Wired Home Automation
Rich at dot
business, or is this market just pointed at hobbyists & interested folks
with more money than skills?
Do the members of this forum think the market is saturated, or not?
What is missing from the marketplace? Product? Installers? Customer Want?
Customer Knowledge?
What about the big home builders? Where are they on this?
tech-home
The advice I was giving is the target is Homes worth over 150,000 for
my area Midwestern Missouri. This would be a typical 4 bed 2 1/2 bath
house.
I don't think the market is saturated but that depends on Where you
live, You should get to Know your market.
I think what is missing is information to the average home buyer. Most
say well that's cool but nothing more. You have to show benefits in
having this along with an automated house.
Most big home builders around here are reluctant to change. You need
to find one that will and shortly after the others will follow suit.
Brian
tech-home.com
Rich at dot
> my area Midwestern Missouri. This would be a typical 4 bed 2 1/2 bath
> house.
In my market, northern suburb of Detroit, centered on my zip (48304), you're
lucky if you can find a lot for this amount. So I would think this area is
prime for home building with automated features or at least structured
wiring built in. But there is almost no penatration in this custom &
semi-custom market.
>
> I don't think the market is saturated but that depends on Where you
> live, You should get to Know your market.
>
I asked the list because I was wondering if the rest of the country is as
non-HA as my market. I would think this area of Oakland county, which has a
tech reputation, would be somewhat ahead, but this is not the case.
> I think what is missing is information to the average home buyer. Most
> say well that's cool but nothing more. You have to show benefits in
> having this along with an automated house.
>
I agree. Marketing is a prime issue. People don't buy things, or ask for
things, that they don't know about. And if they aren't asking, builders
aren't offering. And then, if they are asked by the customer, since they
generally know little about this, they over-price such options by two &
three times, so the consumer is turned off by the idea just based on cost /
benefit. But it's more than just a marketing effort...
> Most big home builders around here are reluctant to change. You need
> to find one that will and shortly after the others will follow suit.
>
Lot's of smaller custom builders here, that buy up 3 & 4 bedroom ranch homes
on 1/2 - 3 acre lots for $250k-$500, and then build & sell for
$800-$2,000K-$x,xxxK...
These homes are generally built as spec, and then sold as the market will
bear. I guess it's understandable why they would not want the additonal
expense of pulling that cable and planning for automation. And the builder
wouldn't want to guess what type of system the eventual owner might
use...and guess wrong.
When you have a technology that's as propriatary as most HA products are
currently, where do you start with an effort to educate the market?
Microsoft & Intel pushed the computer market to a point where the hardware /
software pretty much all talkes to each other. That sort of effort is
required in HA before it goes beyond the hobby / tech inovator type market.
All this talk of refrigerators, ovens, & microwaves talking to the home
network to aid the homeowner is going nowhere until we eliminate all these
proprietary languages and control methodologies.
But a standard will kill many of the market leaders today...and the tendency
is to fight something that's not going to work with "my" stuff...
Duncan McNiven
>I think what is missing is information to the average home buyer.
>Most say well that's cool but nothing more.
I'm sure that is true. To most people home automation looks like a
solution searching for a problem. An interesting toy for geeks to play
with but where is the real benefit?
>You have to show benefits in
>having this along with an automated house.
Exactly. Trouble is, real benefits seem few and far between. Maybe if
you have experience with this stuff it is obvious. To someone like
myself who has never seen a working system, even though I am curious
enough to seek out information, there seems to be little to justify the
cost.
Some simple things are obviously useful. Exterior lights on movement
sensors for example. I guess automatic garage doors would be useful to
those people who (unlike me) don't fill their garage with junk. Beyond
that? I am still to be convinced. Having said that we have just bought
an old house that needs a lot of work, and now would be the time to
install automated features, if ever. So what are the benefits? What
would really justify itself?
--
Duncan
Brian
house out over the web. If a light is on I turn it off. But you could hook
it up to your car so when your leaving everything turns off.
The bigest thing that got me into this was video and random security
lighting. I started working third shift and was concerned that my house
would be broken into. I have installed a camera and can initiate scripts
through Homeseer do make the house look lived in. Not on some set timers
that would be hard for anyone to figure out.
At the very least you can install a structured wiring panel to allow a wired
network and modulated your own channels (like security cams).
What about having Homeseer call you when their is a water leak?
Turn your house into Vacation mode (turn off water heaters, automatically
arm the alarm, run random lighting, email you if something wrong is
detected)
The possibilties are endlist
--
Brian
br...@tech-home.com
Zwave Outlet
http://www.tech-home.com
"Duncan McNiven" <dun...@mcniven.net> wrote in message
news:0n2ol0hft9lqrmpqf...@4ax.com...
Brian
new turning point.
I heard of guys installing basic structured panel and 1-2 camera's. Most
people would be happy with this. After the new home owner moves in then you
could do a follow up with a presentation of more options. Not many people
are going to spend $40.00 for a light switch but they may like the camera's.
