HAI Support forums

[Rick Tinker]

(Part 2 of 2)

With Premise dying on the vine, there are *no* PC-based HA solutions for high-end homes -- retro or new construction. Even the new UPB and z-wave devices are not suitable for high-end custom homes.

I think we differ on that one, but without some common definitions of what a solution is, what a high-end home is, and what the requirements are, I won't try to defend my position and I won't lobby an offense to yours either. What is clear to me though is that some technologies clearly fail with large homes (e.g. X-10) and technologies like Z-Wave no longer have those limitations. Where Z-Wave apparently still has some limitation as you see it for high-end homes is where it becomes a matter of opinion.

Crestron is of course an option but at a very high cost, and for those of us who want to have more hands-on control, HS 2.0 has the potential to fill a huge gap in the market. But I can't tell you how many folks I know who write HS off as a low-end hobby product due to it's tight integration with X-10 and total lack of support for higher-end lighting systems such as Lutron and Vantage. That is a rapidly growing potential market that you seem to just be blowing off. Support for IP-addressable devices would be a huge step in the right direction, and support for high-end lighting systems would put you in a very good position IMHO. I know it would make *me* happy ;-)

We are in no way blowing them off. We have a plug-in for Lutron Radio-RA which has been available for some time now. Vantage decided long ago that they are going to develop their own interfaces and pulled back on giving out their protocol and supporting 3rd party interfaces. It was not our desire not to support them. We still remain the most open and powerful of control systems out there such that if you were to get a copy of Vantage's protocol specification, you could write that interface and make whatever gains through it that you could. We (unlike some of our competitors) do not have to write the interface to make something work with HomeSeer - THAT would be extremely limiting and would create a situation where you could honestly say that we made decisions to support or not support interfaces. By providing an open, extensible interface to HomeSeer, the opposite exists - we welcome everybody and allow everybody to talk to HomeSeer.

Let's say for example that Vantage walked right up and said "here is our protocol" - would we have an interface to them? Perhaps - at that point it does become a business decision as to whether we put forward resources to develop the plug-in, but it in no way prevents somebody else from doing it and that is why there are more 3rd party plug-ins for HomeSeer than there are HomeSeer plug-ins for HomeSeer.

Is there any light at the end of the tunnel? I *want* HS to be a viable solution for me, and I have my hopes pinned on 2.0 without really understanding what the potential is. Any comments you have will be most appreciated.

Hopefully I have answered in such a way that you realize that HomeSeer is, and always has been a viable solution for you, and that all of the potential you can imagine does exist and is ready to be tapped. As we are proud to point out, HomeSeer is used commercially every day to run the lights on a bridge in New York, to run the doors in a prison, and several other applications where high reliability is demanded. HomeSeer scales from small homes used by DIYers to these commercial uses by professionals, so high-end homes put together by professionals definitely exist in that range as well.

Also of course I'd love to get my hands on any 2.0 information that would provide insight into development of .NET plug-ins and particularly IP-addressable devices. Not sure how I can get on that list...but I'll be glad to buy anything that's necessary if only to be able to do some proof-of-concept experiments. Can you advise what I need to do?

Our current product has a 30 day trial period and is the full product, not a trimmed down version. If you spent some time working with it and getting familiar with it, and learn more about HomeSeer through venues like this message board, then I expect that the features and changes in HomeSeer 2.0 will be more readily appreciated and understood. In other words, I would not jump right into learning about 2.0 without first understanding where we are coming from for the past 6-7 years. Despite the roots being in X-10, you will see that we have come a long way since then. Once you are familiar with HomeSeer, then you will appreciate the 2.0 changes which in a nutshell are: All .NET architecture (as you know) and multi-threading for performance, backward compatible with all of today's plug-ins and scripts (and it seems we are pulling that one off pretty well so far), many new features specifically for the professional installer such as yourself, and a new interface method for plug-ins (Genuine Channels) that allows plug-ins to be written using the same API specification we have supported for years but with a more reliable connection to HomeSeer than what COM has allowed in the past.

For some real in-depth conversations about what we can provide a professional installer, a phone call or email exchange with Mark Colegrove with our company can take care of that.

Thanks Rick.

My pleasure - let me know if I did not address anything adequately and I'll be happy to spend more time with it.

[anogee]

I do hope HS 2.0 will be a bit different, if HS ever expects to be a professional solution and not just a home hobbist product. I know that the HS folks have heard this before, but I never get the feeling that this problem will be solved. By this I'm not in any way saying that HomeSeer isn't cabable or flexible, or even the ultimate home control product. What I'm saying is that sometimes I get the impression that the HS developers don't fully undestand the needs of professional installers. (And let me note that I am NOT a professional installer, but do have a software development background.)

The real problem has to do with how HomeSeer is developed and released more than anything else. By that I mean that development of HomeSeer and all the plugins progesses like a never-ending project. Sure, some of the software has "released versions" and "beta" versions, but to be honest, the only difference between the two is that the beta versions have newer code. Once version a.b.c comes out, work starts on version a.b.d and then a.b.e etc. If problems in the "released" code are found, they are just fixed in the "betas," with someday in the future, the "beta" turning into the next "released" code.

