Why is the Elk M1 so popular?

[Tink]

I debated long and hard about writing this reply as I am sure it will fuel the fire, so let me tell you the worst I am going to say first and then explain it - I see a lot of bad info here.

Take this info for what its worth, I have been involved in this industry since 1992.

First of all, any intelligent/programmable controller like Stargate with HomeSeer is way too much overlap. It is a huge waste of money. Anybody who wants to program a Stargate, their security system, MainLobby, and HomeSeer/HAL to automate their home is just plain crazy.

If your HA needs are not that big, perhaps just getting started, do not want to do anything involving the PC on a regular basis (e.g. speak the CNN breaking news headlines, have the weather control your sprinkler system, etc.) then an intelligent hardware system is what you should look for. If you do not want to do security, then Stargate is a great choice. If you want security, then HAI or Elk.

These companies can never make a programming language that will make you totally happy because they are hardware/firmware based. They must conform to the logic that is in the firmware of the controller itself. Additionally, as a hardware manufacturer, their first priority is on hardware and firmware, not software. Even high end systems like Lutron HomeWorks have very poor programming software. Take the time to learn HAI's programming language and it does not port to Stargate. Learn how to program Crestron, it does not port to MainLobby. Learn to program Vantage, it does not port to Lutron. Hardware manufacturers have people who write code compiled down to machine language level - they do not regularly use higher level languages. Changing the system means accessing the programming software, and perhaps 1% of the companies out there have a web interface allowing you to do it from anywhere. This means programming using PC remote access software or PC software on the PC connected to the controller. It is a wonderful environment for where it shines, which is what I described above.

When your needs are more - you want to program the system remotely, you want to customize the system, you want to be able to connect disparate systems together, then you have to go with a more extensible system, and that is always one based entirely upon software. Nothing implemented in hardware is ever going to be as flexible as pure software. Our newest protocols in this industry are UPB and Insteon. What if something completely new comes out - how do the hardware based controller react? If they can support it through a serial interface, they get the code written to support the device and start burning EEProms to ship out - they are the lucky ones. What if the device only has a USB interface or some new interface? If you are the Elk where you put a connector for daughter boards providing interface capabilities, you are very smart - but the hardware and software both still have to be created. If you do not have that capability, you are out of luck and your users can never support that device EXCEPT through a software interface which will almost always involve a PC. Software has to send out updated software, which sometimes can be installed remotely. Software can be configured remotely. For customization or interfacing with things that nobody else will build an interface to, you can pick up the language that the software home automation system uses and build that interface, but if it is like what HomeSeer does, then that language ports to other PC platforms! Use VB, JavaScript, Perl, Python, or whatever is your current favorite - it is the same language you may have picked up elsewhere, and it is portable to other computer systems. And let's face some other facts - the Internet is everywhere, and you can do/get just about anything over the Internet - find a hardware based controller that makes it easy to integrate Internet content in with a few lines of script code. And for text to speech (TTS), let's not go with a limited vocabulary of pre-recorded words - that never works well when you want it to say even simple things like pronouncing your name right! Systems like the Stargate implemented TTS by connecting the panel to a PC, so even Jeff knew he did not want to try to re-invent the wheel by putting it into the hardware.

So now if you are at the level where you need the power and flexibility of a PC based program, why would you leave your controllers smart? Go with a simple Caddx, Napco, or DSC security system, and make your I/O controller something inexpensive like an Applied Digital system, but don't go burying a bunch of logic there - make it a dumb slave - your maintenance of the system is BY FAR easier to maintain. The only time I entered C-Max on my Ocelot was when I used software to convert a bunch of infrared signals I downloaded from the Internet into the ADI format and I wanted to load them into the controller - not a single line of code is in my Ocelot, and I have 5 modules on my system including a SECU16-IR.

