Do you have any plans to support x10 devices?
There’s an X10 device for LinuxMCE, which actually should compile and run fine on Vera. We haven’t tried it though. We’re not intending to put a lot of effort into X10, though, since it’s not expected to be deployed a lot in the future.
I understand your point to concentrate on the new protocol rather then on legacy stuff, but given how widely X10 deployed in US, from mass sales perspective it would be smart move to declare “Yes we do support your 20-years old HA network - get Vera now and upgrade your HA network later”.
X10 users are huge potential market for you. Exposing them to Z-Wave as a side effect is not a bad thing either.
Another benefit is X10 is cheap. A Z-wave outlet costs $30-50 (or more) but a comparable X10 outlet (as far as switching capability) is $20 and can be had used/ebay for less.
It’s so cheap for a reason. X10 is inferior technology - very insecure and unreliable. These days it worth not much more then those 1.5Gb hard drives back from 1990s. It worth supporting only to boost sales, and to motivate current X10 owners to upgrade.
Supporting X10 is likely to drive your support costs through the roof. If big companies like GE and IBM give up on the technology, that’s not a good sign.
Here’s another vote for X-10 support. One could “support” it via software (or plug-ins) and expressly state that this would not be covered by customer support for Vera users, in contrast to Z-wave applications.
I would argue these reasons to consider this: 1) many individuals interested in Z-wave will either be migrating from X-10 or have experimented with it (and would be enticed by the ability to use their legacy devices while transitioning to the better Z-wave replacements); and 2) some deficiencies for items not yet well represented in the current Z-wave catalog (e.g., inexpensive motion detectors) could be temporarily addressed by X-10; 3) there aren’t any inexpensive self-standing X-10 control devices with software interfaces. You could likely capture a fair amount of business from people not interested in dismantling their X-10 networks but who would prefer Vera to other control solutions (e.g., remotes or PC interfaces requiring a computer to stay running).
We all know X-10 has its problems (or we wouldn’t be purchasing or considering Vera) but it would seem wise to consider support.
Another vote for X10 support and I totally agree with ksquared’s reasons. Sure, X10 is inferior technology, but anyone who has dabbled with home automation in the last 30 years probably has some X10 modules. When I tell others about Vera, the first thing they want to know, is it compatible with X10. Why ignore that huge market of existing X10 automated homes? Vera is a flexible platform and could easily serve as a technology bridge between old(X10) and new(Z-Wave). Consider the huge market of existing X10 automated homes and how Vera could rescue all those home automation enthusiasts that already have hundreds(maybe thousands) of dollars invested in X10 modules. Existing X10 automated homes that already have a X10 powerline transceiver module (PowerLinc or TW523), may only need a $15 USB-to-RS232 adapter to interface to one of Vera’s USB ports.
I’m not suggesting MiCasaVerde change the objective of simplified setup and operation for total novices, but offer a X10 interface as an extra feature for those already experienced with X10. That is, don’t formerly give technical support for X10, just refer questions to the forums. Maybe similar to router manufacturers not formerly supporting hacking of their routers.
I think that is a good approach.
I’d like to add my voice to those requesting at least minimal support for X-10. I have a bunch of that stuff in hand. In simple applications it’s enough. Vera should be able to do simple things with it.
Of course you should limit your support exposure. Or better yet, make money through selling such support when required.
Michael
What would helpful is a how-to guide in adding interfaces such as X-10 to the vera.
There are other issues besides the device driver such as web page changes, etc.
Maybe even use x-10 as a case study.
I’m interested in adding RFXCOM support as it supports Home Easy devices that common in the UK. RFXCOM also supports X-10, HomeEasy, OregonScientific and many other protocols.
Regards,
Daniel
I’d rather see the devs spending time improving the Z-wave support. X-10 is a nice feature, but lots of work still needs to be done on the z-wave end of things. Z-wave is what the product is geared towards.
Sure, but keep in mind that z-wave is proprietary commercial technology which must bring revenue to zensys - or it will fail. There were some talks on Intermatic leaving z-wave alliance… why would it do so?