--
Brian
br...@tech-home.com
Zwave Outlet
http://www.tech-home.com
"Rich" <rich(at)nospam_gossel(dot)org> wrote in message
news:c82dnQDt0t0...@comcast.com...
Duncan McNiven
>For instance I check my house out over the web.
>If a light is on I turn it off.
This is where it just looks like a geeky toy. Yes, it is a neat thing to
be able to do, but hardly worthwhile for the mass market. How much did
it cost you (in time and money) for the systems that let you do this?
How many lights would you have to leave on for how many years to get a
payback? The benefits don't outweigh the costs.
>I have installed a camera and can initiate scripts through Homeseer do
>make the house look lived in. Not on some set timers that would be
>hard for anyone to figure out.
OK, I can see an advantage in theory ... but in practise I don't see
that a burglar is likely to be sat outside my house for a week checking
for a pattern of when the lights come on. Besides, anyone doing that
could just as easily note when people arrive and leave.
>At the very least you can install a structured wiring panel to allow a wired
>network and modulated your own channels (like security cams).
Sorry, you lost me there. "structured wiring panel", "wired network"?
"modulated your own channels"? I don't know what these mean. They
certainly don't inspire me to rush out and buy a home automation system,
and I think most people would say the same.
>What about having Homeseer call you when their is a water leak?
That would be nice ... but I have never had a water leak in my life. Why
would I spend large sums of money on the off-chance that I will get one
in the future, and it will be at a time when no-one is at home? Again,
the cost-benefit comparison comes out on the wrong side.
We have just bought a home with old plumbing and apparently there was a
leak last year. Maybe my risk of a leak is going up and I might benefit
from such a system. Trouble is, I would rather spend my money on new
plumbing.
>Turn your house into Vacation mode (turn off water heaters, automatically
>arm the alarm, run random lighting, email you if something wrong is
>detected)
I can switch everything off in very little time without any automation
system. The time such a system would take to install would more than
outweigh the time I will spend switching things off for every vacation
for the rest of my life. If I ever forgot to switch something off, the
cost of this error would be far less than the cost of a system to
prevent it.
My current house has an alarm. We have never used it, and wouldn't know
how to. The builders did explain it, but I have long since forgotten.
There is a leaflet about it somewhere, if we still have it. I doubt if I
will install an alarm at the new house - there would be no-one to hear
it if I did.
>The possibilties are endlist
There are lots of things that can be done, but I haven't yet heard of
anything worth doing. Not, at least, from a purely objective analysis.
The justification seems to be purely as a hobby, an interesting toy to
play with. I can see that side of it, but it doesn't seem ready for
widespread deployment as a convenient tool for the masses.
--
Duncan
G. Morgan
01 Oct 2004 09:22:11 +0100,
>
>There are lots of things that can be done, but I haven't yet heard of
>anything worth doing. Not, at least, from a purely objective analysis.
>The justification seems to be purely as a hobby, an interesting toy to
>play with. I can see that side of it, but it doesn't seem ready for
>widespread deployment as a convenient tool for the masses.
People said the same thing about computers 15 years ago.
-Graham
Remove the 'snails' from my email
Duncan McNiven
<alarmp...@SNAILgmail.com> wrote:
>People said the same thing about computers 15 years ago.
Yes. true. Maybe in 15 years time Home Automation will have matured to
be a mass-market product. Currently it seems not to be.
--
Duncan
wkearney99
it. There are many things in life that "aren't worth it" to some people.
To those that enjoy it, however, it's quite rewarding.
> How many lights would you have to leave on for how many years to get a
> payback? The benefits don't outweigh the costs.
And yet if no effort is put forth to try then NO savings would occur. One
has to start somewhere.
> OK, I can see an advantage in theory ... but in practise I don't see
> that a burglar is likely to be sat outside my house for a week checking
> for a pattern of when the lights come on. Besides, anyone doing that
> could just as easily note when people arrive and leave.
Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
> Sorry, you lost me there. "structured wiring panel", "wired network"?
> "modulated your own channels"? I don't know what these mean. They
> certainly don't inspire me to rush out and buy a home automation system,
> and I think most people would say the same.
And why on earth do we care what 'most people' think? Where is it written
that it's our job to do this?
> That would be nice ... but I have never had a water leak in my life. Why
> would I spend large sums of money on the off-chance that I will get one
> in the future, and it will be at a time when no-one is at home? Again,
> the cost-benefit comparison comes out on the wrong side.
You clearly state you've no experience with the risk. Come back to us when
you have some experience. You may find you'd have wished you hadn't been so
cheap.
> We have just bought a home with old plumbing and apparently there was a
> leak last year. Maybe my risk of a leak is going up and I might benefit
> from such a system. Trouble is, I would rather spend my money on new
> plumbing.
