CM15A issues

[Bob Linca]

A number of CM15A users have experienced problems with the unit when it is
disconnected from the PC. A thread ("loop testing") currently running in the
X10.com forum might be of interest:

http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid=000017&topid=3956&numof=

Bob

[Dave Houston]

You might try connecting a single wire from the PC chassis to Vss inside the
CM15A. The GNDs may be different when the USB cable is connected vs.
unconnected.

"Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote:

>A number of CM15A users have experienced problems with the unit when it is
>disconnected from the PC. A thread ("loop testing") currently running in the
>X10.com forum might be of interest:
>
>http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid=000017&topid=3956&numof=
>
>Bob
>

[Uncle Woody]

I looked at all the complaints in the X10 forum on the CM15A per the
link above. Mine is behaving much the same as a lot of other folks -
stops working after 2 days. People are complaining that X10 has not
announced the problem and tech support is not responding. The thread
in that forum has not been updated since 12/20, so X10 must have
terminated it. I'm pretty pissed, as I spent a lot of time and good
money on this. What state is X10 located? Sounds like it is time to
compalin to the Attorney General.

[AZ Woody]

x10.com, a div of X10 Wireless Tech Inc
3824 N 5th St, suite C
North Las Vegas, NV 89032

I do seem to recall that "x10 Pro", the main x10 person on the forum
announced that he'd be gone for the holidays starting about 12/20. I did
see some posts concerning these issues on the forums today, but it doesn't
sound as if a fix is available. It does seem that many folks are getting
upset (rightfully so).


"Uncle Woody" <scott.t.wood@gm.com> wrote in message
news:1105486894.080312.172530@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> I looked at all the complaints in the X10 forum on the CM15A per the
> link above. Mine is behaving much the same as a lot of other folks -
> stops working after 2 days. People are complaining that X10 has not
> announced the problem and tech support is not responding. The thread
> in that forum has not been updated since 12/20, so X10 must have
> terminated it. I'm pretty pissed, as I spent a lot of time and good
> money on this. What state is X10 located? Sounds like it is time to
> compalin to the Attorney General.
>

[Jack Ak]

Did you miss the 30 day return window on the CM15A?

You might want to study this page before complaining to
an Attorney General...
http://www.x10.com/products3/return_policy.htm

Note the terms of the One Year limited warranty and the
toll free phone number for questions about the warranty.

"Uncle Woody" <scott.t.wood@gm.com> wrote in message news:1105486894.080312.172530@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> I looked at all the complaints in the X10 forum on the CM15A per the
> link above. Mine is behaving much the same as a lot of other folks -
> stops working after 2 days. People are complaining that X10 has not
> announced the problem and tech support is not responding. The thread
> in that forum has not been updated since 12/20, so X10 must have
> terminated it. I'm pretty pissed, as I spent a lot of time and good
> money on this. What state is X10 located? Sounds like it is time to
> compalin to the Attorney General.
>

[Uncle Woody]

Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:

http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid=000151&topid=4089&numof=
Finally a response from someone at X10!

[Uncle Woody]

Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:

http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid=000151&topid=4089&numof=
Finally a response from someone at X10!

[Bob Linca]

I have two CM15A's, and one is definitely a better timekeeper, and more
immune to power interruptions than the other. The main difference between
the two units, is the number on a sticker that is on the IC. I think it's a
firmware number. The unit with the higher version number is the more
reliable of the two. Also, in the more recent unit, the IC is socketed.

Here's their firmware numbers:

Unit received in November: P10792E
Unit received in December: P10792I

I'm wondering if it is this number that we have to check to be sure that we
have one of the better units.

What version is yours?

Bob


"Uncle Woody" <scott.t.wood@gm.com> wrote in message
news:1106100499.108829.228390@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:
>
>
http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid=000151&topid=4089&numof=
> Finally a response from someone at X10!
>

[Art Todesco]

Uncle Woody wrote:
> Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:
>
> http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid=000151&topid=4089&numof=
> Finally a response from someone at X10!
>
I can't get this link to work. Anyone else having this problem?

[Dave Houston]

Mine is socketed so I assumed all were. What are the manufacturing date
codes (round paper sticker on the outside of the case) on the two you have?
Mine is "04J41". It may not be worth proceeding with my daughterboard design
if X-10 is not using a socket for the MCU.

"Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I have two CM15A's, and one is definitely a better timekeeper, and more
>immune to power interruptions than the other. The main difference between
>the two units, is the number on a sticker that is on the IC. I think it's a
>firmware number. The unit with the higher version number is the more
>reliable of the two. Also, in the more recent unit, the IC is socketed.
>
>Here's their firmware numbers:
>
> Unit received in November: P10792E
> Unit received in December: P10792I
>
>I'm wondering if it is this number that we have to check to be sure that we
>have one of the better units.
>
>What version is yours?
>
>Bob
>
>
>"Uncle Woody" <scott.t.wood@gm.com> wrote in message
>news:1106100499.108829.228390@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>> Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:
>>
>>
>http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid=000151&topid=4089&numof=
>> Finally a response from someone at X10!
>>
>

[Charles Sullivan]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:22:40 -0600, Art Todesco wrote:

> Uncle Woody wrote:
>> Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:
>>
>> http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid=000151&topid=4089&numof=
>> Finally a response from someone at X10!
>>
> I can't get this link to work. Anyone else having this problem?