The same goes for Main Lobby - wonderful interface, and even David referred to it as a front end. Why would you want to put your automation there too? When you think about it, Main Lobby is the operating system for your touchscreen computers. If your automation needs are small and include a few touchscreens, that is fine - but when you need more and go into the areas I mentioned earlier, why use a program that was designed by Mario to be a graphical system and has automation added as an "oh by the way" feature? We love the combination of Main Lobby and HomeSeer because ML focuses on "pretty" and we focus on "power" and "extensibility". Use the products that try to do it all when your needs are basic, but as soon as you need to do more, position yourself to make it easier to get things done - the heart of the automation system in one place, "dumb" peripherals and sensors so that they can easily/quickly be replaced if they fail, and a fantastic front-end like ML, when you have a need for that in your system - each piece does their job and does it well and nobody has overlapping functionality.


OK, now I have to address what I am sure some of you are thinking about, and I am going to be very blunt. Many of you will say that "the PC is not reliable" to which I reply "hogwash". Sure I have my fights with my regular desktop PC, but my Home Automation PC has been pretty much as reliable as my HAI system, because like the HAI system it is dedicated to pretty much a single task. The blunt part is this - do not even bother posting your arguments against PC reliability - you will never convince me otherwise even if I agree with your statements JUST LIKE the fact that I will never be able to convince you of my argument if you have had nothing but problems with a PC. We developed a dedicated controller for HomeSeer (PRO100) because of the anti-PC feelings, not because we also felt they were unreliable. So let's leave it at a state of detente and agree to disagree. I have my proof with sites that run major facilities on PCs alone, and you have your proof of your own experiences. Not discussing it either way just helps prevent electron from having to pay for extra hard drive storage for the board.

 

[Dean Roddey]

We take the approach that one system is best, to the degree that is practical of course. We aren't going to be making video projectors any time soon, but in terms of the automation tools, one ring to rule them all is the optimum solution as we see it. It's already a complex scenario, and having to manage disparate systems just makes it more complex. And of course there's the whole issue of depending on multiple companies who have their own separate businesses and may not continue to work together over time, or have conflicting upgrade schedules that cause problems for those using them together.

We certainly take the position that if you have your doubts about trusting the core of your automation solution to a PC, then by all means use an Elk or Omni. It don't hurt our feelings none. You're the customer, so whatever makes you happy. But there are still plenty of other things that those products don't deal with. So, though those products overlap parts of our products, we provide such a broad amount of functionality that they definitely still complement each other quite well. We can handle the touch screens, the coordination of devices that the automation panel does control with the ones that they don't control, control of the home theater, multi-zone audio, media management, TTS, weather data, far more complex automation logic where that's necessary, etc...

However, in our defense, we take stability VERY seriously, as you can confirm by asking any of our customers. I often say no to requests if I don't think they can be done at this time without compromising the robustness of the product. In this business, stability is everything and no amount of features is of use if the overall product isn't rock solid. We have a fairly steady stream of customers coming to us from other products because they hear our customers talking about how robust the product is, and how much we provide in a single package of course. And, if you put a product of this type on a quality PC, strip that PC's OS down to get rid of extraneous stuff, and treat it like an appliance, not like a standard PC, as any serious automation controller should be, it will be completely reliable.

My previous system was up for over a year continuously in one chunk, and probably half a year in another chunk, and only was brought down to after that year period to move it. And only brought down the second time to replace it with one of our CQSL boxes. It had not the slightest memory usage creep and never glitched once, ever. In contrast, my expensive A/V style toys in the rack are a big PITA quite often and fail to want to play with each other much more than I'd like. CQC was stopped during version upgrades, and then restarted of course, but the box was never rebooted.

So there's no doubt that a PC-based system can provide the whole shebang (except for the legal and liability issues that surround security of course), and do it super-reliably, from the back end stop bits and checksums, to the sexy graphics where the metal meets the human, and distribute it throughout the network. But, if you don't agree, then the other options are there either with a pure hardware solution, if that meets your needs, or a layered combination of M1 or Omni at the bottom and a broader software-based solution at the top. Whatever provides the optimum combination of budgetary requirements and ability to sleep at night.

