Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2414S & Insteon Plugin Compatability?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    2414S & Insteon Plugin Compatability?

    I have seen posted that plugin supports both versions of Powerlinc.

    "2414S or 2414U. One is serial and the other is USB"

    I have purhcased 2414S and have not been able to get plugin working due
    to SDM does not allow Serial option on "Set Port"

    Has anyone got serial version working with Insteon plugin?


    Note: I Purchased serial because of all problem in past with USB Zwave

    #2
    Yes, it does allow the serial port to be specified on the Set Port command and no you don't have to use it. Use the =? parameter to scan for the PIM otherwise you use =COMx to specify the port. The plug-in uses the scan option if it can't determine the port to use. It does NOT use the port specified in the HS2 setup screen. I've tested it on Com1 through Com8.

    Jon


    Originally posted by airodas
    I have seen posted that plugin supports both versions of Powerlinc.

    "2414S or 2414U. One is serial and the other is USB"

    I have purhcased 2414S and have not been able to get plugin working due
    to SDM does not allow Serial option on "Set Port"

    Has anyone got serial version working with Insteon plugin?


    Note: I Purchased serial because of all problem in past with USB Zwave
    Jon Ort
    JonOrt@The--Orts.com
    (Remove the dashes in the address, spam is getting out of hand)

    Comment


      #3
      So can we use the http://www.smarthome.com/2414u.html or S model for X10 only and this plugin now that the X10 only version of the Powerlinc was discontinued?
      💁‍♂️ Support & Customer Service 🙋‍♂️ Sales Questions 🛒 Shop HomeSeer Products

      Comment


        #4
        Oman,

        Thanks for reply.

        One more question. What would be the script syntax to send Insteon commands.
        (i.e. HS_ExecX10:A9~Off)

        Comment


          #5
          Now that wasn't nice of SmartHome was it? Yes you could use it just for X10. I guess they want to get Insteon in the home any way they can :>

          Jon


          Originally posted by Rupp
          So can we use the http://www.smarthome.com/2414u.html or S model for X10 only and this plugin now that the X10 only version of the Powerlinc was discontinued?
          Jon Ort
          JonOrt@The--Orts.com
          (Remove the dashes in the address, spam is getting out of hand)

          Comment


            #6
            Thanks Jon. Your probably right and oddly enough the switches are less but the interface is double?
            Last edited by Rupp; December 29, 2005, 12:11 AM.
            💁‍♂️ Support & Customer Service 🙋‍♂️ Sales Questions 🛒 Shop HomeSeer Products

            Comment


              #7
              I usually use SetDeviceStatus, though I think that HS maps ExecX10 correctly internally.

              Jon


              Originally posted by airodas
              Oman,

              Thanks for reply.

              One more question. What would be the script syntax to send Insteon commands.
              (i.e. HS_ExecX10:A9~Off)
              Jon Ort
              JonOrt@The--Orts.com
              (Remove the dashes in the address, spam is getting out of hand)

              Comment


                #8
                I personally think that SmartHome blew it with the computer interface. They have a pretty big processor and a bunch of memory and firmware in the unit. When used with a HA system all that goes to waste. If they would have released a simple unit first it would have been out and working properly months ago. It is better to start small and get it right, then add later.

                Jon


                Originally posted by Rupp
                Thanks Jon. Your probably right and oddly enough the switches are less nut the interface is double?
                Jon Ort
                JonOrt@The--Orts.com
                (Remove the dashes in the address, spam is getting out of hand)

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Oman
                  I personally think that SmartHome blew it with the computer interface. They have a pretty big processor and a bunch of memory and firmware in the unit. When used with a HA system all that goes to waste. If they would have released a simple unit first it would have been out and working properly months ago. It is better to start small and get it right, then add later.
                  I have to disagree, a little. It's really hard to predict what the market will want, so (in my experience) it's best to design as much flexibility as you can into the initial release. The current Insteon devices are actually very capable, it's just not easy to program them as it will be in the future. My take is that they're no worse than some industrial control devices I've had to write protocol stacks for ("What do you mean, I have to poke these 28 locations to make sure the milling machine quill is retracted before I move the next workpiece onto the table?"). The point is, you can "poke those 28 locations" to accomplish something, if you absolutely have to.

                  Smarthome is working hard to shield the casual programmer from that kind of low-level programming. They're not there yet, but they've made great strides over the past month or so. They've been extremely interactive with the Insteon developer community, responding very rapidly to feedback about the programming interface. The guy primarily responsible for the interface was posting updates on Christmas day. FWIW, I've found it much harder to suss out the HomeSeer plugin interface than to make Insteon devices do exactly what I want.

                  I've really resisted saying this in public, but I think it's time to come out and do so - as a professional programmer (and hardware designer) for over forty years, I consider the HomeSeer interfaces to be a bit amateurish. There are important interface definitions missing from their class libraries, and many parameters and results are inadequately defined. A lot of this is the VB heritage ( not a language I would choose to implement a major piece of real-time software), but the move to .NET gave them an opportunity to fully "objectify" HS, and they appear not to have taken it. But, like the overly low-level stuff I mentioned above, you can make it do what you want if you're willing to make the effort. Most of that effort, for me at least, has been reverse-engineering things to make up for the lack of documentation.