So go spend it. Meanwhile those who value peace of mind beyond your
zero-sum economics will continue to be happy with the money they're spending
on it.
> I can switch everything off in very little time without any automation
> system.
Yes, and I can run my VCR too. Yet I've got a Tivo and it's automation
features have greatly overwhelmed any notions about how a VCR would be
'cheaper'.
> The time such a system would take to install would more than
> outweigh the time I will spend switching things off for every vacation
> for the rest of my life. If I ever forgot to switch something off, the
> cost of this error would be far less than the cost of a system to
> prevent it.
Unless you consider the overall waste incurred. Just being able to 'afford'
to waste energy doesn't make it a good idea. Doubtless you're too cheap to
buy decent low wattage lighting over those cheapy incandescents. Let's
guess, you also drive an SUV?
> My current house has an alarm. We have never used it, and wouldn't know
> how to. The builders did explain it, but I have long since forgotten.
> There is a leaflet about it somewhere, if we still have it. I doubt if I
> will install an alarm at the new house - there would be no-one to hear
> it if I did.
Again, just because you don't care doesn't mean others think that way.
> There are lots of things that can be done, but I haven't yet heard of
> anything worth doing. Not, at least, from a purely objective analysis.
> The justification seems to be purely as a hobby, an interesting toy to
> play with. I can see that side of it, but it doesn't seem ready for
> widespread deployment as a convenient tool for the masses.
I'm sure a great many things now considered necessities found themselves
existing as interesting toys and/or hobbies for much longer than your
'objective analysis' would have considered reasonable. Heck, stuff like
e-mail and newsgroups existed for well over two decades before the public
thought anything about making widespread use of it. Automobiles likewise
and I'm sure other examples exist.
Fortunately the pioneers in their use stuck with it and in the end we all
benefit.
-Bill Kearney
John O
If you hadn't added that, I was going to. :-) I recall 20-some years ago
telling my manager at McDonald's that some day we'd ALL have computers at
home, and she couldn't imagine WHY she would ever need one. I had a TRS-80
coco as a student, and to be honest, it was pretty useless. But I was cool
(or geeky) because I had one.
The applications for HA haven't matured yet, and somewhere along the line
there's another Bill Gates making lighting controls or some such thing.
Those of us who even know what HA is, and maybe have some stuff installed,
are the early adopters...the equivalent of the computer tinkerers in 1985.
All we need is the killer app. My guess is it will be related to security or
energy management.
-John O
G. Morgan
Fri, 01 Oct 2004 11:55:43 GMT,
>> People said the same thing about computers 15 years ago.
>
>If you hadn't added that, I was going to. :-) I recall 20-some years ago
>telling my manager at McDonald's that some day we'd ALL have computers at
>home, and she couldn't imagine WHY she would ever need one. I had a TRS-80
>coco as a student, and to be honest, it was pretty useless. But I was cool
>(or geeky) because I had one.
Heh, I had a VIC-20 and Coleco ADAM. My dad said the same thing back
then. Now he has a wireless 802.11G network and three computers. (I
still had to set it up for him)
>The applications for HA haven't matured yet, and somewhere along the line
>there's another Bill Gates making lighting controls or some such thing.
>Those of us who even know what HA is, and maybe have some stuff installed,
>are the early adopters...the equivalent of the computer tinkerers in 1985.
In 1985 I had a GE Homeminder X-10 box. Thought it was the coolest
thing since, well, Nintendo. :-)
>All we need is the killer app. My guess is it will be related to security or
>energy management.
I'm leaning towards household tasks, cooking, cleaning, etc...
John O
> In 1985 I had a GE Homeminder X-10 box. Thought it was the coolest
> thing since, well, Nintendo. :-)
I'm looking at a Heathkit catalog from 1983, which has an X-10 telephone
interface (call in and control stuff) and a sprinkler control valve, among
the regular array of switches. Makes me wonder why X-10 isn't more common
than it is now.
-John O
Rich at dot
> are the early adopters...the equivalent of the computer tinkerers in 1985.
Correction...by 1985 it was a standard business tool, if not a commen
household item...
How about tinkerers in the late 70's....I remember saving programs of to a
cassette tape deck...
Rich Gosselin
Online since 1983 @ 300 baud...
Duncan McNiven
wrote:
>Duncan it seems as if all you want to do is argue about why it's not worth
>it.
No, you misunderstand. Two things:
First, the original post in this thread asked "is this market just
pointed at hobbyists & interested folks with more money than skills?". I
am saying why I think the answer to that question is "yes".
Second, I would like to discuss (not argue) why it IS worth it. I am
interested; why else would I be here? I would like someone (anyone) to
convince me to get involved. So far no-one has.
You seem to think that this a technology that is ready for a wider
audience. I am saying I am interested but doubtful, that I am open to be
convinced, so why not try?
>To those that enjoy it, however, it's quite rewarding.
