON in the X-10
compatibility mode rather than natively?

The native mode has numerous capabilities that (at least) legacy X-10 does
not including signal repeating, the ability to 'discover' INSTEON devices,
give them names/descriptors ("bathroom mirror light") and download them to
the devices for future reference, determine device type and revision
number, and so on.

Are these capabilities also available in the X-10 compatibility mode?

TIA ... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org

I'm using most of the Insteons in X10 mode until the RoZetta is ready.
The problem is that I have everything programmed in my Stargate and
there is no Insteon equivalent to the Stargate. Alas, Stargate only
sends X10 so I need to translate the X10 signals to Insteon. The
Insteon translator that I got as a beta is frozen in some unknown mode
and has lost about half of the programmed translations. Once I have the
RoZetta installed (soon!) I will be able to pretty much eleiminate X10
signaling entirely.

At that point the XTB II will most likely move to my Houston home
which will continue to use X10. I will, however, use XTB I units to
amplify signals from X10 controllers that I still may need.

Marc_F_Hult wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:33:31 -1000, "BruceR"
> <razrbruce@NOgmailSPAM.com> wrote in message
> <459d649d$0$8958$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>:
>
>> Jeff, Right you are about X10 reliability falling off as more Insteon
>> devices are installed but you, sir, have solved that problem (at
>> least for me) with your XTB II product. I have about 60 Insteon
>> devices right now and untill installing the XTB II the X10 signals
>> were almost worthless evem with an ACT repeater. Now, with the XTB
>> II installed at a panel and in TW523 emulation mode, I have no X10
>> problems at all!
>
> Bruce,
>
> Please refresh my memory. Why is it that you use INSTEON in the X-10
> compatibility mode rather than natively?
>
> The native mode has numerous capabilities that (at least) legacy X-10
> does not including signal repeating, the ability to 'discover'
> INSTEON devices, give them names/descriptors ("bathroom mirror
> light") and download them to the devices for future reference,
> determine device type and revision number, and so on.
>
> Are these capabilities also available in the X-10 compatibility mode?
>
> TIA ... Marc
> Marc_F_Hult
> www.ECOntrol.org

> CFLs can render both X-10 and Insteon useless.

Is this because they do not dim? Or do they interfere with the
signaling somehow?

> >hot water heater
>
> Why?

To maybe save on electricity costs: http://www.smarthome.com/1289.HTML


> >Randoming

It appears that the INSTEON PowerLinc Controller V2 USB performs +/- 15
minute randoming of 'events' and also provides the ephemeris function
to use dawn and dusk (with offsets) as event times, using the
"Essential Timer" software.


> >Responsive to sensor signals
>
> Depends on the sensors. You need to be more specific.

For instance: an outside motion sensor might turn on an internal light
(wish it had a little more intelligence). Water sensor might turn on
dehumidifier and blink a light.

> I would probably opt for Insteon

Sounds good, also it does not directly connect to the internets as the
HPCC stuff might, which sounds a little safer.

Thanks

Got it.

I asked in part because it seems that you are well satisfied with the X-10
(protocol) installation using INSTEON hardware. One of the primary,
long-standing complaints about X-10 has been the poor tactile feel of the
X10 (brand) and most other (eg Leviton) X-10 hardware. Years ago I spent $$
on a few expensive non-X10 X-10 switches that also disappointed in one way
or another including touch and feel.

After living with 15 or so INSTEON ICON (the inexpensive ones) dimmer
switches for a few months, I've concluded that they are 'good enough" to
serve as primary switches even if they weren't used in HA with a
controller. In other words, they would not need to ripped out on sale of
the house, and don't irritate the SO, or confound Grandma.

Being able to dependably control them with either protocol (X-10 or
INSTEON) is -- from that most basic, practical homeowner perspective --
effectively an 'optional extra'. Which option you take becomes less
important because the most important consideration (the infrastructure
equivalent of "do no harm") is satisfied.

Mis dos limpuras ... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org


On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 13:01:39 -1000, "BruceR" <razrbruce@NOgmailSPAM.com>
wrote in message <459d8753$0$7701$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>:

>I'm using most of the Insteons in X10 mode until the RoZetta is ready.
>The problem is that I have everything programmed in my Stargate and
>there is no Insteon equivalent to the Stargate. Alas, Stargate only
>sends X10 so I need to translate the X10 signals to Insteon. The
>Insteon translator that I got as a beta is frozen in some unknown mode
>and has lost about half of the programmed translations. Once I have the
>RoZetta installed (soon!) I will be able to pretty much eleiminate X10
>signaling entirely.
>
> At that point the XTB II will most likely move to my Houston home
>which will continue to use X10. I will, however, use XTB I units to
>amplify signals from X10 controllers that I still may need.
>
> Marc_F_Hult wrote:
>> On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:33:31 -1000, "BruceR"
>> <razrbruce@NOgmailSPAM.com> wrote in message
>> <459d649d$0$8958$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>:
>>
>>> Jeff, Right you are about X10 reliability falling off as more Insteon
>>> devices are installed but you, sir, have solved that problem (at
>>> least for me) with your XTB II product. I have about 60 Insteon
>>> devices right now and untill installing the XTB II the X10 signals
>>> were almost worthless evem with an ACT repeater. Now, with the XTB
>>> II installed at a panel and in TW523 emulation mode, I have no X10
>>> problems at all!
>>
>> Bruce,
>>
>> Please refresh my memory. Why is it that you use INSTEON in the X-10
>> compatibility mode rather than natively?
>>
>> The native mode has numerous capabilities that (at least) legacy X-10
>> does not including signal repeating, the ability to 'discover'
>> INSTEON devices, give them names/descriptors ("bathroom mirror
>> light") and download them to the devices for future reference,
>> determine device type and revision number, and so on.
>>
>> Are these capabilities also available in the X-10 compatibility mode?
>>
>> TIA ... Marc
>> Marc_F_Hult
>> www.ECOntrol.org
>