                  Bottom line, Jon has posted a usable plugin. It's not perfect, but it will get your lights turned on and off. I've written a similar plugin that I've been using to run my house for a while. The base of "community knowledge" about how to make Insteon devices play is expanding at an exponential rate. SmartHome's software tools are improving on an almost daily basis.

                  A month or two from now, we'll look back and wonder why we were so concerned. If you lack the patience to wait that month or two (while meanwhilst using the existing plugins to do most of the things you want), I'd suggest you dump your Insteon stuff and buy a bunch of UPB or Z-Wave modules

                  As always, one person's opinion -
                  - Dennis Brothers

                  Comment


                    #10
                    You have been doing this a bit longer than I have. My experience is more in the consumer device and software market, and it just looks to me like they have travelled the same road as many others have and made the same mistakes when coming out with interface products (not the Insteon switches themselves). Marketing would clearly want the most capable whis-bang product out first, but wise engineering managers know that when starting from scratch you need to get the foundation built before you start adding on. My guess is from reading the developer posts in the Insteon forums that about 95% of the interfaces sold will not be running anything but the core app on the interface. That means that they could have concentrated on making a stable core feature interface and had it done more than 6 months ago with a lower price tag. This piggy-backs on the to fact that SmartHome has discontinued any X10 interfaces and is telling people to buy the Insteon interface to do X10. It is 3x more expensive than the old X10 interface they stopped making. It might also have to do with the fact that I've had an Insteon interface for many months that just didn't work right until just a few weeks ago.

                    PS: As an assembly language and C programmer I just cringe when I have to write VB code. Weak variable types with late binding on the interface just pains me to the core.

                    Jon


                    Originally posted by brothers
                    I have to disagree, a little. It's really hard to predict what the market will want, so (in my experience) it's best to design as much flexibility as you can into the initial release. The current Insteon devices are actually very capable, it's just not easy to program them as it will be in the future. My take is that they're no worse than some industrial control devices I've had to write protocol stacks for ("What do you mean, I have to poke these 28 locations to make sure the milling machine quill is retracted before I move the next workpiece onto the table?"). The point is, you can "poke those 28 locations" to accomplish something, if you absolutely have to.

                    Smarthome is working hard to shield the casual programmer from that kind of low-level programming. They're not there yet, but they've made great strides over the past month or so. They've been extremely interactive with the Insteon developer community, responding very rapidly to feedback about the programming interface. The guy primarily responsible for the interface was posting updates on Christmas day. FWIW, I've found it much harder to suss out the HomeSeer plugin interface than to make Insteon devices do exactly what I want.

                    I've really resisted saying this in public, but I think it's time to come out and do so - as a professional programmer (and hardware designer) for over forty years, I consider the HomeSeer interfaces to be a bit amateurish. There are important interface definitions missing from their class libraries, and many parameters and results are inadequately defined. A lot of this is the VB heritage ( not a language I would choose to implement a major piece of real-time software), but the move to .NET gave them an opportunity to fully "objectify" HS, and they appear not to have taken it. But, like the overly low-level stuff I mentioned above, you can make it do what you want if you're willing to make the effort. Most of that effort, for me at least, has been reverse-engineering things to make up for the lack of documentation.

                    Bottom line, Jon has posted a usable plugin. It's not perfect, but it will get your lights turned on and off. I've written a similar plugin that I've been using to run my house for a while. The base of "community knowledge" about how to make Insteon devices play is expanding at an exponential rate. SmartHome's software tools are improving on an almost daily basis.

                    A month or two from now, we'll look back and wonder why we were so concerned. If you lack the patience to wait that month or two (while meanwhilst using the existing plugins to do most of the things you want), I'd suggest you dump your Insteon stuff and buy a bunch of UPB or Z-Wave modules

                    As always, one person's opinion -
                    - Dennis Brothers
                    Jon Ort
                    JonOrt@The--Orts.com
                    (Remove the dashes in the address, spam is getting out of hand)

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Jon -

                      FWIW, I've also done a bit of consumer stuff - I have a MacUser Eddy statue sitting on my shelf, for a Mac comm program I developed a while back (for large values of "while" . Though few users realized it, the scripting system in the program I won that for was "mathematically complete" in the Turing sense, and many sophisticated users and developers used it to develop complex applications.

                      There's always a dynamic tension between "complicated and complete" and "simple and limited". True design genius lies in charting a course between those two extremes that the market accepts. It's important to remember that the "market" we're talking about here (in our discussions of the Device Manager and the PLC) is not end users, but rather we ourselves - developers who should be expected to recognize how "early days" in a new technology works, and who can make informed decisions about whether to wait out a few hands, or to ante up and deal with the limitations and problems through compromises and workarounds.

                      Yeah, things could have been done differently, but as with so many things in life, it's a case of "Who knew?". As I think I said elswhere in these fora, I don't think anyone in the history of the world has ever gotten all the details of a new technology right the first time. SmartHome has come closer than most, in my experience. Rather than bemoaning what could have been, I think our efforts are best spent learning how to most effectively use what we have now, and constructively pushing SmartHome in the right direction for the future.

                      As always, just my opinion -
                      - Dennis Brothers

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X