Now, our system is never going to be used for light weight automation, so I'd never put it forward as a replacement for something like an Ocelot if that serves all your needs. It's a fairly big hammer for fairly big nails, and would be massive overkill for, say, watering the lawn. And I sometimes despair of ever really making it as simple as people would like it to be. Flexibility and simplicity are at some degree mutually exclusive I guess, and in the end we are selling a professional level product that just happens to be DIY friendly, and that flexibility is extremely important in the professional market.

Hopefully that was coherent. I just had a glass of wine and watched a movie after a long day the computer, and my brain cells aren't all pointing in the same direction right now.

 

[upstatemike]

Take this info for what its worth, I have been involved in this industry since 1992.

I have been playing around with this hobby since around 1977.

Anybody who wants to program a Stargate, their security system, MainLobby, and HomeSeer/HAL to automate their home is just plain crazy.

I think I agree with you but I'm not 100% clear that I understand your point. You usually have to program any hardware you attach to Homeseer using it's native interface, plus configure the plugin... I would like to use a system that lets you configure all attached hardware from the main GUI/User Interface. If I need a bunch of relays, I don't want to define them in a C-Max type program, then again in a plugin, and finally in the main GUI. I just want to go to the main menu, update the list of attached hardware (16 port relay board #3 added to com port 4) and start using them.

These companies can never make a programming language that will make you totally happy because they are hardware/firmware based. They must conform to the logic that is in the firmware of the controller itself.

This is a tricky point since "make you totally happy" really depends on your customer. Spanky noted that alarm installers do not want to do any comples programming, period. A lot of Homeseer folks already know one of the Microsoft languages (C++, C#, C spot run, VeryBad6, VeryBad script, VeryBad for Applications, etc.) The strength of the hardware controllers is that the gui lets you create fairly complex code just by making menu choices. It does not permit you to make syntax errors or reference things that are impossible such a hardware object or variable that does not exist.

My experience with HS 1.7 was that it depends too much on scripting and did not include enough "basic" features in the GUI. Some simple things I wanted to do like send some ascii out a serial port or speak a message with embedded variable values, required that I abandon the GUI and jump straight into scripting. Doing the same basic stuff with a Stargate or M1 has a zero learning curve because it is just point and click.

What if something completely new comes out - how do the hardware based controller react? If they can support it through a serial interface, they get the code written to support the device and start burning EEProms to ship out - they are the lucky ones. What if the device only has a USB interface or some new interface?

I agree 100%. This is the reason that I keep looking at the possibility of of moving to PC based system. The problem is that most software systems are no better than hardware based systems with regards to supporting only a limited number of products. Homeseer has a larger list than most, but many software companies will only support one brand of weather station, or will support winamp but not slimserver, or will only support thermostats via X-10 communication.

Software based systems also generally do not directly support inexpensive interfaces like keypads. They are great if you want a lot of expensive touchscreens around your house but things like the RCS 7 button LED keypad, or their inexpensive LCD keypad which could be directly supported on an RS-485 converter on a serial port, instead usually require you to support another whole subsystem like a Stargate or Homevision, in order for them to communicate with the PC based controller.

not a single line of code is in my Ocelot, and I have 5 modules on my system including a SECU16-IR.

Great! This is what I am talking about. Make all the hardware you support accessible from the main configuration menu of the PC system so you never have to mess with the native interface for the device. But make sure it is available through your GUI, not just within scripts!

OK, now I have to address what I am sure some of you are thinking about, and I am going to be very blunt. Many of you will say that "the PC is not reliable" to which I reply "hogwash".

I have come to agree that PC servers can be reliable because my Slimserver has proven itself over the past few years and convinced me. I do have some concerns however about PC based systems getting overwhelmed in certain situations and not recovering gracefully. I know when I fire up HS 1.7 with the Stargate plugin and VWS plugin running, that the status screen immediately becomes unusable. VWS send a lot of data if it is windy and my Stargate updates a lot of variables that each change many times per second, so the HS logging screen just can't keep up. In WinEVM I can just filter stuff so this is not an issue but I worry that PC based systems could end up choking if too much is going on at once.

