Z-wave or X-10 ? Thoughts ? [Archive]

Tech-Home

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Someone wrote:
> Just wondering what everyone suggests for a good and dependable home
> automation system. I know Z-wave is kind of new on the market so, a
lot of
> stuff is not out for it (I am sure someone can correct me here). I
have been
> using some X-10 stuff in my apartment for a while now but, laying out
a
> design of features I want when I find the right home.
>
> Also, can X-10 or Z-wave be secure ? (wiress remotes, etc....from a
kid down
> the street with a $5 remote being able to turn on my lights when he
is
> infront of my home ?)
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Thx !

I'm all for Zwave but I also sell both. I have Zwave installed in my
house. Trouble is their may be better options when you do get a house,
unless that is in the next year or so. Zwave is secure so noone can
just get on your system and screw around. With X-10 you really can't
but you can use different house codes that are less common. There are
alot of new products coming shortly with Zwave and others.

Other products to look at UPB
http://www.tech-home.com/store/index.php3?cat=396426

Zigbee could be a big player but this has been a up and down product.
Search google threads for more.

SmartHome is introducing a new product Insteon which may be big also.
There are
http://www.insteon.net/
http://www.kvvutv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1921642
Brian
http://tech-home.com

Dave Houston

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Only the gullible think Zwave is secure. Only rolling codes are secure and
ZWave does not use rolling codes. With anything else the codes can be
captured and played back. However, the limited range is likely to afford
some protection.

"Tech-Home" <brian@tech-home.com> wrote:

>
>Someone wrote:
>> Just wondering what everyone suggests for a good and dependable home
>> automation system. I know Z-wave is kind of new on the market so, a
>lot of
>> stuff is not out for it (I am sure someone can correct me here). I
>have been
>> using some X-10 stuff in my apartment for a while now but, laying out
>a
>> design of features I want when I find the right home.
>>
>> Also, can X-10 or Z-wave be secure ? (wiress remotes, etc....from a
>kid down
>> the street with a $5 remote being able to turn on my lights when he
>is
>> infront of my home ?)
>>
>> Thoughts ?
>>
>> Thx !
>
>I'm all for Zwave but I also sell both. I have Zwave installed in my
>house. Trouble is their may be better options when you do get a house,
>unless that is in the next year or so. Zwave is secure so noone can
>just get on your system and screw around. With X-10 you really can't
>but you can use different house codes that are less common. There are
>alot of new products coming shortly with Zwave and others.
>
>Other products to look at UPB
>http://www.tech-home.com/store/index.php3?cat=396426
>
>Zigbee could be a big player but this has been a up and down product.
>Search google threads for more.
>
>SmartHome is introducing a new product Insteon which may be big also.
>There are
>http://www.insteon.net/
>http://www.kvvutv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1921642
>Brian
>http://tech-home.com

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> Only the gullible think Zwave is secure...

Having spent half a lifetime in the security industry, I disagree.
*Nothing* is 100% secure. Some things, such as ZWave, are enough of a pain
to hack into that not many people are likely to try. When I say it's a pain
to do so, I don't mean it would be difficult for a knowledgeable person with
the proper tools. I mean there are so few knowledgeable people around with
the right tools that having someone bother your Zwave lighting controls or
adjust your thermostat as a prank is an insignificant risk.

> Only rolling codes are secure...

The gentleman is mistaken. Rolling codes are not 100% secure either.

> and ZWave does not use rolling codes....

Compared to X10 which is the most common lighting control protocol, Zwave is
much more secure.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

Chuck

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dave Houston wrote:
> Only the gullible think Zwave is secure. Only rolling codes are secure and
> ZWave does not use rolling codes. With anything else the codes can be
> captured and played back. However, the limited range is likely to afford
> some protection.
>
> "Tech-Home" <brian@tech-home.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Someone wrote:
>>
>>>Just wondering what everyone suggests for a good and dependable home
>>>automation system. I know Z-wave is kind of new on the market so, a
>>
>>lot of
>>
>>>stuff is not out for it (I am sure someone can correct me here). I
>>
>>have been
>>
>>>using some X-10 stuff in my apartment for a while now but, laying out
>>
>>a
>>
>>>design of features I want when I find the right home.
>>>
>>>Also, can X-10 or Z-wave be secure ? (wiress remotes, etc....from a
>>
>>kid down
>>
>>>the street with a $5 remote being able to turn on my lights when he
>>
>>is
>>
>>>infront of my home ?)
>>>
>>>Thoughts ?
>>>
>>>Thx !
>>
>>I'm all for Zwave but I also sell both. I have Zwave installed in my
>>house. Trouble is their may be better options when you do get a house,
>>unless that is in the next year or so. Zwave is secure so noone can
>>just get on your system and screw around. With X-10 you really can't
>>but you can use different house codes that are less common. There are
>>alot of new products coming shortly with Zwave and others.
>>
>>Other products to look at UPB
>>http://www.tech-home.com/store/index.php3?cat=396426
>>
>>Zigbee could be a big player but this has been a up and down product.
>>Search google threads for more.
>>
>>SmartHome is introducing a new product Insteon which may be big also.
>>There are
>>http://www.insteon.net/
>>http://www.kvvutv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1921642
>>Brian
>>http://tech-home.com
>
>
>
You obviously have no idea how Zwave works. The Zwave remote is the Key
to your house. You can't just walk by a house with Zwave in it with a
Zwave remote and start turning things on and off. You need to program
the moduals in it, doing that would break the network of the zwave
items. You would also have to get into the house, and reset the module.
With X10, anyone can stand infront of your house with a remote and
turn things on or off.

Dave Houston

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

And you obviously are totally clueless about how RF works.

I said absolutely nothing about needing a ZWave remote.