I just now tried it and it works, although with a very slow
response time - about 25 seconds.

[Bob Linca]

Unit 1 (P10792E) Date Code: 04J41
Unit 2 (P10792I) Date Code: 04J44

In unit 1 the IC (MCU?) is not socketed. In unit 2 it is socketed!

Bob


"Dave Houston" <nobody@whocares.com> wrote in message
news:41f1a2dd.90780553@nntp.fuse.net...
> Mine is socketed so I assumed all were. What are the manufacturing date
> codes (round paper sticker on the outside of the case) on the two you
have?
> Mine is "04J41". It may not be worth proceeding with my daughterboard
design
> if X-10 is not using a socket for the MCU.
>
> "Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I have two CM15A's, and one is definitely a better timekeeper, and more
> >immune to power interruptions than the other. The main difference between
> >the two units, is the number on a sticker that is on the IC. I think it's
a
> >firmware number. The unit with the higher version number is the more
> >reliable of the two. Also, in the more recent unit, the IC is socketed.
> >
> >Here's their firmware numbers:
> >
> > Unit received in November: P10792E
> > Unit received in December: P10792I
> >
> >I'm wondering if it is this number that we have to check to be sure that
we
> >have one of the better units.
> >
> >What version is yours?
> >
> >Bob
> >
> >
> >"Uncle Woody" <scott.t.wood@gm.com> wrote in message
> >news:1106100499.108829.228390@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> >> Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:
> >>
> >>
>
>http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid
=000151&topid=4089&numof=
> >> Finally a response from someone at X10!
> >>
> >
>
>

[Dave Houston]

There's no obvious pattern there. All three were made in the same month.
Mine and your oldest one were made during the same week and one of those is
socketed while one is not. Whether or not the MCU is socketed makes an
enormous difference in the potential market for a daughterboard. It's not
practical unless the MCU is socketed.

The only layout I can come up with that fits the space requires surface
mount headers to plug into the socket. I'd be very concerned about users
loosening those while soldering them to the main board. Where the MCU is not
socketed it would require soldering a socket in place of the MCU so the
daughterboard could be plugged in.

"Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Unit 1 (P10792E) Date Code: 04J41
>Unit 2 (P10792I) Date Code: 04J44
>
>In unit 1 the IC (MCU?) is not socketed. In unit 2 it is socketed!
>
>Bob
>
>
>"Dave Houston" <nobody@whocares.com> wrote in message
>news:41f1a2dd.90780553@nntp.fuse.net...
>> Mine is socketed so I assumed all were. What are the manufacturing date
>> codes (round paper sticker on the outside of the case) on the two you
>have?
>> Mine is "04J41". It may not be worth proceeding with my daughterboard
>design
>> if X-10 is not using a socket for the MCU.
>>
>> "Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I have two CM15A's, and one is definitely a better timekeeper, and more
>> >immune to power interruptions than the other. The main difference between
>> >the two units, is the number on a sticker that is on the IC. I think it's
>a
>> >firmware number. The unit with the higher version number is the more
>> >reliable of the two. Also, in the more recent unit, the IC is socketed.
>> >
>> >Here's their firmware numbers:
>> >
>> > Unit received in November: P10792E
>> > Unit received in December: P10792I
>> >
>> >I'm wondering if it is this number that we have to check to be sure that
>we
>> >have one of the better units.
>> >
>> >What version is yours?
>> >
>> >Bob
>> >
>> >
>> >"Uncle Woody" <scott.t.wood@gm.com> wrote in message
>> >news:1106100499.108829.228390@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>> >> Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&postid
>=000151&topid=4089&numof=
>> >> Finally a response from someone at X10!
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>

[Bob Linca]

Your comment, "There's no obvious pattern there.", made me go and check the
units again. Having done so, I can confirm that what I stated previously was
accurate.

So far though, we know that two out of three *are* socketed!