 

[upstatemike]

...I sometimes despair of ever really making it as simple as people would like it to be. Flexibility and simplicity are at some degree mutually exclusive...

True, but I think the right formula is to provide 99.9% of your configuration through a GUI with drop-down menus, and the rest can be programmed through scripting. This is especially important to somebody who likes to tweak their system often and change things on the fly. Trying to make rapid changes via a manual scripted interface is no fun. The heavy scripting should be reserved for the extra flexibility you need for special case situations, not for every day management of HA logic.

I often say no to requests if I don't think they can be done at this time without compromising the robustness of the product.

That is certainly a valid point on something like an interface to a Stargate which has complex protocol issues. On the other hand adding support for something like Virtual Weather Station, which is just a matter of reading some data from a .csv file every couple of seconds and populating some variables, should be both quick and safe to implement. (DHoward added it to PowerHome virtually overnight).

 

[BraveSirRobbin]

Hi Tink;

First and foremost, thanks for replying. I wish you had the time to contribute regularly to our forum. Your knowledge, insight, and experience with the HA industry is a very valuable asset thus your opinion carries a lot of weight because of your credentials. I find your posts very informative and hope you can at least contribute when you have a few spare moments. I along with others would like to see your post count increase!!

On a personal note, I do miss meeting and chatting with you at CES (in Las Vegas). Meeting with you was the highlight of my visit at past CES shows and it is just not the same now .

Anyway, I respectfully disagree with you on one point and that is relying on a PC for critical tasks. I know you have a product whose software/hardware combination has a track record for reliability as you mention, but this is not a knock on your product as much as if a system has a hard drive and a Microsoft operating system, it is not deemed as reliable as a programmable logic controller with no moving parts and a simple, basic operating system.

This is by no means my opinion, but the opinion of major industries that rely on programmable logic controllers to operate and control "mission critical" situations/applications. Of course I am not talking about the Elks, Ocelots, or Stargates here but rather Allen Bradley and Modicon (GE) logic controllers (along with their associated I/O).

Industries rely on programmable logic controllers to handle mission critical situations and SCADA/HMI systems for the user interfaces and data displays that are needed. Intellution (GE) and Wonderware are perfect examples of this scenario.

I am sure that ANY other person who is familiar with or has an industrial controls background will agree with this methodology. Again, this is just my opinion, but I'm at least telling you the reasoning (and knowledge base) behind it.

I, like you, read a lot of opinions on various forums about people who have PC based home automation systems that have an incredible run/up time and I say more power to you! If it works for you then stay with it. I'm just saying that the system I employ is using the same strategy as that used in industry (nothing more, nothing less).

There are indeed two systems that need to be maintained and programmed, the PLC and SCADA node, but this just the cost of doing business in the controls industry. If you choose your products carefully there are some nice ways of synching the two, but this is the bottom line.

Now I do agree whole heartedly with you that MainLobby should be used as the HMI interface! I also use HomeSeer in this scenario as well. I use HomeSeer/MLHSPlugin/MainLobby as my interface for the home user. I also use HomeSeer for capabilities that are beyond those of the PLC (by the way, PLC means "Programmable Logic Controller" and NOT Power Line Controller for those of you playing along at home).

I also agree with your opinion of not wasting our bandwidth with bashing this topic back and forth if you can't back it up with experience and proper credentials!

One other advantage that I like with MainLobby is it has the capabilities of "Home Theater". This is a home after-all, and this is a nice feature. I will not go into details as I have probably already strayed from this topic enough but I do want to say one more issue and that is, people DO NOT read these types of forum posts to the point of understanding the gist of the topic! It took me two years to find this out, but I quit trying to convey anything to do with complicated methodology and just go with the opinion that if it works for them, more power to you!

