Not yet. I asked about the documentation for the Elk Z-Wave module last week and they sent me a draft. Then I received an email that they had published the final version on their site.
The manual is important because it lets you know what it can and cannot do. The range is 100ft. I didnt like not seeing anything about thermostats or other non-lighning devices in the manual. Right now the product is very lightning oriented, but I hope that they expand via firmware as more z-wave products are released.
I plan to wait. UPB seems like a safe bet, but Z-Wave and Insteon show promise, especially if they improve in two areas: assortment of new products, and electrical quality of the devices (so that they dont burn).
With the exception of current z-wave device's inability to send status change message to controllers different to the one that requested the change (like happen with motion sensors), both protocols seems promising (I dont care much about z-wave motion sensors - I go hardwire with all sensors). I think that the Z-wave problem of devices being unenrolled from the network when power fails is more an implementation problem that should be solved soon - I hope.
We still need to see what are Insteon weaknesses. Its a matter of time.
Actually, the protocols are very innovative and probably better than UPB, but I have heard of both Z-wave and Insteon devices lossing the smoke
. So UPB is gaining them on both areas; assortment and quality
. Probably that explains the price difference.
Last but not least, Control4 implementation of Zigbee is impressive, but Zigbee has a lot more to prove and I'll not wait that much. At the end, it might win the race, but I will gladly replace my devices in 10 years if that happens.
I read Insteons white paper over the weekend. Very, very good. I would like to see similar technology documentation for the other protocols.