Chuck <Ummm@guess.org> wrote:

>You obviously have no idea how Zwave works. The Zwave remote is the Key
>to your house. You can't just walk by a house with Zwave in it with a
>Zwave remote and start turning things on and off. You need to program
>the moduals in it, doing that would break the network of the zwave
>items. You would also have to get into the house, and reset the module.
> With X10, anyone can stand infront of your house with a remote and
>turn things on or off.

wkearney99

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> You obviously have no idea how Zwave works. The Zwave remote is the Key
> to your house. You can't just walk by a house with Zwave in it with a
> Zwave remote and start turning things on and off. You need to program
> the moduals in it, doing that would break the network of the zwave
> items. You would also have to get into the house, and reset the module.

No, if someone recorded the RF signals the current devices send it would be
trivial to play them back and compromise a system. The point being that
unless the devices actively 'roll' the codes between each use then it's
nowhere near secure. Sure it's "less insecure" than X10's competely
unchanging frequencies and protocol but only barely. It's true that someone
else trying to use a plain zwave remote wouldn't be able to control anything
unless it was added manually. But if someone takes the radio from a remote
(or uses an SDK module), feeds it into a PC, records the RF signals and
plays them back again then the system may well not be able to distinguish it
from the legitimate devices.

It is perhaps important to note that the protocol actually being used is a
LOT more sophisticated than that of simple X10 signalling. It'd be more
effort to properly establish a hacked device as a participant in the network
but certainly not impossible. More difficult that most script kiddies might
attempt but that's assuming no PC controllable interface gets created that
can be easily hacked. A naive assumption to say the least but probably
enough to avoid most risks to residential applications.

Rolling codes are more resistant to this sort of abuse in that they
complicate the simple process of record and playback. But they're only as
secure as the techniques used. Most of the time that's further limited by
costs and/or battery life issues in the remotes. One can't have elliptical
curve (or whatever) cryptography in a handheld remote without it being
either hideously expensive, a huge battery drain or both.

Finally there's the actual over-the-airwaves signals used. Simple systems
like X10 are one channel. Newer systems like zigbee make use of mulitple
frequencies using techniques like DSSS. This makes it more difficult to use
simple playback attacks. But then again, WiFi (802.11a/b/g) also uses
similar RF techniques and it's quite susceptible to attacks. Not from
simple RF playback but from the availablility of highly programmable
interfaces.

In short, the idea is to be reasonably secure at a reasonable price. For
most lighting control applications it's really not terribly critical for it
to be 'totally secure'. Most residential situations only need to avoid
accidental overlap from neighboring devices. That is, prevent your
neighbor's purchase of the same stuff you have from conflicting with yours.
The vendors want to SELL this stuff to BOTH you and your neighbors. Making
them resistant to overlap helps keep the market growing. Being secure is a
lot less of a priority to the vendors than avoiding costly word-of-mouth
failures.

> With X10, anyone can stand infront of your house with a remote and
> turn things on or off.

Yes, this is probably the only situation where the shitty reception most X10
receivers have is a GOOD thing.

-Bill Kearney

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> You obviously have no idea how Zwave works.

The gentleman indicated in an earlier post that he hasn't actually used any
Zwave equipment. Apparently his comments were based on conjecture.

> The Zwave remote is the Key to your house. You
> can't just walk by a house with Zwave in it with a Zwave remote and start
> turning things on and off...

I suspect he meant that someone could use RF receiving equipment to capture
the transmissions between the user's system and the lightswitch modules.
While this is certainly possible it would be an awful lot of trouble
compared to kicking in a door and taking something.

> With X10, anyone can stand infront of your house
> with a remote and turn things on or off.

Correct. There are so few codes that many X10 systems can be duped in a few
minutes.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> Sure it's "less insecure" than X10's competely
> unchanging frequencies and protocol but
> only barely...

I disagree. It would be easy to screw around with your neighbor's HA system
*if* you have an RF receiver capable of capturing, recording and playing
back the codes. The required equipment will cost enough and require enough
knowledge to all but eliminate problems from the average neighbor. X10 can
be tampered using devices that cost very little and are easy for a rank
beginner to master.

> ... if someone takes the radio from a remote
> (or uses an SDK module), feeds it into a PC,
> records the RF signals and plays them back...

That's way more hassle than the average petty vandal is likely to endure.

> A naive assumption to say the least but
> probably enough to avoid most risks to
> residential applications...

The real point, IMO, is that Zwave is much more secure than X10 (about which
I see no dire warnings from our esteemed colleague :)).

> Rolling codes are more resistant to this
> sort of abuse in that they complicate the
> simple process of record and playback...

As mentioned earlier, *nothing* is 100% secure. Rolling code garage door
remotes are much easier to hack than those used with certain access control
systems.

> But they're only as secure as the techniques
> used...
>
> In short, the idea is to be reasonably secure
> at a reasonable price. For most lighting control
> applications it's really not terribly critical...

Exactly.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

myren, lord

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

myren, lord

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dave Houston

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

"myren, lord" <thefowle@wam.umd.edu> wrote:

>Dave Houston wrote:
>> Only the gullible think Zwave is secure. Only rolling codes are secure and
>> ZWave does not use rolling codes. With anything else the codes can be
>> captured and played back. However, the limited range is likely to afford
>> some protection.
>
>real cryptographic security (ex: AES) seems like a far better option
>than some easily hackable rolling code. sure, you want to roll your
>cypto key sets too, but once a month is pretty damned secure.
>
>but yes, i suppose you need some unqiue packet info in order to prevent
>replay attacks.

Who gives a damn what encryption method is used or what the underlying
meaning of a ZWave code happens to be? We're not talking about national
security, financial data or even identity theft but only about turning the
lights on and off. It takes less than $10 worth of hardware to record the RF
codes and replay them verbatim. Unless the codes change with _each_
transmission, they are insecure. The reason for the AES encryption would
appear to be increased sales of ZWave remotes rather than security.

As for rolling codes being hackable, I haven't seen reports of widespread
hacking of the rolling codes used with garage doors and security alarms. In
any event, it would take more than $10 hardware and a considerably higher
skill level. If the concern is that neighbors will "gaslight" you, rolling
codes would seem to provide adequate security. After all, we use them to
keep our garage doors locked and that would seem a bit more critical than
keeping the neighbors from playing with the lights.

wkearney99

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> x-10 isnt even in the runnings any more.