Back to the topic of the Elk, I do like some of the features it employs, especially with voice announcements and input/output options. Even if you went entirely with a PC based system, you will still need I/O so the Elk brings the most bang for the buck (vs. systems such as the Ocelot with its digital input and output expansion modules) that is currently available and supported!

Well, to wrap up this diatribe, I want to thank you for your opinion and post and hopefully we will see you around CocoonTech more often!

Sincerely,

BSR

 

[Mark S.]

As another Stargate user, I read this thread with great interest. Like Upstate and Stinger, I have been very impressed with what Stargate can do - but the original SG with IVR is no more - and now the HomeSeer plugin may be in jeopardy. I am always on the lookout for the next great hardware controller - and for the reasons they discussed, I am always disappointed with new entries (Elk M1, HomeVision Pro are most recent). At the risk of sounding obnoxious, if you had a Stargate you would understand why it is such a great foundation for a HA hobbyist.

First of all, any intelligent/programmable controller like Stargate with HomeSeer is way too much overlap. It is a huge waste of money. Anybody who wants to program a Stargate, their security system, MainLobby, and HomeSeer/HAL to automate their home is just plain crazy.

Then call me crazy. The only overlap is whatever you want it to be. I prefer to keep many things on SG for reasons of speed, simplicity and yes - RELIABILITY. Other things are best left to a PC. I use SG, Caddx, HomeSeer and Main Lobby. The hardware, SG and Caddx, are set it and forget it - not a whole lot of work there. I spend most of my time with HS and ML, tweaking and adding features. Face it - we're hobbyists - programming new stuff is fun.

When your needs are more - you want to program the system remotely, you want to customize the system, you want to be able to connect disparate systems together, then you have to go with a more extensible system, and that is always one based entirely upon software. Nothing implemented in hardware is ever going to be as flexible as pure software.

But this is where a Stargate user would see it differently. Up until this point, Stargate has done a pretty darn good job of integrating lighting, security, input/output, HVAC, keypads, telephone, audio, etc. into one hardware controller system - pretty extensible and flexible. Adding the capabilities of HomeSeer makes it even better.

I think our frustration is that nobody, in particular JDS, seems to be willing to create the next generation hardware with expanded communication capabilities that can do what SG does and also accept/interface with newer hardware (UPB, Z-wave, etc.).

OK, now I have to address what I am sure some of you are thinking about, and I am going to be very blunt. Many of you will say that "the PC is not reliable" to which I reply "hogwash".

You're right about one thing - arguing hardware control vs. software control is like arguing paper vs. plastic. But as one who appreciates SG and HS, it is not an either-or thing. The beauty is when you use both. Each has their strengths and weaknesses and you program each to leverage that. Based on my experiences with my HA PC, I would never have a software HA system that did not use hardware programming as a backup. As an amateur tinkerer, I'm bound to do something that will affect the stability of my HA PC. If my PC/HS locks up because of a driver/Microsoft/whatever problem, my security system still arms itself when I want it to, my lights still turn on/off, and my HVAC still sets back when I leave, my wife is still told when a car comes up the driveway. I simply lose higher end stuff like TTS, VR, weather reports and touchscreens.

In the spirit that began this thread - who will create the next killer hardware interface?

Mark

 

[DavidL]

So, it should be obvious that there is no single solution that everyone likes. And that is why Cinemar's strategy remains being open and flexible to work with all solutions - whether that is Homeseer or Hal and MainLobby or Elk and MainLobby, Elk with Homeseer and MainLobby.

Or MainLobby all by itself with speciality hardware like Rain8Net, Vantage controllers, Insteon, UPB, etc. The event and conditional logic is built into MainLobby Server 3 and works just fine. It is much more powerful than an embedded controller logic limitations. And Yes, drop down command building (or manual if you choose and are expert).

