Which is better Z-wave or ZigBee & who has got a better future ahead?

[naveen]

Hi
 
Z-wave & ZigBee both form MESH network & operate the same way as each other more or less. If I have choose between Zigbee & Z-wave as an end user which would be better. 
 
Also from the point of launching a new range of home automation products for my company which technology out of both is better from the point that any range of product we may launch based on either of the technology, should be able to survive the market for another 5 yrs or so. 
 
Personally I feel Zigbee should be the choice. What do you guys feel?
 
Naveen

 

[BraveSirRobbin]

What software do you plan to offer/support with your 'new' products?

 

[pete_c]

Welcome to the Cocoontech forum Naveen!
 
Your topic has and will spark some lively conversations.  
 
Here my thoughts go to the early days of simple computations initially analogous to a wired meshing that did involve routing entries "by hand" and watching what would happen to choosing network paths based on speed and "getting the most bang" for the money.  
 
Here is a clip and paste from something I wrote back in the 1990's.  That said this is a tangent to your "question" and its mostly just jabber from me....relating to some "old" stuff today and a little document I wrote and called "root bridge" and specfically relating to Spanning Tree Algorithms (STA)...
 

Why is the Root Bridge important?  The purpose of the configuration BPDU is to notify other switches on all the connected networks of the current topology.  How is the Root Bridge selected? Based on the bridge priority and address, the other switches automatically detect loops and negotiate a single path (link).  Why is it important to have the Root Bridge close to the center of the network?  The switch or switches involved in this primary data path (link) then come on-line and the switches with lower priority involved in the backup path(s) remain in standby.  A topology change BPDU is made up of only 4 data bytes (plus pad) that contain the Protocol Identifier, Protocol Version Identifier and BPDU Type.  The purpose of the topology change BPDU is to notify other switches that a change has taken place.  The other switch then re-spans to form a legal topology.

 
Here there are mostly Z-Wave users as that is prevalent here in the US.  Then you also have a sprinkling of Zigbee users.  Numbers are different.
 
That said RF in itself is magical somewhat and its distribution inside of a home can be somewhat dependant on the materials utilize for walls and floors et al.  IE: playing here now with a little "do what" access point and repeater.  That said it works fine in one room on the second floor of my home. Signals though are very poor some 100 feet away and down one floor making it sort of disfunctional somewhat.
 
Wireless and batteries brings the whole wireless meshing stuff to a new world.  I remember bugging Intel once about when a wireless network device would be able to wake up with a magic packet and still stay "alive" when asleep in a routing table.  Its been many years now...

 

[az1324]

At this point it feels like zwave is more consumer and zigbee is more pro/corporate/industrial.  But then you have smartthings and iris using both zwave and zigbee radios and revolv which has 7 radios.  I would say unless you have a specific marketing strategy that builds around name recognition of zigbee/zwave then don't support the closed working groups with yearly membership fees and instead pick an open standard like 6lowpan with alljoyn.

 

[Dean Roddey]

If it's a matter of pure technological superiority, clearly Zigbee is way ahead. Unfortunately the best technology doesn't always win, and a lot of it will depend on various marketing and licensing factors and a fair chunk of luck (good or bad.) I think that clearly Z-Wave limited its own acceptance in the general automation community for some time, due to restrictive licensing and never bothering to create an official interface to Z-Wave for automation systems (this was done by third parties and was always a bit of a hack.) The Leviton vRCOP now widely used just hides most of that hack from the automation system, but still it is pretty limited in what it can do compared to a more direct connection. But the more direction connection is must more complicated and difficult to support, and costs a lot more to get the info required. Early on it cost a whole lot more.
 
Z-wave ended up splitting off from the Zigbee crowed, to get out first, but went forward before the technology was totally baked, and it's had its growing pains since. Zigbee held out until it was much more mature and capable, but may have lost too much headway in the process, who knows. Certainly for automation systems looking for wireless communications within its own sphere, Zigbee makes a lot more sense, i.e. wireless keypads, touch screens, sensors, etc... The question I guess is how long it will be before manufacturers of the all various third party widgets (lights, locks, etc...) support Zibgee as well, and for what price premium.
 
If the price isn't too much higher, and the support is approximately as broad, I would hope that Zigbee's superior technology would win out. Though it also seems that, like Z-Wave, they really haven't addressed a formal, and somewhat simpler, interface to the Zigbee network. Third parties again seem to have been left to do this, right?