Exactly what I am saying. It is a hobby, an interest, not something that
can be mass-marketed to people who just want something in their home to
be improved.
>And yet if no effort is put forth to try then NO savings would occur. One
>has to start somewhere.
Yes, fine. You do that, and justify it as a hobby, but dont't claim that
this is ready for prime time. It isn't.
>> OK, I can see an advantage in theory ... but in practise I don't see
>> that a burglar is likely to be sat outside my house for a week checking
>> for a pattern of when the lights come on. Besides, anyone doing that
>> could just as easily note when people arrive and leave.
>
>Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
So you have some real information on this? Great. What I would like to
know, to convince me to get started with this technology, is:
A) How common is this practise by burglars?
B) What do I need to tackle this problem?
C) By how much will this reduce my risk?
In other words, the cost and the benefit.
If you can't provide that information, you are doing it because you want
to, because it is a hobby/interest, not because there is any
demonstrable benefit. That's fine, just don't claim otherwise.
>And why on earth do we care what 'most people' think?
Maybe you don't. The poster of the message that originally started this
thread obviously does. That's really what he is asking about.
>You clearly state you've no experience with the risk. Come back to us when
>you have some experience. You may find you'd have wished you hadn't been so
>cheap.
No, I have clearly stated that I do have experience of the risk, and
that my experience is that the risk is negligable.
>So go spend it. Meanwhile those who value peace of mind beyond your
>zero-sum economics will continue to be happy with the money they're spending
>on it.
Fine, I can quite see that people spend their money on hobbies and
interests that make no financial sense. We all do. The thread started
with someone trying to find out why there is not more interest from the
general populace. As someone who clearly is interested it is hard for
you to answer that. I am giving my view as someone who has looked into
it a little, and my initial conclusion is that there is nothing to tempt
me.
>Yes, and I can run my VCR too. Yet I've got a Tivo and it's automation
>features have greatly overwhelmed any notions about how a VCR would be
>'cheaper'.
Cheapness is not the criteria I am applying. I am looking for enough
benefit to offset the cost. Is that unreasonable?
>Unless you consider the overall waste incurred. Just being able to 'afford'
>to waste energy doesn't make it a good idea. Doubtless you're too cheap to
>buy decent low wattage lighting over those cheapy incandescents. Let's
>guess, you also drive an SUV?
No and no, and can't you discuss anything without cheap, unsubstantiated
personal insults?
>I'm sure a great many things now considered necessities found themselves
>existing as interesting toys and/or hobbies for much longer than your
>'objective analysis' would have considered reasonable. Heck, stuff like
>e-mail and newsgroups existed for well over two decades before the public
>thought anything about making widespread use of it. Automobiles likewise
>and I'm sure other examples exist.
>
>Fortunately the pioneers in their use stuck with it and in the end we all
>benefit.
Yes, exactly. It takes time before anything new is sufficiently
developed to be of interest to the mass market. Home Automation usn't
there yet. Or can you convince me otherwise?
--
Duncan
John O
>> installed, are the early adopters...the equivalent of the computer
>> tinkerers in 1985.
>
> Correction...by 1985 it was a standard business tool, if not a commen
> household item...
My definitions of standard and common don't match yours.
>
> How about tinkerers in the late 70's....I remember saving programs of to a
> cassette tape deck...
Sure, I do too, in '83. Floppy disk drives were what, $500? While PCs took
form by '85 (286's with DOS 3.2), only us geeks and those affluent people
had them at home.
Anyway, shift the dates this way or that way, the idea is still valid.
-John O
James Baber
wkearney99 wrote:
> Duncan it seems as if all you want to do is argue about why it's not worth
> it. There are many things in life that "aren't worth it" to some people.
> To those that enjoy it, however, it's quite rewarding.
and he inspired quite a discussion
I (Jim Baber) have a short comment:
If one of our earlier ancestors hadn't discovered it worked better to walk than
to crawl, we would still be in that mode, even if it took a little effort to
learn to stand up.
--
Jim Baber
(see my 10kW grid tied solar system at "www.baber.org")
1350 W Mesa Ave.
Fresno CA, 93711
(559) 435-9068
(559) 905-2204 cell
Email j...@NOJUNKbaber.org
Neil Cherry
I had a really old Heath Kit X10 interface (based on the 8048). That
eventually turned into the CP290. Both of those were early 80's and
Then there is Steve Ciarcia's articles from Byte ins 1985:
Volume 10, issue 4 (April, 1985) Circia's Circuit Cellar: Build
the Home Run Control System,
Part 1: Introduction
Volume 10, issue 5 (May, 1985) Ciarcia's Circuit Cellar: Build
the Home Run Control System,
Part 2: The Hardware
Volume 10, issue 6 (June, 1985) Ciarcia's Circuit Cellar: Build
the Home Run Control System,
Part 3: The Software
Eventually that turned into the HCS II (see my link below).
