OK, I've done a lot of searching here on the whole "AMX vs. Crestron" question for those of us looking to enter into this level of control systems. From several threads I have gleamed pretty much the following:

-AMX might be less initial investment
-Either way I should take all the trainings immediately AND hire out the programming on initial jobs.
-Crestron offers "complete" solutions, while AMX is a bit more open architecture allowing integration into other brands (for HVAC, etc.)
-Both offer easier (relatively) object programming (Simpl+ & NetLink?), but AMX has line level programming and now Java (a plus for me as I know 'enough to be dangerous' in JS.)
-I LOVE the idea of AMX's web control of panels for support issues (haven't determined if Crestron offers similar/better in that regard)

Does is sound like I am leaning towards AMX? Probably, but the real kicker for me is that I do a lot of retrofit vs. NC and thus - a fair amount of RadioRA for lighting control.
Do either of these systems play nice with RA? I envision using something like an IR>RF interface from Lutron connected to whatever Crestron or AMX control box... I know I won't get 2 way back from RA devices for feedback to the touch-panel. (although with Chronos, we could theoretically nab status from the RS-232... for that matter a Chronos install can be controlled via RS-232, but not all installs have Chronos.)

Am I missing the painfully obvious or looking like a jackass for even asking? :) I would like to "settle" on a system I can grow with. To that end, which of the two (Crestron vs. AMX) is better suited for smaller, single room systems with eye towards potential expansion later. I have many clients that I will do a media room or family room system for, and then sell them lighting control and other systems later. With respect to lighting, that's what I like about RA; it's 100% retrofittable and pretty scaleable (to a point). Can we say the same definitively about either or both of the control cos. out there?

Any opinions that you all might have would greatly appreciated. In searching it looks like Impaqt uses AMX and RA so perhaps he will at least chime in....

TIA!

Lutron has a separate RadioRA RS-232 module for your installs not using Chronos.

Part # RA-RS232

Using AMX/Crestron or others, you can get status feedback to update your touch panels.

George P.

Yes, and thanks for the response! I often forget about that module now that I have Chronos in the arsenal. ...does so much more if I can sell it!

Anyway, any additional thoughts on the underlying debate of AMX vs. Crestron with respect to expandibility and/or interfacing with other lines?

Here is something to confuse the issue.

Either Crestron or AMX permit you to interface to any product. However, this means you must do a lot of serial string parsing, which, depending on your programming abilities, can be daunting.

Both companies understand the the issue preventing their attaining greater maket share is the requirement of custom software. One way out is software wizzards which permit you to get a system up and running without having to master any software languages. There are a number of issues with wizzards, one being scalability and the other being the ease of modifying the code the wizzard generates. Alongside the issue of scalability is that wizzards to not execute tight, well written code.

The other way around this is to produce equipment that sits on the RS-485 network and communicates internally with other system devices. Here Crestron is ahead of AMX. It is not that you could not use April Air thermostats with a Crestron system but why would you go through the aggrivation if you could use a TSTAT? You could certainly use a Linn multi-room/multi-zone audio system but a PAD8 makes the system simpler to integrate. If your primary application is resididental as opposed to education or commercial Crestron makes your job easier by simplifying the degree of bidirectional communication necessary ( keep in mind that RS-232 has a spec of 60 ft on its distance whereas the RS-484 buz can often go to 5000 feet. ) You could use any available matrix video switcher on the market with either system but, while pricey, the Crestron Video solution offers products that are not easily configuable in the AMX so it is easier to mananage without the software managment amoung serial devices. Crestron also makes its own lighting control solutions so while you can talk to a Lutron, Vantage or Lightouch system with either product having a product that sits on the 484 bus makes communication easier. While all solutions offered by Crestron currently require wires you will see Graphik Eye like devices and wireless smart devices within a year.

Finally, while the heart of Crestron's propritary language is symbolic it also includes a line code utility called Simpl+. To sum up, AMX has taken the traditional control system route which requires you to be adept at programming and to relay on serial string parsing and the limitations of RS-232 protocols ( you can get around this with RS-422 converters or short haul modems but this adds complexity and cost ). Crestron also allows you to use the system as a control system but they have decided to market themselves as a whole house product solution. They offer maxtrix audio and video switchers, video distribution over CAT5, HVAC products, lighting control, and now bidirectional control of certain Somfy motors.