 

[Bragi]

Hi all.
Interesting thread. Considering that I am currently working on a product that combines both zigbee and z-wave protocols into 1 single device (allowing for communication accross protocols), consumers might soon be free to use whatever they like.

 

[elcano]

Z-wave is faaaaarrrrr from perfect, but it is what it is and has been used by many consumers for many years now.

Zigbee's history is maybe as long, but a little more complex. So much that I decided to stop following it. The last time that I checked Zigbee was like a caricature of Bluetooth (and we know haw bad and long was bluetooth's start) . Bluetooth is not for Home Automation, but both are committee derived 'open' standards.

Both consist of a stack with a communication layer and an application layer. But Zigbee application layer is extensible and can be used to tie in proprietary features that are not interoperable among vendors. My perception was that there was a dominant committee member ensuring that the definition of the HA application profile was compatible with their vendor lock-in business model.
As far as I knew, you couldn't expect regular Zigbee devices to be used as drop-in replacement for Control 4 branded devices on a Control 4 network. If you compare it with bluetooth, you can mix and match devices with almost no loss of features.

Zigbee defined a standard that would run on cheap, low memory and cpu devices. But before Zigbee HA was even adopted, they introduced a Zigbee Pro standard that required more memory and cpu, thus increasing the cost of the devices. The new standard was designed with BMS (building management systems) in mind - the kind of system required for buildings and maybe, huge mansions. But all zigbee systems that you could find in the market were using the more expensive Zigbee Pro devices.
Ironically, Bluetooth moved in the other direction by launching the Low Energy standard with very cheap controllers. The jury is still out on this one. I think that I'll take it about two more years to catch on.

Finally, I just read that it is not compatible with the GPL license. This was hard to believe for me, since I had the perception that Control4 runs on top of Linux. I'm not a GPL fan, but I guess, if you leech from the GPL..... Unless, maybe they are BSD instead.

Anyway, with the high license fees I don't think you will ever see hobbyists using Zigbee. The maker movement has grown to the point of being profitable (ask LadyAda). Sad.

Wikipedia says that all the fees and certifications are required because a single misbehaving device can drain the batteries of the rest of the devices. If you tell me that that statement was written by a foe trying to spread FUD about Zigbee I would believe you. This looks like an easy way to cause damage to a wireless network. Please tell me that this impossible. Please.

I'd love to read replies clarifying how my perception is wrong, or how have Zigbee successfully evolved to reach the interoperability that bluetooth has. IMHO, a standard without interoperability benefits vendors and developers (everything is half baked), but presents almost no benefit to consumers.

With my limited and old knowledge, the proprietary standard looks more attractive if I where going to start today.

 

[elcano]

BTW, Bluetooth changed their license to make it GPL compatible. I guess it is the best way to reach all the corners of the technology world.

 

[pete_c]

Question and a bit of a tangent relating to OP.
 
Currently my LV LED lighting is  using 5 smaller DIN mounted 12VDC regulated power supplies for some 12 zones of LED outdoor LV lamps.
 
I want to divide up the 12 zones such that I can switch each zone separately via my automation stuff. 
 
Currently playing with remote controled multicolored 12VDC LED lamps.  Seems to work OK right now.
 
Short term I will most likely purchase a multi solenoid RF switch and mode/hack some means of RF control. 
 
Long term the outdoor 12VDC LV lighting will just be using some storage batteries charged up by solar panels.
 
Does a 12 or 24 VDC always powered Zigbee or Z-Wave switch exist?
 
Does same said switch exist with multiple addressable switches on it  (like 12 maybe?).
 
Can I build one of these in a DIY endeavor?

 

[Dean Roddey]

If worrying about a single device being unhappy causing issues, imagine the concerns with automation systems being directly allowed onto the network? Like Zen-Sys, they don't appear to have created any sort of simplified, official on-ramp for automation systems, which means that those systems will be just like a regular node on the network and have to deal with all of the complexity that entails, which will I'm sure leave plenty of room for sub-optimal behavior.

 

[ano]

Its really not fair to compare the two standards because they are very different.  Z-Wave emerged as a specific solution to a problem, basically a wireless replacement for X-10 like devices.  Zen Sys is a business and its goal was to sell a product and make money at it.  It was designed by a group of engineers there to be cost effective, and to get the job done. For the most part it does that. But being a technology created by one company and licensed in limited ways, it is also limited. Because z-Wave chips are all designed from the same parent, devices all inter-operate and they generally operate how they should. As a negative, like most commercial products, the goal was to get the product out the door and start getting revenue from it. They didn't spend a whole lot of time future-proofing it, because that would cost money, and there wouldn't even be a future unless they started selling these things.
 
