Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More Good News on the INSTEON Front

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • mloebl
    replied
    That all makes a lot more sense now...

    However I could have sworn the SignaLinc RFs origionally said they would repeat X10 (could be I'm nuts), but I now see that it says clearly "Please Note: SignaLinc RFs repeat INSTEON signals and not X10."

    -Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • Bicster
    replied
    To clear up an important misconception: Insteon devices, by default, do not have an X10 address and do not transmit or acknowledge X10 commands. X10 primary and scene addresses can be added or removed by the user if desired.

    Insteon devices do suck X10 signals though, just like any other 2-way X10 device would.

    Leave a comment:


  • MPodlin
    replied
    Originally posted by Chas821
    So for right now, what we have is a PLC device that can be RF controlled by a split-phase, fancy RR501 OR by X10 PLC signal. SHEESH!

    Until all the Insteon devices can rebroadcast commands via RF netting, what is everyone getting excited about? For all the folks that are jumping on this bandwagon, it looks like you're going to have to change out any early devices for later ones that will rebroadcast.

    Seems like SH is just repackaging what's already available. It's not new technology. Convince me that I need to change.
    I don't think all INSTEON devices will ever be both RF and PLC transmitting. The way the INSTEON signal works is that a transmitting device sends out the INSTEON signal (like a pond ripple) on what ever it is capable of (RF, PLC, or both). Each device in turn that receives the signal will then rebroadcast it on whatever it is capable of (RF, PLC or both). Once it hits the destination module, that module will transmit back that it received and executed the function (like the way Z-wave does) in the same manner of broadcasting off all the modules in route. If the transmitting module doesn't receive a confirm back from the receiving module, it will resend the signal up to 5 times before giving up. So yes there is a possibility it could fail but at least the transmitting device will know it and should tell you so. The SignaLinc's which are the RF repeaters are designed so that the signal can jump the electrical phases. These will eventually be used for RF devices like motion sensors and hand held remotes. So far with my testing of it, lights on opposite phases across the house turn on/off before I have even released the button on the ControLinc. I am finding that INSTEON performs as well if not better than my Z-Wave devices. The nice thing I like about INSTEON over Z-Wave is once I learn the module into my network mesh, I can move it anywhere in the house with out having to remove it from the remote, move it and then readd it to the remote. Its nice that I can assign an X-10 address to the modules and use them with my current X-10 setup and HS, but then I'm not gaining anything other than replacing a module. For its true benefit, you need to run only in INSTEON mode (no X-10 addresses assigned) but until HS supports it, I can add/replace modules slowly, use them with an X-10 address in my current HS setup and when HS supports INSTEON, I'll just remove the X-10 address from the modules and run only the INSTEON protocol. I wasn't too excited about it either until I saw it demonstrated and the May CHAUG meeting and had a chance to talk with SmartHome and actually play with some of the devices they had brought with.

    The Pod

    Leave a comment:


  • AccessX10
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Chas821
    Seems like SH is just repackaging what's already available. It's not new technology. Convince me that I need to change.
    Chuck,



    A better comparison of the INSTEON PLC devices would be with UPB. As an added bonus, the INSTEON devices include X10 backwards compatibility.<O</O

    Leave a comment:


  • mloebl
    replied
    Originally posted by Chas821
    So for right now, what we have is a PLC device that can be RF controlled by a split-phase, fancy RR501 OR by X10 PLC signal. SHEESH!

    Until all the Insteon devices can rebroadcast commands via RF netting, what is everyone getting excited about? For all the folks that are jumping on this bandwagon, it looks like you're going to have to change out any early devices for later ones that will rebroadcast.

    Seems like SH is just repackaging what's already available. It's not new technology. Convince me that I need to change.

    Chuck
    LOL, I was just thinking that same thing....

    -Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • Chas821
    replied
    So for right now, what we have is a PLC device that can be RF controlled by a split-phase, fancy RR501 OR by X10 PLC signal. SHEESH!

    Until all the Insteon devices can rebroadcast commands via RF netting, what is everyone getting excited about? For all the folks that are jumping on this bandwagon, it looks like you're going to have to change out any early devices for later ones that will rebroadcast.

    Seems like SH is just repackaging what's already available. It's not new technology. Convince me that I need to change.

    Chuck

    Leave a comment:


  • AccessX10
    Guest replied
    Yep, Pod hit the nail on the head.

    Leave a comment:


  • AutomatedOutlet
    replied
    I think that's right.

    Leave a comment:


  • MPodlin
    replied
    I was under the impression that the default setting for INSTEON modules did not include an X-10 address. When I first set them up (INSTEON mode only), straight out of the box, I never saw any X-10 traffic at the HS log. After I had the modules working with the ControLinc, I then assigned X-10 addresses into the INSTEON modules so that HS can control them and see the X-10 traffic which it now does.

    My understanding, and what I was told from SmartHome was that the modules will absorb X-10 signals (like the 2-way X-10 modules do now) even if you are not using an X-10 address with them. So the more INSTEON modules you add to your setup, the weaker your X-10 signals are going to get.

    The Pod

    Leave a comment:


  • AutomatedOutlet
    replied
    Hmm, the instructions talk about "removing and X10 address" but I was thinking that was to get it to default - perhaps you can. That would be good.

    I think you will still be dealing with signal absorbtion issues though. I'll do some more testing.

    Rupp, not sure which protocols will be supported but I'm not sure if it makes sense, or is feasible, to have three. All I know is that they told be that in probably a year or so that the end devices would support Insteon RF signals.

    Leave a comment:


  • jrfuda
    replied
    So let me understand this correctly.

    When mature, Insteon will communicate THREE ways, X10, Insteon PLC, and Insteon RF. That's pretty interesting.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rupp
    replied
    Originally posted by AccessX10
    See my post above. According to Smarthome, you can "disable" X10 on all INSTEON devices. I'm only taking the word of their support staff, so don't shoot the messenger.

    That would make a lot of since and would stave off any problems.

    Leave a comment:


  • AccessX10
    Guest replied
    See my post above. According to Smarthome, you can "disable" X10 on all INSTEON devices. I'm only taking the word of their support staff, so don't shoot the messenger.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rupp
    replied
    Originally posted by AutomatedOutlet
    Rupp,

    I don't really think that it would be a big issue, HS could just ignore and not do anything with the extra signal.
    I guess it doesn't matter who sent an A1 on but it would seem to cause problems if the X10 interface receives it along with the Insteon interface. Oh well that's an HS issue to deal with.

    Leave a comment:


  • AutomatedOutlet
    replied
    Rupp,

    I don't really think that it would be a big issue, HS could just ignore and not do anything with the extra signal.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X