The road is littered with failed efforts that have made that claim. If not
failed outright certainly in failure to gain even a fraction of the same
market. This isn't to say X-10 is any good, it's shite of a high order.
But it's in that sweet spot combining relative ease of use and low price
point. That, combined with tireless, if annoying, marketing have kept X-10
an active player in the market. I'm as eager as anyone else to see X-10
technologies killed once and for all but I've learned not to hold my breath
waiting for it to happen.

> If you're talking about the future, zigbee is going to kick the pants
> off Z-Wave. it'll provide a cheap industry standard to do everything
> z-wave does, versus z-wave which is proprietary and expensive.

Yeah, sure, as was also claimed by the likes CeBus, Echelon, uPnP and a
whole host of others. I'll believe it when they start pushing out the same
range of devices, at the same or better price points, in the same volume,
from the same diversity of sales outlets with the same level of marketing
drive. Sadly most other efforts end up failing the most in the last two.
They fail to penetrate to a wide enough range of sales outlets (retail,
distribution, oem and contractor) or drop the ball on REALLY pushing the
product.

While X-10 may be a technological piece of shit, it's well marketing and
that, sad to say, often rules the day.

-Bill Kearney

Dan

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

wkearney99 wrote:
>
> Yeah, sure, as was also claimed by the likes CeBus, Echelon, uPnP and a
> whole host of others. I'll believe it when they start pushing out the same
> range of devices, at the same or better price points, in the same volume,
> from the same diversity of sales outlets with the same level of marketing
> drive. Sadly most other efforts end up failing the most in the last two.
> They fail to penetrate to a wide enough range of sales outlets (retail,
> distribution, oem and contractor) or drop the ball on REALLY pushing the
> product.
>
> While X-10 may be a technological piece of shit, it's well marketing and
> that, sad to say, often rules the day.
>
> -Bill Kearney
>

Don't confuse the X10 'marketing machine' with the X10 protocol based
devices, as far as I know, no other company is really marketing the X10
(protocol) based hardware. As for CeBus, uPnP etc., you are right, but
keep in mind that in this case, several of the new protocols are backed
by major players in the home automation and security industry. UPB is
supported by Elk, HAI, and others, Insteon is a SmartHome product, which
means it will be popular (and the pricing of the Insteon hardware seems
to be very competitive), and there is ZigBee hardware out there already
, from phones to thermostats. I personally think that Insteon(X10+RF),
UPB(Powerline based, but much better than X10) and ZigBee(RF) are here
to stay. However, I don't see X10 going away for a while considering
how many people have implemented it (which is why Insteon might be a
winner here since it can work with X10, or RF, whichever is faster in
your environment). I hate plugging my site, but check out the press
releases I posted on CocoonTech.com the last few days, there is tons of
news about these protocols/hardware/vendors. There is so much data in
those press releases that I can't just post them here.

dan

Dave Houston

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dan <haguru@gmail.com> wrote:

>wkearney99 wrote:
> >
>> Yeah, sure, as was also claimed by the likes CeBus, Echelon, uPnP and a
>> whole host of others. I'll believe it when they start pushing out the same
>> range of devices, at the same or better price points, in the same volume,
>> from the same diversity of sales outlets with the same level of marketing
>> drive. Sadly most other efforts end up failing the most in the last two.
>> They fail to penetrate to a wide enough range of sales outlets (retail,
>> distribution, oem and contractor) or drop the ball on REALLY pushing the
>> product.
>>
>> While X-10 may be a technological piece of shit, it's well marketing and
>> that, sad to say, often rules the day.
>>
>> -Bill Kearney
>>
>
>Don't confuse the X10 'marketing machine' with the X10 protocol based
>devices, as far as I know, no other company is really marketing the X10
>(protocol) based hardware. As for CeBus, uPnP etc., you are right, but
>keep in mind that in this case, several of the new protocols are backed
>by major players in the home automation and security industry. UPB is
>supported by Elk, HAI, and others, Insteon is a SmartHome product, which
>means it will be popular (and the pricing of the Insteon hardware seems
>to be very competitive), and there is ZigBee hardware out there already
>, from phones to thermostats. I personally think that Insteon(X10+RF),
>UPB(Powerline based, but much better than X10) and ZigBee(RF) are here
>to stay. However, I don't see X10 going away for a while considering
>how many people have implemented it (which is why Insteon might be a
>winner here since it can work with X10, or RF, whichever is faster in
>your environment). I hate plugging my site, but check out the press
>releases I posted on CocoonTech.com the last few days, there is tons of
>news about these protocols/hardware/vendors. There is so much data in
>those press releases that I can't just post them here.

Leviton, PCS and SmartHome market X-10 (protocol) products.

If Insteon were coming from anyone other than SmartHome I'd be excited but
SmartHome has no history of successfully introducing a new protocol and has
had myriad problems implementing the X-10 protocol so I'm highly dubious. So
far, there have been lots of press releases but no hardware (at least that I
know of). Still, I would love to be forced to eat my words.

UPB costs too much and is likely to have the same problems with signal
suckers as X-10.

If you hate plugging your site, why do you do it 10 times a day?