But Freedom of Choice. If a better music player comes out than J River - whether Cinemar coded or not, then Cinemar will probably support it. J River has been a great partner and makes good code. Same is said for Homeseer and HAL and Zoom Player and TheaterTek and the list goes on. These folks are best of breed. When they are tied together, Best in Industry. Each integration is solid, fast and reliable. Each product can then interact with each other. Tremendous capability that would take even an avid DIY'r years to exploit. For the dealer - reliable product differentiation and capability and flexibility to meet a customers needs with existing hardware and hardware a customer has an inkling to.

Now, another point on using a security panel - it is physical connection to the real world (switches, outputs, relays, etc) and a very economical IO as well. Even if it didn't have any logic or call the cops capability, an ELK or HAI is still worth the investment just for the IO that a PC based system needs anyway. You could do same with Ocelot, Rain8Net, UPB IO box, and zillions of other flavors, but if you add it up, a good security / automation panel is still cheaper per I and O.

For those that have PC lockups, that is why XPEmbedded was created. And for hard drive haters, CF cards (that require swapping once in a while due to read /writes). No virus issues, no updating that isn't sanctioned. That is what runs on Homeseer's Pro-100. Very close to that embedded dream machine you are searching for.

 

[upstatemike]

DavidL-

You make a strong case for MainLobby. Problem is I am pretty committed to SlimDevices and the Squeezebox players... any plans to support them?

I also had an idea to take an old DVD changer and load it up with the entire original series of Star Trek (I'm talking Kirk and Spock, not that later "Next Generation" nonsense). I'm going to set the player to play 24/7 into a modulator so I have a TV station dedicated to Star Trek that is always available from any TV in the house. Is this something I could monitor and control using MainLobby?

*****

Sorry. I probably should have started a new topic for this question.

 

[Stinger]

Homeseer will always have it's place in my home automation. Mainlobby will always have it's place in my home with the cheap Intermec 5055B touchscreen's I've picked up. Stargate will be replaced as soon as a viable solution is introduced that has more capability.

I'm not even going to grace Tink's message with a debate on Software vs. Hardware solutions. They all have their place. I can say that without qualifying my opinion and stating that you won't convince me otherwise so don't try. I think that's the ego that many report about the folks at HST.

 

[toymaster458]

I was trying to keep my mouth shut on this thread regarding Homeseer, MainLobby and Elk but since it is steering that way by others I might as well jump in.

As I am reading the main thing most want is a system that can do EVERYTHING! But as we all know there is no such thing in are budgets and it needs to be a combination. When you start doing a combination of products that is when the reliability starts going down. Having Elk as your security and I/O, Homeseer as your automation logic, and MainLobby as your UI and A/V control gives you 3 points of failure along with three companies working together and communicating at all times about changes that could effect the communication between them.

This is one of many reasons I switched from Homeseer to CQC. I can still use the M1 for my hardware standard automation controller handling the logic that needs to be done incase of computer failure then CQC does everything else handling the Touch Screen UI, A/V and complex automation logic that the M1 can not. Sure it is missing some features that Homeseer has but I never had those features running reliable in the first place or they kept changing the preferred hardware. (I still have my Homeseer Phone Switch if anyone wants it.)

CQC has been running with out an issue except a hard drive failure which they can do nothing about like any other software based product. As an Installer I would never install Homeseer in a customer’s house based on what I had gone through in the past trying to keep Homeseer running. I am now installing CQC in other houses quicker, better looking and more reliable then I could have with Homeseer.

I know how this looks but I am really not trying to down Homeseer as I know it works fine for others in my users group and they swear on it but from what I went through I swear at it.

My Main point to all reading this is sure the M1 can not do everything but neither can most economical products out there. Keep your mind open to all possible solutions because Homeseer/MainLobby/M1 is not the only choice to provide all your needs and wants. Just try keeping the total number of failure points down to a minimum to keep your system as reliable as possible.

