Crestron "Zigbee" switches -- non-standard?

[ChrisWalker]

I was happy to see a copy of CE PRO in the mail today

On page 39, there's a whole article about how Crestron is “not using the ZigBee stack as it was written†and is using their own variation of dynamic frequency technology.

I asked around to see if that meant that their system was proprietary/closed or not, and the general consensus is that their "Zigbee" switches are only going to work with Crestron systems--and both their system and their switches will likely be incompatible with any other Zigbee switches.

Does anyone have more info this? I guess that would keep in line with Crestron's game plan to "own the home," so to say, but it's not exactly a "Zigbee" switch if it won't play with others. With the multiple variations of standards all being marketed as "Zigbee" right now, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Chris

 

[electron]

I just got my copy as well, will have to check it out.

 

[Dean Roddey]

I would not have expected anything else really. That's how they make their money, by making you live within their world and buy their stuff.

 

[rocco]

With the multiple variations of standards all being marketed as "Zigbee" right now, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Chris, can you explain this further? Who is marketing as ZigBee? I don't know of anyone claiming ZigBee yet (though there are products using the term 'ZigBee ready', as defined by the alliance).

 

[electron]

I finally got a chance to take a look at that article, and it looks like Creston has a brand named infiNET, which is a wireless line of products, based on the ZigBee protocol. Looks like their main focus was on improving reliability by adding the "dynamic frequency allocation" feature (since ZigBee operates at 2.4Ghz).

Example product (specs show it is IEEE 802.15.4 compliant):
http://www.crestron.com/products/show_prod...at=1130&id=1340

 

[ChrisWalker]

With the multiple variations of standards all being marketed as "Zigbee" right now, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Chris, can you explain this further? Who is marketing as ZigBee? I don't know of anyone claiming ZigBee yet (though there are products using the term 'ZigBee ready', as defined by the alliance).

Rocco, sure--no problem. I guess I should be more specific.

Creston is advertising products which are "Zigbee-based."
Control4 is advertising products which are "Zigbee."
Companies with industrial sensor components, USB dongles, and a number of other products are advertising their products as "Zigbee."

The media mixes up the 802.15.4 family of standards with each other, and with Zigbee (one of a set of extensions/application layers typically built on top of 802.15.4).

I don't know that anyone is claiming that their devices are "Zigbee logo'd/certified" since I'm not sure that there is even a program in place for that yet. And if there is, I'm not sure how they're going to deal with issues of frequency (and frequency-hopping technologies), since products from some different vendors won't be able to communicate with each other unless they have a bridge, etc.

In the end, right now "Zigbee" is a word used to describe a whole bunch of different things. It's like using the term "Internet" to describe HTML and FTP, WiFi and DSL, Internet Explorer and Firefox. It can mean a lot of different things.

When people say "Bluetooth," they mean a specific protocol which lets them hook up two devices wirelessly in which all devices (assuming they support the profile) will work with each other. But right now, when the media (or even manufacturers) mention Zigbee, they're not always talking about a specific protocol--they're often talking about a variety of related mesh-networked technologies.

[A good example are Crestron's highly touted "Zigbee" devices, which apparently may or may not work with other "Zigbee" devices at all.]

I think I may have just confused things further--but did that make sense?

Chris

 

[rocco]

Yes, I see. The problem seems to be with the embellishments that occur when we discusses ZigBee, coupled with the press hype.

A good example is Crestron. They mention that their InfeNet is based on IEEE 802.15.4 (which it is), and they hint that the mesh network is derived from ZigBee. They are also a member of the ZigBee Alliance. Yet they make no claims that their network is ZigBee, but here we are talking about Crestron and ZigBee.

Control4 is the same situation, although I believe they do intend to get ZigBee certification. I'm not sure Crestron would want to.

The ZigBee Alliance supposedly has two testing centers operating for performing certification, but I have only heard of platforms being certified thus far. That is why you don't see any real ZigBee products yet, none have been certified.

But the certification process should insure that ALL ZigBee devices inter-operate. That is the purpose of the certification process. If Crestron does not want their products to work with others, they don't need certification, but they also can't call it ZigBee.

 

[rocco]

BTW: did you see the range they claim for those switches?

150 feet indoors, 500 feet outdoors!

I wonder if that's real, or if it's measured in "marketing units".

 

[PeterW]

That range on 2.4GHz? With or without a microwave oven running?

 

[electron]

That's the major reason they made changes to the ZigBee stack, to deal with all the 2.4Ghz interference. I'll try to scan the article tonight.