3 ms·

What's bad about wireless? I don't think that's why the smart home of this person turned out to be a terrible experience. For example he describes how adding a

What's bad about wireless? I don't think that's why the smart home of this person turned out to be a terrible experience. For example he describes how adding a generator made influenced the lighting. That didn't sounded like a wireless problem, but a problem with either the relays or mosfets/igbts that were used for switching or dimming, or the power circuitry that made the chips reset in those units. There are also wired systems that use the existing wires for example. It's just apples and oranges and I don't think wireless vs wired is the issue at hand here.

jjoonathan 10y ago
> What's bad about wireless? You answered your own question: > For example he describes how adding a generator made influenced the lighting. That didn't sounded like a wireless problem, but a problem with either the relays or mosfets/igbts that were used for switching or dimming, or the power circuitry that made the chips reset in those units. The long, long list of subtle things that can go wrong with wireless is the problem. Reassigning blame to the Wan Hung Lo SMPS barfing RF all over the place doesn't solve anything unless the person in question has the expertise, tools, and patience to track down and address the interference at the source. Putting in wires that easily reject such interference, OTOH, solves the problem nicely.
- MrQuincle 10y ago
  The things I describe are all relevant to wired systems. They might be the real reason why the system brakes down. Your statement that it must be interference is unfounded. It's an unfair statement trying to tie reliability to one aspect of the system. It's like a doctor who never prescribes oral medicines because the stomach is such a hellish place. Wireless might not be the weakest link you think it is. In the end wireless is just EM waves, it is just physics. There is no way it violates the laws of physics.
  - y4mi 10y ago
    wireless systems essentially work on a hub with silly amount of noise. there are always corrupt packets, despite several layers of validation. Technically, these corrupt packets can also occur on wired systems, their frequency is however lower by several orders of magnitude. each of these corrupt packets has potential of causing lasting strange behavior. especially if we're talking about a closed source system from a niche vendor. a more fitting metaphor would be a doctor that blames the patients lung cancer on his smoking habit. while there might've been another reason for the affliction, that possibility is low.
    - MrQuincle 10y ago
      Wireless systems do not necessarily work with a hub. The problem of closed source and niche vendors is also a different one. I feel sorry for people that get advice from the current home automation dealers. What seems to be important to them is to make a lot of money. One of the ways to guarantee that is by forcing customers to wire their homes completely and require them to contact them for any change imaginable. This is how KNX is sold in Europe. Subsequently they create a very crappy KNX wireless protocol almost as a marketing trick. With DALI for lighting its the same. Moreover, when those lobbying groups come up with a DC standard, even the voltage level is not standardized. There are also plenty of wireless systems that aren't attacked for being "wireless". People know that if "3G" or "4G" "doesn't work" it is a matter of devices and coverage. If it is GPS they know it's getting a signal from satellites. Light is wireless as well, so with infrared they often know it's changing the battery in the remote or pointing more accurately to the receiver. You will probably see the same behavior with wireless charging. A few people will swear by a cable. However, the majority of people will be happy to get rid of them. Yes, first the distance might not be large enough and a few protocols have to be standardized, but there is no reason that it can't be done reliably. And about corruption of packets. We already know how to handle stochastic processes since UDP. Besides that, human communication is inherently fuzzy and lossy. That's not a reason to despise it. Collaborative filtering methods that now form e.g. the blockchain backbone come also from fields such as wireless (sensor) networks to give one example of how people make reliable systems out of noisy ones.
      - 10y ago
- mcguire 10y ago
  A software upgrade fixed the generator related problems: "The next day the REV was installed. It fixed the TV, the Touch Screen AND all the flickering, humming lights. Control 4 reported the REV “to fix some known bugs”. Hmmmm…."
- jondiggsit 10y ago
  The issue with the generator could have been as simple as the Generac smart switch not properly managing the load requirements of the panel.
jondiggsit 10y ago
The big issue of this story is this: NEVER INSTALL CONTROL4. It's utter garbaged. I hate to say it, really hate to say it, but if you want this level of integration in a system the only option is Crestron. I was hoping for a while that Savant would be a great option, but I fear they are backing away from the "PRO"-level integration now.