Bob


"Dave Houston" <nobody@whocares.com> wrote in message
news:41f0e380.73650257@nntp.fuse.net...
> There's no obvious pattern there. All three were made in the same month.
> Mine and your oldest one were made during the same week and one of those
is
> socketed while one is not. Whether or not the MCU is socketed makes an
> enormous difference in the potential market for a daughterboard. It's not
> practical unless the MCU is socketed.
>
> The only layout I can come up with that fits the space requires surface
> mount headers to plug into the socket. I'd be very concerned about users
> loosening those while soldering them to the main board. Where the MCU is
not
> socketed it would require soldering a socket in place of the MCU so the
> daughterboard could be plugged in.
>
> "Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Unit 1 (P10792E) Date Code: 04J41
> >Unit 2 (P10792I) Date Code: 04J44
> >
> >In unit 1 the IC (MCU?) is not socketed. In unit 2 it is socketed!
> >
> >Bob
> >
> >
> >"Dave Houston" <nobody@whocares.com> wrote in message
> >news:41f1a2dd.90780553@nntp.fuse.net...
> >> Mine is socketed so I assumed all were. What are the manufacturing date
> >> codes (round paper sticker on the outside of the case) on the two you
> >have?
> >> Mine is "04J41". It may not be worth proceeding with my daughterboard
> >design
> >> if X-10 is not using a socket for the MCU.
> >>
> >> "Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I have two CM15A's, and one is definitely a better timekeeper, and
more
> >> >immune to power interruptions than the other. The main difference
between
> >> >the two units, is the number on a sticker that is on the IC. I think
it's
> >a
> >> >firmware number. The unit with the higher version number is the more
> >> >reliable of the two. Also, in the more recent unit, the IC is
socketed.
> >> >
> >> >Here's their firmware numbers:
> >> >
> >> > Unit received in November: P10792E
> >> > Unit received in December: P10792I
> >> >
> >> >I'm wondering if it is this number that we have to check to be sure
that
> >we
> >> >have one of the better units.
> >> >
> >> >What version is yours?
> >> >
> >> >Bob
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >"Uncle Woody" <scott.t.wood@gm.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:1106100499.108829.228390@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> >> >> Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
>
>>http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&posti
d
> >=000151&topid=4089&numof=
> >> >> Finally a response from someone at X10!
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

[Bob Linca]

I've just seen inside a third CM15A (04J44, P10792I), and the MCU is
socketed.

Bob


"Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UWhId.14115$Ka6.97975@news1.mts.net...
> Your comment, "There's no obvious pattern there.", made me go and check
the
> units again. Having done so, I can confirm that what I stated previously
was
> accurate.
>
> So far though, we know that two out of three *are* socketed!
>
> Bob
>
>
> "Dave Houston" <nobody@whocares.com> wrote in message
> news:41f0e380.73650257@nntp.fuse.net...
> > There's no obvious pattern there. All three were made in the same month.
> > Mine and your oldest one were made during the same week and one of those
> is
> > socketed while one is not. Whether or not the MCU is socketed makes an
> > enormous difference in the potential market for a daughterboard. It's
not
> > practical unless the MCU is socketed.
> >
> > The only layout I can come up with that fits the space requires surface
> > mount headers to plug into the socket. I'd be very concerned about users
> > loosening those while soldering them to the main board. Where the MCU is
> not
> > socketed it would require soldering a socket in place of the MCU so the
> > daughterboard could be plugged in.
> >
> > "Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Unit 1 (P10792E) Date Code: 04J41
> > >Unit 2 (P10792I) Date Code: 04J44
> > >
> > >In unit 1 the IC (MCU?) is not socketed. In unit 2 it is socketed!
> > >
> > >Bob
> > >
> > >
> > >"Dave Houston" <nobody@whocares.com> wrote in message
> > >news:41f1a2dd.90780553@nntp.fuse.net...
> > >> Mine is socketed so I assumed all were. What are the manufacturing
date
> > >> codes (round paper sticker on the outside of the case) on the two you
> > >have?
> > >> Mine is "04J41". It may not be worth proceeding with my daughterboard
> > >design
> > >> if X-10 is not using a socket for the MCU.
> > >>
> > >> "Bob Linca" <AbbyNormal@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >I have two CM15A's, and one is definitely a better timekeeper, and
> more
> > >> >immune to power interruptions than the other. The main difference
> between
> > >> >the two units, is the number on a sticker that is on the IC. I think
> it's
> > >a
> > >> >firmware number. The unit with the higher version number is the more
> > >> >reliable of the two. Also, in the more recent unit, the IC is
> socketed.
> > >> >
> > >> >Here's their firmware numbers:
> > >> >
> > >> > Unit received in November: P10792E
> > >> > Unit received in December: P10792I
> > >> >
> > >> >I'm wondering if it is this number that we have to check to be sure
> that
> > >we
> > >> >have one of the better units.
> > >> >
> > >> >What version is yours?
> > >> >
> > >> >Bob
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >"Uncle Woody" <scott.t.wood@gm.com> wrote in message
> > >> >news:1106100499.108829.228390@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> > >> >> Re: CM15A Controller problems - Check this out:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
>
>>http://www.x10.com/news/msgb/index.cgi?board=ahp-general&action=read&posti
> d
> > >=000151&topid=4089&numof=
> > >> >> Finally a response from someone at X10!
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
>
>