Dan

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dave Houston wrote:
> Dan <haguru@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>wkearney99 wrote:
>>
>>>Yeah, sure, as was also claimed by the likes CeBus, Echelon, uPnP and a
>>>whole host of others. I'll believe it when they start pushing out the same
>>>range of devices, at the same or better price points, in the same volume,
>>>from the same diversity of sales outlets with the same level of marketing
>>>drive. Sadly most other efforts end up failing the most in the last two.
>>>They fail to penetrate to a wide enough range of sales outlets (retail,
>>>distribution, oem and contractor) or drop the ball on REALLY pushing the
>>>product.
>>>
>>>While X-10 may be a technological piece of shit, it's well marketing and
>>>that, sad to say, often rules the day.
>>>
>>>-Bill Kearney
>>>
>>
>>Don't confuse the X10 'marketing machine' with the X10 protocol based
>>devices, as far as I know, no other company is really marketing the X10
>>(protocol) based hardware. As for CeBus, uPnP etc., you are right, but
>>keep in mind that in this case, several of the new protocols are backed
>>by major players in the home automation and security industry. UPB is
>>supported by Elk, HAI, and others, Insteon is a SmartHome product, which
>>means it will be popular (and the pricing of the Insteon hardware seems
>>to be very competitive), and there is ZigBee hardware out there already
>>, from phones to thermostats. I personally think that Insteon(X10+RF),
>>UPB(Powerline based, but much better than X10) and ZigBee(RF) are here
>>to stay. However, I don't see X10 going away for a while considering
>>how many people have implemented it (which is why Insteon might be a
>>winner here since it can work with X10, or RF, whichever is faster in
>>your environment). I hate plugging my site, but check out the press
>>releases I posted on CocoonTech.com the last few days, there is tons of
>>news about these protocols/hardware/vendors. There is so much data in
>>those press releases that I can't just post them here.
>
>
> Leviton, PCS and SmartHome market X-10 (protocol) products.
>
> If Insteon were coming from anyone other than SmartHome I'd be excited but
> SmartHome has no history of successfully introducing a new protocol and has
> had myriad problems implementing the X-10 protocol so I'm highly dubious. So
> far, there have been lots of press releases but no hardware (at least that I
> know of). Still, I would love to be forced to eat my words.
>
> UPB costs too much and is likely to have the same problems with signal
> suckers as X-10.
>
> If you hate plugging your site, why do you do it 10 times a day?
>
UPB has been around for several years, and the prices just got lowered
(eventho they are set by PCS I believe), if you look around online, you
can find the pricing, which is very similar to the Lightolier line of
X10 switches.

As for Insteon, SmartHome is showcasing the products at CES right now,
and certain people I know are in the beta test.

I am pretty sure you can count on 1 hand how many times (10 times a
day?) I have mentioned the site, that's really a great attitude you have
there. As I mentioned in my previous message, these press releases
contain really useful and accurate information regarding these new
protocols, I don't see it posted here by anyone else. At least I am
'trying' to share knowledge in a positive way, and I am not asking
anything in return, the site doesn't even have ads. Happy new year to
you too!

dan

Brian

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dan has a great site and I visit their all the time. He is biased towards
automatedoutlet.com (he builds the site). But who wouldn't be if they work
for them. I read earlier that he said he has nothing to gain maybe not
directly . But non the less he has alot of knowledge to offer and post press
releases that are very interesting. His site is not filled with ads like
others just links to a few vendors.

Yes UPB prices are fixed I still feel they are High compared to the others.
I would much rather go for another product. I feel UPB won't last because of
price and better products coming to the market.

Also I'm still waiting for the kid down the street to hack my Zwave system?
lol :)

Brian
http://tech-home.com

"Dan" <haguru@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3RdDd.128747$AL5.59768@twister.nyroc.rr.com.. .
> Dave Houston wrote:
>> Dan <haguru@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>wkearney99 wrote:
>>>
>>>>Yeah, sure, as was also claimed by the likes CeBus, Echelon, uPnP and a
>>>>whole host of others. I'll believe it when they start pushing out the
>>>>same
>>>>range of devices, at the same or better price points, in the same
>>>>volume,
>>>>from the same diversity of sales outlets with the same level of
>>>>marketing
>>>>drive. Sadly most other efforts end up failing the most in the last
>>>>two.
>>>>They fail to penetrate to a wide enough range of sales outlets (retail,
>>>>distribution, oem and contractor) or drop the ball on REALLY pushing the
>>>>product.
>>>>
>>>>While X-10 may be a technological piece of shit, it's well marketing and
>>>>that, sad to say, often rules the day.
>>>>
>>>>-Bill Kearney
>>>>
>>>
>>>Don't confuse the X10 'marketing machine' with the X10 protocol based
>>>devices, as far as I know, no other company is really marketing the X10
>>>(protocol) based hardware. As for CeBus, uPnP etc., you are right, but
>>>keep in mind that in this case, several of the new protocols are backed
>>>by major players in the home automation and security industry. UPB is
>>>supported by Elk, HAI, and others, Insteon is a SmartHome product, which
>>>means it will be popular (and the pricing of the Insteon hardware seems
>>>to be very competitive), and there is ZigBee hardware out there already ,
>>>from phones to thermostats. I personally think that Insteon(X10+RF),
>>>UPB(Powerline based, but much better than X10) and ZigBee(RF) are here to
>>>stay. However, I don't see X10 going away for a while considering how
>>>many people have implemented it (which is why Insteon might be a winner
>>>here since it can work with X10, or RF, whichever is faster in your
>>>environment). I hate plugging my site, but check out the press releases
>>>I posted on CocoonTech.com the last few days, there is tons of news about
>>>these protocols/hardware/vendors. There is so much data in those press
>>>releases that I can't just post them here.
>>
>>
>> Leviton, PCS and SmartHome market X-10 (protocol) products. If Insteon
>> were coming from anyone other than SmartHome I'd be excited but
>> SmartHome has no history of successfully introducing a new protocol and
>> has
>> had myriad problems implementing the X-10 protocol so I'm highly dubious.
>> So
>> far, there have been lots of press releases but no hardware (at least
>> that I
>> know of). Still, I would love to be forced to eat my words.
>>
>> UPB costs too much and is likely to have the same problems with signal
>> suckers as X-10.
>>
>> If you hate plugging your site, why do you do it 10 times a day?
>>
> UPB has been around for several years, and the prices just got lowered
> (eventho they are set by PCS I believe), if you look around online, you
> can find the pricing, which is very similar to the Lightolier line of X10
> switches.
>
> As for Insteon, SmartHome is showcasing the products at CES right now, and
> certain people I know are in the beta test.
>
> I am pretty sure you can count on 1 hand how many times (10 times a day?)
> I have mentioned the site, that's really a great attitude you have there.
> As I mentioned in my previous message, these press releases contain really
> useful and accurate information regarding these new protocols, I don't see
> it posted here by anyone else. At least I am 'trying' to share knowledge
> in a positive way, and I am not asking anything in return, the site
> doesn't even have ads. Happy new year to you too!
>
> dan

