Motorola Premise


I'm just getting started as a electronic home systems integrator. Is anyone using Motorola's Premise software?

I was.....The lack of support and release progress drove me away and back to HomeSeer with a Main Lobby front end. I will not go back, even though I feel that Premise was way ahead of the competition when I signed on. TCP/IP based control is the future that the other packages are just starting to touch.

With all of the advances in store for both HomeSeer and MainLobby, I would highly recommend there packages.
CQC is definitely something in the same vein as Premise, i.e. a serious software based automation package, and all in one package so no need to buy two and lash them together.
The day you support my Ocelot, MR26A, NetCallerID, and Caddx Systems is the day I will try this software. Unitl then, well ... ;)
CQC is definitely something in the same vein as Premise, i.e. a serious software based automation package,

I'm not sure you are doing justice to CQC by saying 'in the same vein as Premise". ;) Maybe "in a MUCH better vein" would be correct.

On the serious side, Premise has a long and not particularly pretty past. The concept was excellent, but the execution was somewhat lacking. It started with a premature beta release, when in reality the software should not have been qualified as even at pre-alpha level. They had to withdraw it completely, and by the time it made it back to beta, it had acquired the tag of being overhyped/oversold vaporware. It also morphed from a package for the general HA population to a integrator only package with a high pricetag. When Lantronix bought them, it seemed that the software was only marketed as a means to sell Lantronix equipment, not as the center of the HA setup. Now that Premise has been sold to Motorola, it is now with a company that has the deep pockets to really give the software some momentum, assuming that the software just doesn't disappear into the aformentioned deep pockets. Time will tell.

None of this really answers your original question though. I tried Premise a while ago, and decided that the steep learning curve did not justify the benefits (I have an IT background, so programming is not the challenge to me that it could be for many people). Talking to other integrators, they tended to echo my thoughts. Premise is very powerful, but has a very steep learning curve. Many mentioned that when you got all done with the required equipment and software, the total cost was in the same ballpark as a Crestron/Elan system, but without the long track record of success that Crestron/Elan have.[

Best bet, download copies of all the HA software packages and try them. Unlike hardware, all the good packages have some sort of 30-day try before you buy setup. It's not worth the effort for a hobbiest to do this, but if you plan on doing this as a business, you need to know the lay of the land. I myself need to put my effert where my mouth is and download CQC to give it a try.

Cripes, I'm long-winded tonight. Must be the wine. :(
The only problem I see with demoing lots of HA software is that it takes a learning curve with each one. Hard to do a fair comparison with a reasonable amount of time investment.

I think I read (from you or someone else's post) that you don't allow others to write hardware drivers for your application? I suspect it's a control thing to keep system stability? Unfortunately, if that is the strategy, It will be real hard for you to keep up with the hardware interfaces needed like what BSR posts, and my list is different from his.
This is a deal breaker for me to expend the effort as it is very unlikely you will support all my equipment, and BSR's too ;)
Dean - I quickly reviewed your software tonight. Great Start - but please keep moving forward with the development process. You have a long way to go to match items like Premise or the quickly growing ML / HS combination.
What things in particular do you find missing? There's always stuff on the plate to do, but it helps to hear about specific things.

BTW, most of my customers turned away from something like ML/HS because it is not a fully integrated package like CQC, and some of them who had looked at ML before found CQC to be more in the Crestron vein as far as 'just working' and being rock solid. Obviously features are important, and we are working hard to add them as quickly as possible without compromising stability, but there are other considerations as well that customers consider.

BTW, in order to avoid the hammer coming down again, you should respond to this on the CQC thread, not here.
HS needs to buy ML or vice versa and the integration would be complete. The packages could also be more tightly integrated. Who has more capital?
It might be a good business move, I dunno. But it wouldn't make them any more integrated than they are now. They would remain two completely different code bases based on different software technologies, and it would take a couple years of heavy and dispruptive work to actually create truely a single product out of them.
Just thought I'd post the information that Motorola is now providing Premise 2.1 for free (full version). Essentially they are no longer going to market the product line and decided to let anyone have it and also the development kit 2.1 that is compatible with Visual Studio 2005.

Here's a link:

In addition there is a new Yahoo groups formed to continue support for this "unofficially". There's even a nice Insteon driver available as well.

Thought this may come in handy for those looking at home automation software. While Homeseer may still be the best for most, those that want a real good performing solution for cheap may want to give this a try.
Take off in what sense? As a commercial product Premise crashed-and-burned years ago with multiple owners. As a DIY orphan, I don't know who will spend much time on it without access to the core source code.