--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry nch...@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog
Jack Ak
a plug in ROM module for the TRS80 Color Computer.
The instruction booklet has a Pico Electronics Ltd. copyright date of 1984.
I purchased several BSR - X10 modules (brown) and a BSR SYSTEM X10
The Timer in the mid or late 1970s. The Timer still works.
"Neil Cherry" <n...@wolfgang.uucp> wrote in message news:slrnclrfk...@wolfgang.uucp...
Robert Green
> On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 06:33:19 -0400, "wkearney99" <wkear...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Duncan it seems as if all you want to do is argue about why it's not
worth
> >it.
>
> No, you misunderstand. Two things:
> First, the original post in this thread asked "is this market just
> pointed at hobbyists & interested folks with more money than skills?". I
> am saying why I think the answer to that question is "yes".
I think like any other eventually mass-marketed technology it has to START
with the geeks to "get its footing." This was true of PCs, certainly.
Twenty years ago the big issues in PCs were quite different than they are
today and only "geeks" were buying them because there was no perceived
market for them. HA's still in that very geeky infancy period, but it's
making progress. Zigbee represents a serious effort by manufacturers to
create a standard for appliance control unlike anything before.
> Second, I would like to discuss (not argue) why it IS worth it. I am
> interested; why else would I be here? I would like someone (anyone) to
> convince me to get involved. So far no-one has.
I might be able to. The first problem is a definition of terms. HA,
perhaps illegitimately , has come to include home networking, home
security, home theater and even home telephone systems. Progress has been
made rather independently on a number of fronts and as a result there now
exists a very real problem of interoperability. Why should anyone have to
have more than one remote control to operate their home appliances (be they
phones, thermostats, DVD players or any other controllable appliance)? Only
this year does it seem like the concept of a TRUE universal remote seem to
be on the horizon. The technology is there. The will of the companies
making the devices has been absent. Consumers, however, have complained
over and over again that they resist buying new equipment because one more
remote on the coffee table would cause a divorce. Manufacturers are
starting to listen because they know they have to do more to sell more.
The Washington DC-based Consumer Electronics Association (CEA), a trade
group of many of the world's electronic device makers, has published a new
standard, CEA-2027, that aims to allow any networked entertainment device in
the home to be controlled through a TV screen with a single remote control.
http://www.ce.org/standards/StandardDetails.aspx?Id=1728
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V20621759
> You seem to think that this a technology that is ready for a wider
> audience. I am saying I am interested but doubtful, that I am open to be
> convinced, so why not try?
That's a legitimate question. As a newbie who inherited a few cartons full
of X10 and other HA-related goodies I got a chance to explore HA for very
little "up front" expense. I think that puts me at an advantage in
evaluating HA's worth because I don't have any investment I need to justify
to myself, even subconsciously. I think it would even be helpful to me to
review where I am going in a semi-formal process so that I don't fall prey
to the "gee whiz, it's magic" effect of HA without a clear idea of how it
will really help me.
> >To those that enjoy it, however, it's quite rewarding.
Precisely. When I hit one button and the whole house goes dark, I can't
help but think: "This is magic!"
> Exactly what I am saying. It is a hobby, an interest, not something that
> can be mass-marketed to people who just want something in their home to
> be improved.
I think you've both accurately and fairly stated your own, somewhat
divergent view of the technology. My view falls somewhere in between the
two. (-:
> >And yet if no effort is put forth to try then NO savings would occur.
One
> >has to start somewhere.
>
> Yes, fine. You do that, and justify it as a hobby, but dont't claim that
> this is ready for prime time. It isn't.
I think once again, you are both right. HA, at least as far as I have
experienced, CAN save some significant money on electric bills. The other
side of that coin is that you really have got to WANT to tolerate HA's
current quirks to achieve that savings. X10 is a remarkable system.
Developed at a time when (only guessing) an average house had 1/10 the
electronics plugged into the housewiring, it was a cheap and very effective
way of controlling houselights.
As houses got larger and more junk got plugged into the wiring (that serves
as an antenna for the control signals), it became apparent that a reliable
X10 system needed filters, repeaters, couplers and other "add ons." As far
as I can tell, this is where a lot of people leave X10 that might have
otherwise become true HA aficionados. "I can NOT get my garage light to
turn on or off" is a question I have seen 1000 times in the archives.
The weakening of the control signal throughout a typical large house is
X10's Achilles’ heel. I would indict it as the primary reason that HA has
failed to "connect" with a larger audience. People got turned off by the
thought of having to install something (coupler/repeater) in their
electrical panel and gave up.
So, I submit to you that the desire has long been there, but the technology
was not in a position to support it. X10 itself realized some of these
issues and began to move towards a radio-centric model. But from what I
read of Dave Houston's incredibly detailed work with X10 RF, it's married in
many ways to the old X10 powerline carrier (PLC) specifications and carries
with it many of that protocol's weaknesses. However, X10 was moving in the
right direction and begat Zwave and Zigbee. These systems address and
overcome the fatal flaw in X10's design: The signals travel through the
air, not the powerline and they are automatically rebroadcast to all modules
using what's called a "mesh network."