Mass awareness of z-wave is unsatisfactory - in part because it’s not user friendly enough for non-techie users. Most prominent target audience that could actually appreciate what z-wave is capable of are existing X-10 users.
Sure, it’s great to support an already widely implemented architecture. But unnecessary in this case. We want to move forward in home automation. Z-wave is a much more capable system than X-10/ Fact of the matter is X-10 is old and cheap technology that is tempermental in many cases. Focus for Vera should be on rock solid performance of Z-Wave and then offering newer ways of implementing Z-Wave. If you try to support too many different technologies in the platform it gets confusing for developers and even more confusing for customers. And over long periods of development time you end up with a mediocre product, take LinuxMCE for example. LinuxMCE is trying to support so many of the same technologies at once, the devs are overwhelmed and the project is not even close to what they’ve promised to deliver.
I personally would love x10 support. I don’t think that extra support for developers would be needed. It looks like the newest Luaupnp is integrating the core of it already.
If support for the CM11A could be added to the device template and adding a house/unit code address for individual devices, then generic on/off/dims should work like zwave devices.
Im in agreement that X10 support would be great as most of us were early adopters and used the low cost X10 modules to get started. I have 15+ X10 device modules and sensors, and would love to have Vera support an option to add manual X10 devices and set codes. I’d love support for a firecacker (see CM17A - X10Wiki) or the CM11A, both serial devices. With core X10 support, I can then plop a USB - RS232 converter and use a firecracker or CM11A
Another possibility would be to have a Zwave to X10 Bridge product. This would be a single Zwave module that can accept Zwave signals and then retransmit to the X10 modules. Not sure how this would work but I think it’s a possibility.
Im not sure if X10 makes a USB firecracker stick…then we could simply add support for that device and you could just plug it into the back of Vera
Wayne Dalton still has it’s Wireless X-10 Bridge Control as coming soon. So let’s hope
http://www.wayne-dalton.com/access/access_controllers.asp
Given how busy these guys are, I don’t think X10 can possibly be integrated any time soon. However, to make this bridge isn’t that difficult: HomeZIX (running on PC) supports all three systems - it can interact with X10 devices and post JSON commands to Vera on X10 events. It also can be used to add IM and Voice control to Vera.
The other way, Vera events to trigger X10 commands, is a bit more complicated. I suppose LUA will let post URLs on Vera events. The same HomeZIX can be controlled by simple socket connection, so I guess we need Tomcat to accept HTTP POST, connect to HomeZIX, and send the appropriate command, which in turn would make it issue X10 command…
When the lua stuff is done a cm11a should be added via a usb-to-serial adapter to Vera. The device templates hopefully will somehow be modified as well to add a Port/Channel Number for these new rs232/ir devices from the looks of the LuaUPNP page on the wiwki
http://wiki.micasaverde.com/index.php/LuaUPnP#Writing_the_Lua_Code
Then some lua code to parse and send x10 data over the serial port. It’s already been done many times over in perl, so tweaking for lua shouldn’t be all that difficult.
http://cpansearch.perl.org/src/BBIRTH/ControlX10-CM11-2.09/CM11.pm
X10 Protocol Below
http://www.x10pro.com/pro/pdf/cm11a_protocol.txt
My hope is that it will be added to the “Existing List” database and work out of the box. If not,a wiki post can give instructions on how to do it.
I am currently trying to decide what home automation package to migrate to (currently using defunct Premise Sys - remember them?).
Anyway, I have so many X10 devices ($$$) that it is a driving factor in my choice. I have resolved down to Homeseer and MiCasaVerde. I like MiCasaVerde more in every way except lack of X10 support (which Homeseer of course supports). If MiCasaVerde provided even a minimal command only (On/Off/Dim) X10 bridge capability, my decision would be complete in favor of MiCasaVerde. I would even be willing to pay extra $100 or more for the X10 bridge feature to save my $1000s in X10 hardware.
I would imagine there are many in the market with my situation. Could be a GREAT opportunity for MiCasaVerde and/or a third party plug-in developer.