Dan

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Thanks for the kind words Brian, Just to avoid any confusion, all I did
was install some software for him (and help him out when there are
technical issues) as the previous version of his site was done by hand,
and affected customers such as me (pricing not being up to date, etc.).
I am not really biased towards AO, I also link to SmartHome and
asiHome (who also links back to the site), it's just that most customers
get the hardware from AO, and these few stores are the ones I have
personal experience with. Heck, the new version even has a link back to
your site, it just isn't open to the public yet ;)

As for UPB not lasting, I am not so sure about that (maybe not the most
popular), as it has been around for a while now, and some of the popular
alarm system manufactures are supporting this protocol now. The market
is big enough for all these protocols, and the consumer will decide
which one will survive (eventho I agree that Insteon/ZigBee has probably
a better chance of surviving than UPB).

dan

Brian wrote:
> Dan has a great site and I visit their all the time. He is biased towards
> automatedoutlet.com (he builds the site). But who wouldn't be if they work
> for them. I read earlier that he said he has nothing to gain maybe not
> directly . But non the less he has alot of knowledge to offer and post press
> releases that are very interesting. His site is not filled with ads like
> others just links to a few vendors.
>
> Yes UPB prices are fixed I still feel they are High compared to the others.
> I would much rather go for another product. I feel UPB won't last because of
> price and better products coming to the market.
>
> Also I'm still waiting for the kid down the street to hack my Zwave system?
> lol :)
>
> Brian
> http://tech-home.com
>
> "Dan" <haguru@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3RdDd.128747$AL5.59768@twister.nyroc.rr.com.. .
>
>>Dave Houston wrote:
>>
>>>Dan <haguru@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>wkearney99 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Yeah, sure, as was also claimed by the likes CeBus, Echelon, uPnP and a
>>>>>whole host of others. I'll believe it when they start pushing out the
>>>>>same
>>>>>range of devices, at the same or better price points, in the same
>>>>>volume,
>>>>
>>>>>from the same diversity of sales outlets with the same level of
>>>>
>>>>>marketing
>>>>>drive. Sadly most other efforts end up failing the most in the last
>>>>>two.
>>>>>They fail to penetrate to a wide enough range of sales outlets (retail,
>>>>>distribution, oem and contractor) or drop the ball on REALLY pushing the
>>>>>product.
>>>>>
>>>>>While X-10 may be a technological piece of shit, it's well marketing and
>>>>>that, sad to say, often rules the day.
>>>>>
>>>>>-Bill Kearney
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Don't confuse the X10 'marketing machine' with the X10 protocol based
>>>>devices, as far as I know, no other company is really marketing the X10
>>>>(protocol) based hardware. As for CeBus, uPnP etc., you are right, but
>>>>keep in mind that in this case, several of the new protocols are backed
>>>>by major players in the home automation and security industry. UPB is
>>>>supported by Elk, HAI, and others, Insteon is a SmartHome product, which
>>>>means it will be popular (and the pricing of the Insteon hardware seems
>>>>to be very competitive), and there is ZigBee hardware out there already ,
>>>
>>>>from phones to thermostats. I personally think that Insteon(X10+RF),
>>>
>>>>UPB(Powerline based, but much better than X10) and ZigBee(RF) are here to
>>>>stay. However, I don't see X10 going away for a while considering how
>>>>many people have implemented it (which is why Insteon might be a winner
>>>>here since it can work with X10, or RF, whichever is faster in your
>>>>environment). I hate plugging my site, but check out the press releases
>>>>I posted on CocoonTech.com the last few days, there is tons of news about
>>>>these protocols/hardware/vendors. There is so much data in those press
>>>>releases that I can't just post them here.
>>>
>>>
>>>Leviton, PCS and SmartHome market X-10 (protocol) products. If Insteon
>>>were coming from anyone other than SmartHome I'd be excited but
>>>SmartHome has no history of successfully introducing a new protocol and
>>>has
>>>had myriad problems implementing the X-10 protocol so I'm highly dubious.
>>>So
>>>far, there have been lots of press releases but no hardware (at least
>>>that I
>>>know of). Still, I would love to be forced to eat my words.
>>>
>>>UPB costs too much and is likely to have the same problems with signal
>>>suckers as X-10.
>>>
>>>If you hate plugging your site, why do you do it 10 times a day?
>>>
>>
>>UPB has been around for several years, and the prices just got lowered
>>(eventho they are set by PCS I believe), if you look around online, you
>>can find the pricing, which is very similar to the Lightolier line of X10
>>switches.
>>
>>As for Insteon, SmartHome is showcasing the products at CES right now, and
>>certain people I know are in the beta test.
>>
>>I am pretty sure you can count on 1 hand how many times (10 times a day?)
>>I have mentioned the site, that's really a great attitude you have there.
>>As I mentioned in my previous message, these press releases contain really
>>useful and accurate information regarding these new protocols, I don't see
>>it posted here by anyone else. At least I am 'trying' to share knowledge
>>in a positive way, and I am not asking anything in return, the site
>>doesn't even have ads. Happy new year to you too!
>>
>>dan
>
>
>

Brandon Blackmoor

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

myren, lord wrote:
>
> If you're talking about the future, zigbee is going
> to kick the pants off Z-Wave.... x-10 isnt even in
> the runnings any more.

As nice as ZigBee sounds, I think I would wait until one can actually
*buy* the product and *install* the product before declaring its future
competitors "not even in the running".

bblackmoor
2005-01-06

Brandon Blackmoor

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dan wrote:
>
> I am pretty sure you can count on 1 hand how many
> times (10 times a day?) I have mentioned the site,
> that's really a great attitude you have there.