ZigBee originated from the IEEE and was a standard created by committee.  There was no pressure to quickly commercialize it, instead MANY stakeholders wanted an open very flexible technology they could use for future products.  ZigBee started with some specific goals, but has more and more companies started to put their input into the standard, it got very far-reaching.  In many ways, ZigBee is much bigger than Bluetooth, because by its nature of being a very low-power mesh wireless network, it fits into more applications than does Bluetooth, which was envisioned as a type of wireless USB cable replacement from the start. Bluetooth is about low-power point-to-point short-range communications, or at least it was at the start. ZigBee is about very low  power longer-range communications. Lower throughput, longer battery life, longer range.
 
The good part of ZigBee, its flexibility, is that also is its Achilles heel.  Because the standard was designed to meet so many applications, and there were so many stakeholders involved, it took a LONG time to develop.  In addition, because Z-Wave was doing just fine moving along in the home automation area, this was the one area where ZigBee has lagged, because if your company is going to sell commercial home automation products, why not use Z-Wave, which has traction, instead of ZigBee, with little customer base?  A few companies, like Control4 saw the advantages of ZigBee, and since outside interoperability wasn't an issue wasn't a concern, they went with ZigBee over the more popular Z-Wave because they saw the potential and cost was not the biggest concern for their customers.
 
For anyone that doesn't know, ZigBee is a whole lot more than a home automation chip technology. It uses an 802.15.4 radio standard that is now being used by a standard called RF4CE that eventually will replace IR remotes. (DirecTV, Sony, and many others already use it.) In addition ZigBee has many types of profiles used in all different industries, most of which are way beyond what Z-Wave could even dream about. For example the Philips Hue bulb uses ZigBee lightlink. The Cosmopolitan in Las Vegas has all its lights controlled by ZigBee. Millions of smartmeters and electric car chargers use the ZigBee Smart Energy profile. Medical products communicate over ZigBee. And new ZigBee "profiles" are being introduced all the time. The ZigBee chips are the same for all these uses, but the firmware is different.
 
Eventually more companies in the home automation space will start offering many more products, but ZigBee chips need to get cheaper first. ZigBee is MUCH more complex than Z-Wave and as such chips cost more. ZigBee chips are firmware upgradable over the wireless network, and they have a MUCH larger program space. Z-Wave chips are much simpler and not upgradable. ZigBee can also be MUCH more secure than Z-Wave, to the point where ZigBee can be used for very secure applications.
 
There is NO question that in the next 5-10 years we will get to the point where ZigBee chips, because of their high volume, will become cheaper than Z-Wave chips in the home automation area, and more companies will start making products for them.  At this point you may see many Z-Wave companies flipping over to ZigBee, and the number of the Z-Wave products will decrease in number. But this will take time. Years.
 
So which is "better?" We'll I don't think anyone that really understands the technology would say that Z-Wave is technologically "better" than ZigBee, but it certainly Z-wave is cheaper and there are more Z-Wave devices to pick from currently.  Which has a better "future?" That depends how far your "future" is.  At some point the available number of ZigBee home automation devices will surpass Z-Wave. This could be in 2 years, or 5 years, or 10 years.
 
This area is no different than any other area. No one technology dominates forever.  If the devices available in Z-Wave meet your needs, and you can do what you want with it, why do you need to look any further?  If you want the future, and are willing to pay more for it and have limited device choices for a few years, ZigBee might be the way to go.  ZigBee is unstoppable at this point. But when it will be the most popular wireless home automation standard is an unknown.
 
As a disclaimer, I use UPB for most lighting, and use ZigBee for my 4 thermostats, 3 door locks, two pool pumps, and two lights. ZigBee works great. I have never used Z-Wave. I also was a wireless analyst who consulted with big companies on wireless technologies, and I have good relationships with both the ZigBee Alliance and the Z-Wave Alliance.

 

[elcano]

Thanks ano. Very insightful. Makes sense.