jjoonathan 10y ago

> What's bad about wireless? You answered your own question: > For example he describes how adding a generator made influenced the lighting. That didn't sounded like a wireless problem, but a problem with either the relays or mosfets/igbts that were used for switching or dimming, or the power circuitry that made the chips reset in those units. The long, long list of subtle things that can go wrong with wireless is the problem. Reassigning blame to the Wan Hung Lo SMPS barfing RF all over the place doesn't solve anything unless the person in question has the expertise, tools, and patience to track down and address the interference at the source. Putting in wires that easily reject such interference, OTOH, solves the problem nicely.

MrQuincle 10y ago
The things I describe are all relevant to wired systems. They might be the real reason why the system brakes down. Your statement that it must be interference is unfounded. It's an unfair statement trying to tie reliability to one aspect of the system. It's like a doctor who never prescribes oral medicines because the stomach is such a hellish place. Wireless might not be the weakest link you think it is. In the end wireless is just EM waves, it is just physics. There is no way it violates the laws of physics.
- y4mi 10y ago
  wireless systems essentially work on a hub with silly amount of noise. there are always corrupt packets, despite several layers of validation. Technically, these corrupt packets can also occur on wired systems, their frequency is however lower by several orders of magnitude. each of these corrupt packets has potential of causing lasting strange behavior. especially if we're talking about a closed source system from a niche vendor. a more fitting metaphor would be a doctor that blames the patients lung cancer on his smoking habit. while there might've been another reason for the affliction, that possibility is low.
  - MrQuincle 10y ago
    Wireless systems do not necessarily work with a hub. The problem of closed source and niche vendors is also a different one. I feel sorry for people that get advice from the current home automation dealers. What seems to be important to them is to make a lot of money. One of the ways to guarantee that is by forcing customers to wire their homes completely and require them to contact them for any change imaginable. This is how KNX is sold in Europe. Subsequently they create a very crappy KNX wireless protocol almost as a marketing trick. With DALI for lighting its the same. Moreover, when those lobbying groups come up with a DC standard, even the voltage level is not standardized. There are also plenty of wireless systems that aren't attacked for being "wireless". People know that if "3G" or "4G" "doesn't work" it is a matter of devices and coverage. If it is GPS they know it's getting a signal from satellites. Light is wireless as well, so with infrared they often know it's changing the battery in the remote or pointing more accurately to the receiver. You will probably see the same behavior with wireless charging. A few people will swear by a cable. However, the majority of people will be happy to get rid of them. Yes, first the distance might not be large enough and a few protocols have to be standardized, but there is no reason that it can't be done reliably. And about corruption of packets. We already know how to handle stochastic processes since UDP. Besides that, human communication is inherently fuzzy and lossy. That's not a reason to despise it. Collaborative filtering methods that now form e.g. the blockchain backbone come also from fields such as wireless (sensor) networks to give one example of how people make reliable systems out of noisy ones.
    - 10y ago
mcguire 10y ago
A software upgrade fixed the generator related problems: "The next day the REV was installed. It fixed the TV, the Touch Screen AND all the flickering, humming lights. Control 4 reported the REV “to fix some known bugs”. Hmmmm…."
jondiggsit 10y ago
The issue with the generator could have been as simple as the Generac smart switch not properly managing the load requirements of the panel.

jondiggsit 10y ago

The big issue of this story is this: NEVER INSTALL CONTROL4. It's utter garbaged. I hate to say it, really hate to say it, but if you want this level of integration in a system the only option is Crestron. I was hoping for a while that Savant would be a great option, but I fear they are backing away from the "PRO"-level integration now.