This mentality is BAD BAD BAD.

Instead HomeSeer has to adopt a development environment like a professional software product. When Windows 98 was released, did Microsoft halt all bug fixes on Windows 98, instead focusing all their energy on Windows XP? Were Win 98 bugs just fixed in the Win XP betas? NO. Microsoft continued to fix Win 98, as well as add new features to it in the form of Win XP betas.

When was the last time that you saw the HomeSeer folks release bug fixes for a current product that WASN'T a "beta" for the next version? How many HS 1.x version updates have come out since work was started on HS 2? Not many.

I think this is a serious problem although its never really talked about. Again, I'm not saying that the HomeSeer developers aren't doing a great job getting new products out, I'm just saying that no effort is being paid to support released products once they are released. Hopefully HS2 will be different.

[rpeck]

Thanks, Rick.

Thanks for the very thoughtful and thorough reply, Rick. FYI, Vantage sells devices which support 3rd-party integration via IP-based Ethernet, RS-232, and RS-485 -- so I'm surprised that they would not publish the protocol???

http://www.vantagecontrols.com/downl...%20Enabler.pdf
http://www.vantagecontrols.com/downl...%20Station.pdf
http://www.vantagecontrols.com/downl...%20Station.pdf

But personally I'm leaning heavily toward Lutron HI at this point. The problem with RadioRA is that for new construction an RF solution is far less desirable than a hard-wired solution IMHO, and RadioRA supports a maximum of 32 loads from what I can tell, which is not sufficient for a large home. Homeworks Interactive is far better suited to a large custom installation, and from what I can tell, their RS-232 protocol is very similar to RadioRA's.

Is it a large leap to update the RadioRA plug-in to work with Homeworks? Would it be possible to obtain the RadioRA plug-in source code to use as a starting point if I were to develop this myself (or have it done for me)?

I know you say that I can do virtually any interface myself, but you also mentioned that it would likely take 30 hours for *you*, an experienced HS developer, to write an Ethernet interface to HAI. This is a little bit discouraging. But perhaps that's due to the proprietary nature of the HAI protocol.

Also, I have long ago downloaded the trial version of HS 1.x and I've read the entire on-line manual, and I've downloaded and read the MainLobby docs and the ML plug-in docs, and I've installed and played with VB.NET to start getting used to that environment (I owned a software development company for many years but did not do any VB), and I've combed thru this message board for many many hours trying to learn more. I've done RS-232 interfaces in low- and high-level languages, and I've reviewed the Homeworks Interactive and RadioRA RS-232 protocols. I.e. I've done a fair amount of homework already. I will gladly purchase any products or tools or licenses required to get this moving along, and sign an NDA if that will help.

What I don't want to do is waste time learning how to write a HS 1.x plug-in if there will be a better way to do it in 2.x, and I don't want to write a Homeworks plug-in from scratch if it's possible to get a running start with the source for the RadioRA plug-in. It's about 100 times easier to modify an existing model than to figure the whole thing out from ground zero.

So with that in mind, can you advise the most efficient way for me to move forward on this project? If you want to contact me privately my e-mail is randy at thepecks dot com.

Thanks again for your valuable time and consideration, Rick -- I really do appreciate it, particularly considering the stress you must be under to get a 2.x beta out the door. I've been there ;-)

Randy

[Rick Tinker]

(snip) When was the last time that you saw the HomeSeer folks release bug fixes for a current product that WASN'T a "beta" for the next version? How many HS 1.x version updates have come out since work was started on HS 2? Not many.

Hmmmm - not sure I agree with this. Recent evidence is that HomeSeer 1.7 was released with version 1.7.0, and version 1.7.30 is what is currently in the updater. 1.7 was released April 20th, 1.7.7 on May 12th, 1.7.29 on November 22nd and 1.7.30 on November 24th. There are bug fixes in each one of those releases, and we started development of HomeSeer 2.0 last summer.

I don't have the 1.6 history in front of me, but while we do have long beta periods for most of our releases, we definitely release versions along the way with bug fixes in them.

[Rick Tinker]

Thanks for the very thoughtful and thorough reply, Rick. FYI, Vantage sells devices which support 3rd-party integration via IP-based Ethernet, RS-232, and RS-485 -- so I'm surprised that they would not publish the protocol???

It has been quite a while since I have checked, so perhaps they have reversed their reversed decision regarding third parties! Their website does not have the protocol available, but that does not mean we cannot get it. At some point I may inquire with them again but one would think that if it were possible that we would have had a dealer work to make it happen as has been the case with other devices/systems we support. The communication station products are the best evidence that they do support 3rd party control mechanisms.

But personally I'm leaning heavily toward Lutron HI at this point. The problem with RadioRA is that for new construction an RF solution is far less desirable than a hard-wired solution IMHO, and RadioRA supports a maximum of 32 loads from what I can tell, which is not sufficient for a large home.

This is why I was not sure of the basis of your assertion that Z-Wave was not suitable for a large home. It uses no repeaters like Radio-RA as each node (lighting, HVAC, or other) is a router for the entire network, and you can have over 200 devices in the network.