CocconTech is a good and useful site, so there's no harm done there. As
for certain attitudes, you might find the signal to noise ratio of this
newsgroup increases if you filter such people out.

bblackmoor
2005-01-06

Dave Houston

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dan <haguru@gmail.com> wrote:

>Dave Houston wrote:
>> Dan <haguru@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>wkearney99 wrote:
>>>
>>>>Yeah, sure, as was also claimed by the likes CeBus, Echelon, uPnP and a
>>>>whole host of others. I'll believe it when they start pushing out the same
>>>>range of devices, at the same or better price points, in the same volume,
>>>>from the same diversity of sales outlets with the same level of marketing
>>>>drive. Sadly most other efforts end up failing the most in the last two.
>>>>They fail to penetrate to a wide enough range of sales outlets (retail,
>>>>distribution, oem and contractor) or drop the ball on REALLY pushing the
>>>>product.
>>>>
>>>>While X-10 may be a technological piece of shit, it's well marketing and
>>>>that, sad to say, often rules the day.
>>>>
>>>>-Bill Kearney
>>>>
>>>
>>>Don't confuse the X10 'marketing machine' with the X10 protocol based
>>>devices, as far as I know, no other company is really marketing the X10
>>>(protocol) based hardware. As for CeBus, uPnP etc., you are right, but
>>>keep in mind that in this case, several of the new protocols are backed
>>>by major players in the home automation and security industry. UPB is
>>>supported by Elk, HAI, and others, Insteon is a SmartHome product, which
>>>means it will be popular (and the pricing of the Insteon hardware seems
>>>to be very competitive), and there is ZigBee hardware out there already
>>>, from phones to thermostats. I personally think that Insteon(X10+RF),
>>>UPB(Powerline based, but much better than X10) and ZigBee(RF) are here
>>>to stay. However, I don't see X10 going away for a while considering
>>>how many people have implemented it (which is why Insteon might be a
>>>winner here since it can work with X10, or RF, whichever is faster in
>>>your environment). I hate plugging my site, but check out the press
>>>releases I posted on CocoonTech.com the last few days, there is tons of
>>>news about these protocols/hardware/vendors. There is so much data in
>>>those press releases that I can't just post them here.
>>
>>
>> Leviton, PCS and SmartHome market X-10 (protocol) products.
>>
>> If Insteon were coming from anyone other than SmartHome I'd be excited but
>> SmartHome has no history of successfully introducing a new protocol and has
>> had myriad problems implementing the X-10 protocol so I'm highly dubious. So
>> far, there have been lots of press releases but no hardware (at least that I
>> know of). Still, I would love to be forced to eat my words.
>>
>> UPB costs too much and is likely to have the same problems with signal
>> suckers as X-10.
>>
>> If you hate plugging your site, why do you do it 10 times a day?
>>
>UPB has been around for several years, and the prices just got lowered
>(eventho they are set by PCS I believe), if you look around online, you
>can find the pricing, which is very similar to the Lightolier line of
>X10 switches.
>
>As for Insteon, SmartHome is showcasing the products at CES right now,
>and certain people I know are in the beta test.
>
>I am pretty sure you can count on 1 hand how many times (10 times a
>day?) I have mentioned the site, that's really a great attitude you have
>there. As I mentioned in my previous message, these press releases
>contain really useful and accurate information regarding these new
>protocols, I don't see it posted here by anyone else. At least I am
>'trying' to share knowledge in a positive way, and I am not asking
>anything in return, the site doesn't even have ads. Happy new year to
>you too!
>
>dan

You are very ill informed for someone who claims expertise. Many of the
"experts" who post to your site are equally ill informed. UPB was first
announced in press releases about a year ago and was in a show early last
year. UPB products only began appearing in the past few months. As yet,
there are not many reports from users. Given the high prices, there may not
be a lot of reports from users. All of these facts were noted here in this
news group.

What's wrong with my attitude? I just don't like ill informed nitwits
muddying the water and confusing the issues by presenting inaccurate
information. You seldom know what you're talking about and manufacturer's
press releases seldom include much useful information.

Dan

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dave Houston wrote:

>
>
> You are very ill informed for someone who claims expertise. Many of the
> "experts" who post to your site are equally ill informed. UPB was first
> announced in press releases about a year ago and was in a show early last
> year. UPB products only began appearing in the past few months. As yet,
> there are not many reports from users. Given the high prices, there may not
> be a lot of reports from users. All of these facts were noted here in this
> news group.
>
> What's wrong with my attitude? I just don't like ill informed nitwits
> muddying the water and confusing the issues by presenting inaccurate
> information. You seldom know what you're talking about and manufacturer's
> press releases seldom include much useful information.
>
>
Where did I claim I am an expert? You really should stop spreading
"inaccurate information", you know what they say about assumption, and
there is definitely no reason to insult people you have never met (it's
the internet, lighten up). I only joined here (I have been lurking here
for years) to learn more about home automation and help others when
possible, not to deal with your "expert" elitism. I am not even going
to bother responding to the rest of that post, as it is obviously just a
waste of my time, I know what I know, and I know what I have seen. I am
done with this conversation and will follow the previously mentioned
advice of adjusting my filter settings, I suggest you do the same so I
won't be 'muddying your water'.

dan

Dan Lanciani

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

In article <crii6v$dvg$2@grapevine.wam.umd.edu>, thefowle@wam.umd.edu (myren, lord) writes:

| If you're talking about the future, zigbee is going to kick the pants
| off Z-Wave. it'll provide a cheap industry standard to do everything
| z-wave does, versus z-wave which is proprietary and expensive.

Just to be clear on this, are you implying that no part of zigbee is
proprietary (meaning owned, not secret)? I ask because while both LonWorks
and CEBus were presented as "open" standards you still had to license
the technology from the patent holders if you wanted to build and sell a
product.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

Dave Houston

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dan <haguru@gmail.com> wrote:

>I only joined here (I have been lurking here
>for years) to learn more about home automation and help others when
>possible, not to deal with your "expert" elitism. I am not even going
>to bother responding to the rest of that post, as it is obviously just a
>waste of my time, I know what I know, and I know what I have seen.

Just where did you "join"?

You've been posting here for the past few weeks and nearly all of your posts
recommend your website. I've refrained from comment until today when you
posted a boatload of absolute crap.

You know very little and most of what you claim you know is incorrect. If
pointing out your false statements is insulting you, so be it.