> >> OK, I can see an advantage in theory ... but in practise I don't see
> >> that a burglar is likely to be sat outside my house for a week checking
> >> for a pattern of when the lights come on. Besides, anyone doing that
> >> could just as easily note when people arrive and leave.
> >
> >Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Proving what I said earlier about the huge umbrella that's represented by
the words HA, we are now in the realm of home security. It's clearly a
valid area of discussion because there's a very clear need for HA to
interact seemlessly with a security system. It's also been demonstrated
that's its always a good idea to have a standalone security system that is
hardwired and largely independent of whatever home control system you use.
KISS seems to be the operant principle here.
> So you have some real information on this? Great. What I would like to
> know, to convince me to get started with this technology, is:
> A) How common is this practise by burglars?
> B) What do I need to tackle this problem?
> C) By how much will this reduce my risk?
> In other words, the cost and the benefit.
It's always a good idea to evaluate C&B for anything you spend more than
$100 on. As for burglaries, no matter what the situation, I feel it is
always important to have a security system for several reasons. It often
can pay for itself in reduced premiums over the life of the system. It can
provide great peace of mind when traveling. It can reduce the chances that
a burglar can run off with ALL your stuff. It can reduce the chances of you
being injured in a break-in. Usually a window gets broken, a loud alarm
sounds and the perp leaves. I've been burglarized a number of times in my
life and it's a nasty, nasty feeling. Since I started using an alarm
system, the burglaries have stopped. Hard to put a concrete dollar value
on it but no more broken windows and stolen stuff is worth a lot to my piece
of mind.
Now with that said, lets look at your question about how HA might help
augment a security system. Burglars "case" joints. The more lived-in a
house looks, the less likely it is to be burgled. All the lived-in look HA
controlled lights won't mean much if your mailbox is overflowing and there
are ten newspapers piled up on your lawn. If you DO take care of the papers
and the mail, HA CAN offer significant aid in making your house looked lived
in. This is where I have had great success with HA and X10.
Part of the equipment my uncle left consisted of X10 minitimers and lamp
modules. With these, and the security settings on the lamps, I was able to
set up five house lamps to simulate occupancy with relative ease. It was so
easy to do I even gave a timer and some modules to a neighbor after she had
been burglarized. Before this, she had been using a mechanical timer to
achieve a similar effect. Those have lots of problems, though. Local
control of the lamp off the timer was difficult. Power failures meant a
clock reset. X10 offered another advantage. With a cheap minicontroller
by her beside she could turn all the houselights on at once if she heard a
noise in the night. She loved that feature.
Now, how do you put a dollar value on that peace of mind? I have the same
sort of setup and take great comfort that if I hear something at night, I
can turn on all the houselights and NOT reveal my location. If anyone had
broken in, I think it's far more likely they would bolt if all the lights
came on rather than just the bedroom light (which would indicate where you
were - another bad thing).
In practice, I can't honestly claim that this saves me money. There's a
power cost to keeping the X10 modules and timer running (24 watts per ten
modules, IIRC) and quite frankly the lights seem to come on of their own
accord far too often. I haven't run that problem to ground because it seems
like the only way to do it is spend several hundred dollars on a high-end
tester/analyzer. The very downside of X10 automation.
> If you can't provide that information, you are doing it because you want
> to, because it is a hobby/interest, not because there is any
> demonstrable benefit. That's fine, just don't claim otherwise.
But there IS a demonstrable benefit, although it's one that's hard to
quantify. I sleep better knowing I can control lots of houselights from my
bedside. In the long run (and if I had ALL electrical devices hooked to
X10) I believe I can save a lot of money by making it easier to turn out
lights when I am not using them. Frankly, though, I have saved a lot more
by using compact fluorescent bulbs instead of incandescent ones. And that
brings up another problem. When I first started installing CF's my X10
stuff went crazy. They did NOT work in places where X10 and incandescent
worked without incident. They caused noise on the line that knocked out the
signal to the far ends of the house and they turned themselves back on when
you turned them off via X10. That's just too damned much trouble to be
considered a mainstream product. I nearly gave up then, and from I see of
the archives, that's where a lot of people's love affair with HA dies.
> >And why on earth do we care what 'most people' think?
Why should we care? If "most people" got interested in HA then the prices
for all of us would drop tremendously through economies of scale. That's
perhaps the best part of X10. They made so much of this stuff that nothing
else can touch X10 in terms of price per control point. I can get more
modules for $5 or $10 each. The last time I looked Zwave was at least five
if not ten times more expensive. If enough people adapt Zigbee with its
open source, the price should eventually meet or beat X10's.