Homeworks Interactive is far better suited to a large custom installation, and from what I can tell, their RS-232 protocol is very similar to RadioRA's.
Is it a large leap to update the RadioRA plug-in to work with Homeworks? Would it be possible to obtain the RadioRA plug-in source code to use as a starting point if I were to develop this myself (or have it done for me)?

Yes, this is possible, but other parties are involved other than us. Contact me via email and I'll let you know what is involved in this.

I know you say that I can do virtually any interface myself, but you also mentioned that it would likely take 30 hours for *you*, an experienced HS developer, to write an Ethernet interface to HAI. This is a little bit discouraging. But perhaps that's due to the proprietary nature of the HAI protocol.

Yes, but keep in mind that 30 hours is not even one work week. The fact is I have very little experience with the encryption method they use and they added a packet number that has to be reconciled - the current plug-in was architected WISHING that it had something like that but was written without it, so it would now be a fair amount of work to make it work with the packet numbers when the connection is Ethernet but without when it is serial - would have been MUCH easier for HAI to just adopt the packet numbers on both electrical connection formats! Anyway, that is why it would take at least that long, and yes it is another reason we don't spend all of our time writing interfaces to various systems. We do not often profit from the plug-in sales against their development costs. We would rather sell copies of HomeSeer. The complicated nature of the HAI protocol has already banished any and all future possibilities of us recovering the development costs of the plug-in. We want to write plug-ins for anything that is either A) in high demand such that it would satisfy a large portion of our user's needs or B) that we are getting reimbursed for. Even the latter item causes us to pause and think as it takes away from the development of our core products.

Also, I have long ago downloaded the trial version of HS 1.x and I've read the entire on-line manual, and I've downloaded and read the MainLobby docs and the ML plug-in docs, and I've installed and played with VB.NET to start getting used to that environment (I owned a software development company for many years but did not do any VB), and I've combed thru this message board for many many hours trying to learn more. I've done RS-232 interfaces in low- and high-level languages, and I've reviewed the Homeworks Interactive and RadioRA RS-232 protocols. I.e. I've done a fair amount of homework already. I will gladly purchase any products or tools or licenses required to get this moving along, and sign an NDA if that will help.

What I don't want to do is waste time learning how to write a HS 1.x plug-in if there will be a better way to do it in 2.x, and I don't want to write a Homeworks plug-in from scratch if it's possible to get a running start with the source for the RadioRA plug-in. It's about 100 times easier to modify an existing model than to figure the whole thing out from ground zero.

I understand. I think the good work that Krumpy has done with the ML plug-in will probably take care of your needs there, and I can get you in contact with him if you like, and if you do want to explore getting the RadioRA source code I can make a contact happen there as well and you can discuss having it written for you or obtaining the source code. Drop me an email if you want that to happen and I'll forward it to the appropriate person.

I can tell you that we have tried to provide as much information on HomeSeer 2 changes to application providers that we can. All of the application providers were given the opportunity to test their plug-ins with the HS 2.0 alpha. There is a hidden forum on this message board where we have been communicating with these testers. As we put a lot of energy into making sure that 1.x plug-ins would work with HS 2.x, so it goes with the API that you can actually create a plug-in conforming to the 1.x API and it should work with 2.0, so development effort is not lost.

The only difference is that if you wanted to make a plug-in that worked ONLY with 2.0, then you can use the .NET interface to connect the plug-in with HomeSeer, but all of the procedure calls are the same and so the changes here are minimal still. When we get to the beta testing of HS 2 which is going to be soon, we will be trying to get the documentation updated. Our first concern is to get the core documentation updated and then to get new documentation needs taken care of which would include the .NET plug-in API changes. Sorry we cannot move any faster but we're still a small team of developers!

[CCRRAR]

Rick and Randy -

I have been tracking this discussion as I am also a HomeWorks user. I am using all RF although it has the same software and communication protocol as the hardwired original. I am up to the max of 64 lighting loads on my first processor and will probably add a second processor and get the balance of my 15-25 remaining loads controlled.

Although I am not a programmer I have done a good bit of system design and spec writing. If an effort gets launched to right a plug in please let me know if I can help.

Thanks,

Rob

[rpeck]

Homeworks Interactive

That's great Rob - thanks for the offer of help.

How has the HomeSeer-to-Homeworks RF plug-in worked for you? Is there anything missing, and has it been reliable? Is it fast?

Thanks in advance for any input.

Randy

[CCRRAR]

Randy -

I was not clear in my post, I am not using RadioRA, I am using the wireless version of Homeworks, it is called HomeServe (www.lutron.com/nolimits/). The serial protocol my system uses is the same as the hardwired Homeworks, and much to our mutual disappointment, completely different that the RadioRA. My control software is the same as yours, Homeworks Interactive.

Rob

[rpeck]

Homeworks Homeserve RF

Ah, okay Rob. I sent Rick an e-mail yesterday requesting contact information for the RadioRA plug-in developer. I want to inquire as to the cost of developing a Homeworks Interactive (/Homeserve RF) plug-in and/or licensing the source code and doing it myself.

Will post back here, or shoot me a private e-mail at homeseer at thepecks dot com.

Randy