Moreover, I think that Zigbee has other challenges ahead that will influence how strong it will get to be in the consumer sector. Zigbee HA and RF4CE need to create brands that are strong, unique and distinguishable. When a consumer needs a replacement remote for their Sony they shouldn't have to return to the store because they selected an incompatible remote. Likewise, when they go to Amazon, Radio Shack or Home Depot to buy a thermostat, sensor or controllable patio lamp.
The Zigbee brand is an amorphous thing that has no significance even for the advanced early adopter. Actually, it means too many things.
The best analogy is uPnP and DLNA. UPnP is a generic term that has no meaning for the consumer and can actually mean a lot more than media streaming. Then they invented DLNA. A poor implementation, in my opinion, but much better than uPnP.
If I were to develop a low throughput mesh solution I might use Zigbee. But as a consumer the answer is not that easy.
BTW, I use UPB too and it has served me well with few exceptions. The reason for not going Z-wave was (several years ago) that my house is made of concrete and all the gang boxes are metallic. I had RF 'range anxiety'. RF could work, but I didn't want to take the risk.

 

[ano]

You are exactly correct that ZigBee doesn't have a brand.  That is a big difference between Z-Wave and ZigBee. Z-Wave is a product sold by Sigma Designs and its licensees. ZigBee is an IEEE open standard that any company can use for generally free. (The ZigBee Alliance makes money by certifying products.) 
 
There is aso little argument that money drives the world, and the way we perceive the world.  You can have great technology, but if companies aren't going to make money from it, its likely you'll never hear about it.
 
My wife has lots of allergies, and for her these allergies can lead to mucus in her chest which can lead to Bronchitis which can lead to Pneumonia which can lead to hospital visits.  It can be a very serious thing and she typically can have problems several times per year.  When I first met he she would typically be sick with this condition for 5 to 10 weeks a year, and miss work for 2 to 3+ weeks of that.
 
For years we went to specialists after specialists to try to find what would help with this, and she also went to an allergist several times per year.  Needless to say we always returned from the doctors with a list a long list of drugs, steroids, antibiotics, neutralizers, etc. These were not only very expensive (even with insurance) but they were pretty serious with unknown long-term risks.  Even worse, they didn't even work very well. Every doctor's visit would yield a new handful of the latest drugs to try.
 
Then about two years ago I was searching on the Internet and I find this device for $50 that you blow into that causes a rhythm that causes the mucus to dislodge.  This along with some over-the-counter medicine have reduced her episodes which lasted a month+ (usually requiring antibiotics) down to the point where they last 10 - 15 hours or less. She missed no work last year due to this illness. Not a single day.
 
So why didn't any specialist recommend we try this $50 medical device instead of the literally 100+ medicines we must have used over the years?  Simple. These medicines are what the drug companies want you to buy. They get money which pays for the drug reps. which drops of drug samples to doctors which continues the cycle.  Doctors aren't evil, its just what is pounded in their heads day after day. 
 
Technology is no different.  There are so many instances where it was the money which determined which technology choice won, not the technology itself.  There is no doubt that this has been the case for Z-Wave and ZigBee, and probably will be for some time to come.  But I think here its a bit different. Where there is definitely currently more Z-Wave around than ZigBee, I think that the overwhelming use of ZigBee in non-home automation application will pull it into that as well.  Long-term, its hard to beat open standards.
 
As for the metal gang boxes, that doesn't make things as bad as you would think.  With ZigBee it wouldn't be a problem.
 
Interestingly ZigBee has a different problem that few people realize, and I got zinged by this.  ZigBee is a mesh networking standard, BUT battery operated devices DO NOT forward the packets of other devices.  Only line powered devices do this.  In other words, ZigBee will likely work terribly if you ONLY have battery operated ZigBee locks. I had this problem at the start. But add in some line-powered devices, like thermostats, light switches, and range problems will be a distant memory.   I'm not sure if Z-wave works the same way, but with ZigBee, having a few line-powered devices is just about mandatory. Once you do that, it really works great. I think I change the batteries in my ZigBee locks maybe once per year, if that.

 

[az1324]

ZigBee is based on an IEEE 802.15 standard. It is not itself an IEEE standard or open.

 

[ano]

It is fact an open standard, and available for download here: http://www.zigbee.org/Standards/Downloads.aspx
 
Zigbee isn't distributed as open source, although if you search, there are several open source options available.
Here is one here: http://zboss.dsr-wireless.com/  This one is even ZigBee Certified.
 
The Zigbee Alliance owns the right to the Zigbee specifications, but that doesn't mean its not open.
 
Z-Wave, on the other hand, is proprietary to Sigma Designs. The firmware that runs Z-Wave are imbedded in hardware built by Sigma Designs or licensed by Sigma Designs.  As far as I have heard, Sigma has only licensed hardware manufacturing to one company to date, Mitsumi.  The Z-wave specification is not available for download that I have ever seen.  I've seen open source Z-Wave code available that speaks with Z-Wave devices, but not open source code to create Z-Wave devices, but it might be out there somewhere.