> Maybe you don't. The poster of the message that originally started this
> thread obviously does. That's really what he is asking about.
Yes - it's a legitimate question.
> >You clearly state you've no experience with the risk. Come back to us
when
> >you have some experience. You may find you'd have wished you hadn't been
so
> >cheap.
Buzz! "Cheap" shot! (-: I think he's said he's evaluated the risk and
decided it's inconsequential, at least in his circumstances. It's clear to
me that looking from the outside, it seems that many HA enthusiasts spend a
lot of money to deal with very unlikely eventualities and potential
failures, just because they can. I think it's a very individualized
decision whether to automate the master water valve or something similar.
It's not something that's going to make or break a house sale.
> No, I have clearly stated that I do have experience of the risk, and
> that my experience is that the risk is negligable.
Agree. If you have never had a pipe burst or you don't travel much, there's
little to be gained by an auto-leak detector. I can even imagine that
adding one could result in more, not less, trouble with the system. Would I
put one into a new house? Probably. Shutting off the water main remotely
would be nice for a number of reasons, least of which that it would make
changing out a sink washer a lot easier.
> >So go spend it. Meanwhile those who value peace of mind beyond your
> >zero-sum economics will continue to be happy with the money they're
spending
> >on it.
>
> Fine, I can quite see that people spend their money on hobbies and
> interests that make no financial sense. We all do. The thread started
> with someone trying to find out why there is not more interest from the
> general populace. As someone who clearly is interested it is hard for
> you to answer that. I am giving my view as someone who has looked into
> it a little, and my initial conclusion is that there is nothing to tempt
> me.
You're addressing the issue I raised earlier. Once you've spent your own
hard-earned money and scarce free time on an HA system you've got an
investment to justify. I think that makes it a little harder to be
objective about the benefits. But not impossible. Yet, once again, it's a
hard thing to put a dollar value on looking at your TV or a wall display and
knowing that your garage doors are closed and locked.
The biggest surprise for me was how useful a door and driveway cam turned
out to me. I can work in the basement shop and see who's at the door now.
Before I would stop work, run upstairs when the doorbell rang only to find
it was kids selling stale candy. It's much more convenient now, but my
cardiologist tells me it's much less healthy not to run up the stairs and
get more exercise. I tell him it's better because I don't get stressed out
from being interrupted in the woodshop. Who knows what the true costs and
benefits are? I do know I have been able to intercept packages Fedex
wouldn't have left because of the doorcam so convenience-wise I really like
it. I would be hard pressed to tell you what it's worth in dollars, though.
> >Yes, and I can run my VCR too. Yet I've got a Tivo and it's automation
> >features have greatly overwhelmed any notions about how a VCR would be
> >'cheaper'.
>
> Cheapness is not the criteria I am applying. I am looking for enough
> benefit to offset the cost. Is that unreasonable?
No, it's not unreasonable. I've tried to explain the "blue sky" value of
some of HA's features and readily concede it would be very hard to translate
that into dollars. Apply the same question to PCs and the answer is just as
squishy. Does anyone really save money with their PC? I submit they use it
because they enjoy it, and that seems to be enough for most users.
> >Unless you consider the overall waste incurred. Just being able to
'afford'
> >to waste energy doesn't make it a good idea. Doubtless you're too cheap
to
> >buy decent low wattage lighting over those cheapy incandescents.
Uh oh! Low blow. I don't recall him saying anything that implied how
parsimonious he is. I bought decent low wattage lighting and I have had to
buy filters, cut open modules and consider installing a repeater as a
result. That's one of the big problems with HA, in my estimation. Here I
am trying to incorporate new, power-saving technologies and X10 is fighting
me tooth and claw, forcing me to spend lots more money than I ever wanted.
In fact, the CF problem is really the straw that broke the camel's back for
me. If I have to buy a $20 filter for every energy efficient lamp I want to
switch to then the cost/benefit equation really tilts AGAINST HA.
> >Let's guess, you also drive an SUV?
> No and no, and can't you discuss anything without cheap, unsubstantiated
> personal insults?
I have to agree, Bill. Let's keep personality opinions out of the
discussion. I think Dan's got some legitimate beefs. Let's cook them, not
him.
> >I'm sure a great many things now considered necessities found themselves
> >existing as interesting toys and/or hobbies for much longer than your
> >'objective analysis' would have considered reasonable. Heck, stuff like
> >e-mail and newsgroups existed for well over two decades before the public
> >thought anything about making widespread use of it.
Not sure that's a good example. Many things had to happen before
non-technical people were able to buy a machine from Walmart, plug it in and
connect to the internet. In the bad old days of DOS, Procomm and X-modem
protocols you really had to WANT to connect to get on line. It's much, much
simpler now. And that's why it's so widely used - because people CAN use
it. HA now is like the DOS PC's moving to a GUI that people can manipulate
without knowing DOS file manipulation commands. Until it got that simple,
it was never going to penetrate the mass market.