For example:

Act's A10 uses the X-10 protocol.
Leviton DHC uses the X-10 protocol.
PCS Scenemaster uses the X-10 protocol.
Most of the products bearing SmartHome's *Linc brand use the X-10 protocol.
I believe Lightolier Compose uses the X-10 protocol but I've never seen any
complete documentation.

The first prices I recall seeing for UPB were in Worthington's print catalog
which I received in May 2004. I do not think any UPB products actually
shipped until a few months later. So UPB has been around for only a few
months, not the "several years" that you claim.

I'd say your batting average is 0.000.

Where can one buy these Zigbee phones? What Zigbee products do they control?

Dave Houston

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

ddl@danlan.*com (Dan Lanciani) wrote:

>In article <crii6v$dvg$2@grapevine.wam.umd.edu>, thefowle@wam.umd.edu (myren, lord) writes:
>
>| If you're talking about the future, zigbee is going to kick the pants
>| off Z-Wave. it'll provide a cheap industry standard to do everything
>| z-wave does, versus z-wave which is proprietary and expensive.
>
>Just to be clear on this, are you implying that no part of zigbee is
>proprietary (meaning owned, not secret)? I ask because while both LonWorks
>and CEBus were presented as "open" standards you still had to license
>the technology from the patent holders if you wanted to build and sell a
>product.

I don't know whether there are any underlying technology license fees but
the standard is available to anyone who wants to pony up $7500 or so. ;)

The most likely way for smallfry to develop Zigbee applications is to buy an
SDK from someone like Microchip and use their Zigbee chipset. That's quite
reasonable (far more reasonable than Zensys) and you don't have to muck
about with the protocol.

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> It takes less than $10 worth of hardware to record
> the RF codes and replay them verbatim...

The average thief uses nothing more sophisticated than a large screwdriver
or a heavy shoe to gain entry. Zwave is very useful for controlling lights,
appliances, thermostats and such. I probably would not use it to control
security functions.

> Unless the codes change with _each_ transmission,
> they are insecure...

Even if they change with _each_ transmission, anyone smart enough to figure
out the algorithm can get past rolling codes too. However, the likelihood
of that happening to any given user is so remote that the risk is IMO
insignificant.

> The reason for the AES encryption would appear
> to be increased sales of ZWave remotes rather
> than security.

The same can be said of any advancements. Marketing is the driving force
behind most research and development. Anyone who believes otherwise is
kidding himself.

> As for rolling codes being hackable, I haven't seen
> reports of widespread hacking of the rolling codes
> used with garage doors and security alarms...

In nearly 28 years in the alarm industry I have seen almost no reports of
hacking even of the simplest, least secure RF alarm systems around. The
reason is simple -- most burglary is drug related. Sophisticated thieves
using computers and RF recording equipment -- even the $10 stuff of which
our esteemed colleague speaks -- are the stuff of Hollywood. I speak of
security against burglary because that is IMO more of a concern than the
possibility that some neighborhood punk will turn my living room lights on
or off. The potential risk of hacking a lighting control system is low
enough that the medium doesn't merit the added cost of rolling codes or much
else.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> While X-10 may be a technological piece of shit,
> it's well marketing and that, sad to say, often
> rules the day...

Amar Bose realized the same thing long time ago. :^)

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

>> If you hate plugging your site, why do you
>> do it 10 times a day?
>
> I am pretty sure you can count on 1 hand
> how many times (10 times a day?) I have
> mentioned the site, that's really a great
> attitude you have there...

Dan,

You don't need to explain yourself to him. You're doing a good job. You
have a useful website and there's nothing wrong with mentioning it in the
context of a discussion where products or data on your site are relevant.
Also note that he routinely plugs his own website. I do the same thing,
perhaps more than most, but like you I also try to contribute to the forum.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> You are very ill informed for someone who claims
> expertise...

Translation: You had the audacity to disagree with this fellow... :^)

> What's wrong with my attitude?

For one thing, you're an arrogant, pompous, self-absorbed jerk.

> I just don't like ill informed nitwits...

or anyone who disagrees with you.

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

>> If you're talking about the future, zigbee is going to kick the pants off
>> Z-Wave.... x-10 isnt even in
>> the runnings any more.
>
> As nice as ZigBee sounds, I think I would wait
> until one can actually *buy* the product and
> *install* the product before declaring its future competitors "not even in
> the running".

Agreed. I have no axe to grind for now* concerning Zwave but from what I
see so far it's got a very strong backing. Numerous corporate giants have
bought into the technology. The list of available and soon-to-be-available
products is growing rapidly. Cost is quite competitive when compared to
other non-X10 products. As more lines come to market expect to see per
control point prices dropping even more.

* I'm talking to product managers at several of my distributors about
getting them to bring in some Zwave components. When (not if) that happens
I'll offer them in my online store.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> I don't know whether there are any underlying
> technology license fees but the standard is
> available to anyone who wants to pony up
> $7500 or so. ;)
>
> The most likely way for smallfry to develop
> Zigbee applications is to buy an SDK from
> someone like Microchip and use their Zigbee
> chipset. That's quite reasonable (far more
> reasonable than Zensys) and you don't have
> to muck about with the protocol.

Even a small fry manufacturer would consider $2500 or $7500 a drop in the
product development bucket.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

Dan Lanciani

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

In article <JNmdnRmehtY8hEPcRVn-2g@comcast.com>, robertlbass@comcast.net (Robert L. Bass) writes:

| Even a small fry manufacturer would consider $2500 or $7500 a drop in the
| product development bucket.

Yes, but I'd still like to know whether there are other costs (especially
per-unit costs) for the right to use the technology.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> Yes, but I'd still like to know whether there are
> other costs (especially per-unit costs) for the right
> to use the technology.

I'm certain there must be, Dan. Otherwise Zensys' only income would be
$2,500 per manufacturer. That wouldn't begin to cover the cost of
developing the technology.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

Frank Olson

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

"Robert L. Bass" <robertlbass@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:JNWdndzio6QEiUPcRVn-iw@comcast.com...
>> You are very ill informed for someone who claims
>> expertise...
>
> Translation: You had the audacity to disagree with this fellow... :^)
>
>> What's wrong with my attitude?
>
> For one thing, you're an arrogant, pompous, self-absorbed

<snip>.