 

[Steve]

These folks are best of breed. When they are tied together, Best in Industry. Each integration is solid, fast and reliable. Each product can then interact with each other. Tremendous capability that would take even an avid DIY'r years to exploit.

I have to respectfully disagree with some caveats. I do Systems Integration for a living. You simply can not say that you can take the best available products in a segment and put them together and have the best of the best. They either need to be designed to work together or each use a standard api or protocol (like serial messaging). I have seen many apps which are best of the best and ultra reliable puke all over the place when trying to interact with other equally good products. Sure, its possible, but IMNSHO in order to achieve the top tier of interoperability and supportability they need to either be designed to work together, support a common external messaging protocol or come from the same place (and sometimes even that is not a guarantee).

 

[WayneW]

OK, I will throw a couple observations here. These are not necessarily my opinions, just talking points, so don't flame me, but please correct me if I have made a factual error

1) Elk M1 is new, new is sexy. Stargate is old, old is not sexy. In todays world, how many 10 year old electronic products do YOU buy?
2) Stargate, HAI, HomeVision Pro are all over $1000, which is roughly twice the cost of the Elk M1.
3) The Elk M1 includes security built in which has a high WAF value, high resale value, & instant gratification.
4) With more people using VOIP (which often provides free voicemail) and more people using cell phones in lieu of landlines, the StarGate phone features are perceived as fluff.
5) Elk M1 supports most lighting systems. Stargate doesn't support Z-wave or Insteon.

That doesn't make the StarGate a bad thing, but unless somebody knows upfront (before the major purchase) that they NEED the StarGate, it is hard justify the higher price and get wife approval. And dare I say that if money is no object, people may look ABOVE the StarGate (at least in sexiness, if not functionality).

Personally, I don't think there is enough of a market for the uber box you are looking for when you figure what the retail price would have to be. How many StarGates & HV Pros have been sold over the years? For anybody that remembers "Home Automator" magazine, Pete Hallenbeck designed and built a prototype he called the Base-Box about 6 years ago. As I recall, that would have been an amazingly powerful, flexible & reliable hardware product. I lost touch with Pete when the magazine folded. I would speculate that Pete might have determined that there was not enough market and/or profitability to market the device.

Does anybody think that it is profitable to make a dedicated non-PC based HA controller that is "better" than the Elk M1 in todays market?

 

[toymaster458]

Does anybody think that it is profitable to make a dedicated non-PC based HA controller that is "better" than the Elk M1 in todays market?

The issue with this is many are already trying but are not going after the DIY market. It is Certified Installers/Dealers Only type sales and support.

I beleave many DIY'ers would want to purchase the product but what company would be wanting to take on the task of trying to make most of use happy. We are not an easy group to please with all the request we would make and want to prevent us from going a different route.

Also the cost required for such a product to include the best of all solutions would bring it to the point where most of us would not be willing to pay. This would result into us going back to multiple products for a solution. For example would you pay $10,000 for such a product?

 

[Steve]

Well, then how does Elk do it successfully?

My opinion:

Home Automation awareness is the key to success for everyone involved in home automation, from the manufacturer to the end user.

The average non technical home owner will not call a professional installer to put in a home automation system, because he does not realize he needs home automation in his home.

In the same neighborhood as the non technical home owner is a DIYer that has fixed up his home with all the home automation bells and whistles. The non technical neighbor, seeing what can be done in an automated home, becomes jealous and calls the professional installer for the same home automation features.


The DIYer now sees a business opportunity and becomes a professional installer. The manufacturer now has more customers and is able to offer more products to the home automation market and the cycle continues.

Support the DIYer!

 

[WayneW]

Does anybody think that it is profitable to make a dedicated non-PC based HA controller that is "better" than the Elk M1 in todays market?

The issue with this is many are already trying but are not going after the DIY market. It is Certified Installers/Dealers Only type sales and support.

I agree and forgot to include "DIY friendly" in my specification question.

What names are you thinking of? Control4? Crestron? LifeWare? Do even those satisfy the wish lists given?