> >Automobiles likewise and I'm sure other examples exist.
> >
> >Fortunately the pioneers in their use stuck with it and in the end we all
> >benefit.
>
> Yes, exactly. It takes time before anything new is sufficiently
> developed to be of interest to the mass market. Home Automation usn't
> there yet. Or can you convince me otherwise?
I believe, based on living in Google's archive of CHA, that we are NOT there
yet but we are where PC's where circa Windows 95. There's a growing
integration between all the components of HA - home theater, home security,
home networking and home communications - that will soon result in the same
sort of mass penetration that we saw in home computers in the mid-90's.
Bobby G.
Duncan McNiven
some good points, and I agree, or at least empathise, with most of what
you say. There seem to me to be three main issues:
1. The technology isn't ready for mass market yet.
2. Many people look at HA and say "so what". There is no killer app.
3. Benefits are not necessarily monetary.
When I talk of benefit I don't necessarily restrict that to benefits
that can be quantified in monetary terms. (As you point out, not
everything has a simple monetary value.) Even - especially - in those
cases though you need to be very clear what the benefit is.
As I said before, cheapness is not the criteria I am applying. Something
can be expensive and still worth it - if there is sufficient benefit to
be gained from it. Absent the hobby/interest benefit and many HA
products fall short.
I have been looking around for Zigbee info but I can't find solid
documentation anywhere - just high-level overviews and marketing fluff.
Is the protocol or anything available for download anywhere?
--
Duncan
Brian
released it will be great for HA. It should eliminate most of the porblems
in HA
Check out this links
http://www.zen-sys.com/
http://www.zen-sys.com/index.php?page=108 This page show How much interest
their is. Check out same of the big name companies.
http://www.zigbee.org/ Link to Zigbee
--
Brian
br...@tech-home.com
Zwave Outlet
http://www.tech-home.com
"Duncan McNiven" <dun...@mcniven.net> wrote in message
news:jlfsl01dasblte0b0...@4ax.com...
Randy P.
Homeseer doesn't support high-end wired lighting solutions. Everything
seems to be wireless or powerline. The only product that doesn't seem to be
aimed at the low-end hobby/retrofit market is Premise -- and that product
has a very "iffy" future now that it's been acquired by Motorola.
Randy
"Rich" <rich(at)nospam_gossel(dot)org> wrote in message
news:XdudneITWtY...@comcast.com...
Dean Roddey
"Randy P." <pin...@REMOVEthepecks.com> wrote in message
news:10nt1l2...@corp.supernews.com...
Steve Letkeman
add new devices and it would appear to be limited due to it's
X10 nature of addressing modules, even if it is not X10. If there
is a Homeseer expert that is willing to work with me on providing
an interface to our hardwired lighting control system (www.brightan.com)
I would like to talk to them.
Steve
Steven D. Letkeman BSc.
President - Zanthic Technologies Inc.
403-526-8318
www.zanthic.com Embedded micro-controllers and CAN interfaces
www.brightan.com Automated lighting systems
"Randy P." <pin...@REMOVEthepecks.com> wrote in message
news:10nt1l2...@corp.supernews.com...
Sigma5
automation, the way I try to explain it to sceptics is:-
If you got into a car & the interior light had to be switched on
manually you would think it was a prety crap car.
Now add that wouldn't it be nice if the light stayed on untill you
started the car.
Then how about the hard work of winding the windows down & having to
move your hand at least a foot.
How about a powered sunroof.
Air conditioning or better still climate control
Cruise control
Adjustable front lights.
All the above have been standard in many cars for years & most people
expect them.
So why don't they expect the same from there homes.
P.S. Does anyone make a PCI card equivalant to the Ocelot (or better)
I know they used to make an ISA card, also how about infra red PCI
input/output card.
Don
turn on lights except when I want them on during the day. Then all I do is
speak. No switches for me. Even my car talks to the internet. Just in the
process of upgrading my home automation computer but should be back in
operation by Sunday if everything goes right. Even the TV is voice
controlled.
Come visit next week and you will be able to turn the lights/fans on/off
yourself.
--
Don K9SOA
www.k9soa.net
Home of JEANNIE
The House That Listens
As Seen on HGTV
Featured Home in
Home Automation, Kentucky Living magazines.
"Sigma5" <c...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6a3fe41.04110...@posting.google.com...
m...@privacy.net
How is this possible?
What kind of setup do you have? Just curious..
Rich Gosselin a*tt dut
<m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:81gko0pp9don3d2cn...@4ax.com...
>> Even my car talks to the internet.
As long as it doesn't keep saying that "the door is a jar" . It isn't a
jar...it's a door...
Philip Lewis
only the cars hooked up to AOL and WebTV say that... ;)
--
be safe.
flip
Ich habe keine Ahnung was das bedeutet, oder vielleicht doch?
Remove origin of the word spam from address to reply (leave "+")