Have you looked in the mirror lately?? :-))

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> Have you looked in the mirror lately?? :-))

Yep. Arrogant? Well, yes. Pompous, nope. Self-absorbed, naah.

Dan Lanciani

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

In article <h92dnRGJEs7t0UPcRVn-gw@comcast.com>, robertlbass@comcast.net (Robert L. Bass) writes:
| > Yes, but I'd still like to know whether there are
| > other costs (especially per-unit costs) for the right
| > to use the technology.
|
| I'm certain there must be, Dan. Otherwise Zensys' only income would be
| $2,500 per manufacturer. That wouldn't begin to cover the cost of
| developing the technology.

I'm talking about Zigbee...

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

Frank Olson

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

"Robert L. Bass" <robertlbass@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hLednQuAZZDNx0PcRVn-iQ@comcast.com...
>> Have you looked in the mirror lately?? :-))
>
> Yep. Arrogant? Well, yes. Pompous, nope. Self-absorbed, naah.

Modest?? Nope. :-)

John O

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

>> While X-10 may be a technological piece of shit,
>> it's well marketing and that, sad to say, often
>> rules the day...
>
> Amar Bose realized the same thing long time ago. :^)
Displacing X-10 in the marketplace is going to require the same thing.
Whatever the new technologies do better, their proponents need to make X-10
look like a liability in comparison. And then flood the market with that
message, and hope it sticks. Of course, the licensing (and all that stuff)
has to make sense, but marketing IS going to be the key.

Facts don't matter, which is why we have VHS, Windows, NTSC, etc.

-John O

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> | I'm certain there must be, Dan. Otherwise Zensys'
> | only income would be $2,500 per manufacturer.
> | That wouldn't begin to cover the cost of developing
> | the technology.
>
> I'm talking about Zigbee...

Oh, OK. I don't know for sure but I *assume* it's the same. Without that
there's insufficient financial incentive to carry it forward. If a protocol
is the brainchild of an industry association, it might become freely
available to all. An example would be the SIA high speed alarm transmission
format. This is basically a series of codes in a data structure which is
commonly recognized. Development costs are minimal compared to something
like Zigbee or Zwave. The entire industry profits from its free
distribution.

Zensys spent a lot of time and money developing Zwave. If they let it out
for free to every home-based operator who wants to develop a pet project the
large manufacturing clients will not be willing to pay millions of dollars
for the right to use it. Without knowing more about Zigbee I couldn't tell
you what the fee structure is. Some here seem inclined to post as fact that
which they merely assume concerning this. :^)

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

>> Yep. Arrogant? Well, yes. Pompous, nope. Self-absorbed, naah.
>
> Modest?? Nope. :-)

It's all a matter of perspective.

Dan Lanciani

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

In article <c4Kdnf6nPsULOkPcRVn-1A@comcast.com>, robertlbass@comcast.net (Robert L. Bass) writes:
| > | I'm certain there must be, Dan. Otherwise Zensys'
| > | only income would be $2,500 per manufacturer.
| > | That wouldn't begin to cover the cost of developing
| > | the technology.
| >
| > I'm talking about Zigbee...
|
| Oh, OK. I don't know for sure but I *assume* it's the same. Without that
| there's insufficient financial incentive to carry it forward.

Financial incentive to whom? Isn't Zigbee supposed to be the product of
an "open" standards process like CEBus? The problem with such processes
is that often one or more "contributors" manage to insert into the standard
a requirement to do something covered by one of their patents. I was just
wondering if this is the case with Zigbee. (I'm assuming Zigbee isn't like
LonWorks that became an "open" standard after the fact with all the patent
rights remaining proprietary to one company.)

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

Robert L. Bass

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

> Financial incentive to whom? Isn't Zigbee
> supposed to be the product of an "open"
> standards process like CEBus?

I don't really know. IME most of these open standards end up costing
anyway. :)

myren, lord

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

Dan Lanciani wrote:
> In article <JNmdnRmehtY8hEPcRVn-2g@comcast.com>, robertlbass@comcast.net (Robert L. Bass) writes:
>
> | Even a small fry manufacturer would consider $2500 or $7500 a drop in the
> | product development bucket.
>
> Yes, but I'd still like to know whether there are other costs (especially
> per-unit costs) for the right to use the technology.
>
> Dan Lanciani
> ddl@danlan.*com

i was pretty concerned about supplementary costs of zigbee. best
response i've gotten yet has been here:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=132777&cid=11086010&pid=11086010&threshold=0&mode=nested&commentsort=3&op=Change

"word on the street" is the spec goes public Q1 of `05. after that,
expect some free open source stacks to crop up.

we shall see
Myren

Dan Lanciani

24-01-2005, 11:41 AM

In article <cs46td$nsf$1@grapevine.wam.umd.edu>, thefowle@wam.umd.edu (myren, lord) writes:
| Dan Lanciani wrote:
| > In article <JNmdnRmehtY8hEPcRVn-2g@comcast.com>, robertlbass@comcast.net (Robert L. Bass) writes:
| >
| > | Even a small fry manufacturer would consider $2500 or $7500 a drop in the
| > | product development bucket.
| >
| > Yes, but I'd still like to know whether there are other costs (especially
| > per-unit costs) for the right to use the technology.
| >
| > Dan Lanciani
| > ddl@danlan.*com
|
| i was pretty concerned about supplementary costs of zigbee. best
| response i've gotten yet has been here:
|
| http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=132777&cid=11086010&pid=11086010&threshold=0&mode=nested&commentsort=3&op=Change
|
| "word on the street" is the spec goes public Q1 of `05. after that,
| expect some free open source stacks to crop up.

If the version of an "open" standard described in that thread (free for
noncommercial and academic use only) accurately characterizes the intent
of Zigbee, I wouldn't count on free stack implementations. I suppose a
more basic question is whether you are free to implement even base 802.15.4
without paying roaylties either directly or as part of the cost of a radio
chip.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com