Whether you prefer one software language to the other, the internal box solution to the external, or the coporate style of one or the other is a personal perference. I perfer the Crestron box solution to the control system solution of AMX but this is a personal preference. Either company will perform as advertised and function as a control system.

Alan

Alan:

That is excellent perspective.. a million thanks! What you bring up is a really good insight into some of the longer term issues with using the products - in fact it's one of the reasons I didn't rush into this side of the business when I got started. What I've learned elsewhere, and what you are reminding me with respect to these two lines, is that "open architecture," while attractive at first, isn't always the best business decision. The geek in me wants all options available, unlimited programmability, etc. The realist in me is constantly reminded that I am a small shop with NEVER enough time in the day. Canned/complete solutions providers can really be my friends! I don't need to re-invent ANY wheels here. If Crestron has audio distribution that is *relatively* plug and play with their controls, albeit pricey, there is MUCH to be said for that.

Man, if nothing else I sure see why both these companies suceed. They are different enough from each other to provide very valid arguments for both in the marketplace.... And I can certainly see how larger integrators may ultimately sell both depending on the application(s)

Thanks again for the feedback....

AMX has HVAC Controls... had em WAAAAYYYY Before Crestron.....

AMX Has Matrix Audio and Video switches... AS-8 and AS-16 for Audio and Also an 8x8 (Although only Composite) video card for the PLB-Hub.

AMX is also partnered with Lutron so there are lots of pre-made Lighting modules available......

AMX also has a system wizard programming interface that is really good. You dont need to know anything about programming to configure a basic system.

AMX has their own RPM lighting control system as well. And its commercially speced about 100 to 1 over Crestron....

AMX Axlink is pretty much the same as Cresnet as far as distances and control options go......

Phastlink/ICSNet is a 10Base T Power Over Ethernet communication protocal that is quite handy.

True 100 Base T Network Compatability is of course available

RS232 is standard
RS422 is standard
RS485 is Standard

Of course, theres always good ole relays and I/o's too

If the device you want to control cant be done with one of those... It doesnt need to be controlled....

Other AMX Benefits not mentioned above:

Native Ethernet TCP/IP Support. The NI Series processors were designed to be ethernet/TCP/IP Compliant.

PC VNC Control

G-4 Web-Control. Emulate Any Modero TOuchPanel on Any Networked PC. This is an Awsome feature.

What AMX Doesnt have............
Rebranded Universal Remote Control Home Theater Master remotes for twice the price of the original remotes.....
A Surround sound processor with no user controls
Rebranded Video Scaler/Processors with Buggy Interface firmware that hasnt been fixed in over a year
Rebranded ATI amplifiers that can heat a mid sized home.
A Lighting control system that they have to give away to their dealers just to move product out of the warehouse
Wireless panels with a Microsoft OS

Yes, but then they will send you an email _telling you_ they've heated the house. Is that the long-delayed climate control you referred to above?

They haven't given any away to me yet, I've bought alll mine. :-(

Impaqt

You seem to enjoy turning discussions into debates and then turn the debate into mine is bigger or better than yours. You have the really childish tendancy to wish to prove that the product(s) you prefer is truely superior and that is not demonstrible in this case.

I never said Crestron was better than AMX or AMX better to Crestron. My post was sufficently long that it was both unnececessary to catolog the similarirties between the products nor to make the point that a RS-485 bus is a RS-485 bu or that both companies resort to software wizzards to sell products. However, my point that AMX has chosen to maket itself as a traditional control system comes out of AMX itself. While they offer boxes it would be foolish to argue that Crestron has not decided to market itself as a box solution to simplify integration while AMX has not.

Moreover, your bizzare catolog of the Crestron product line speaks for itself and, of course, adds nothing to the discussion save to make you feel superior. Manufacturers OEM products all of the time. Resorting to traditional amp design is a choice that is neither good nor bad, save in terms of sound quality and that is subjective. Class D switching power supplies are hardly better just because they run cooler. I suspect you have designed many systems with traditional amp designs and engineered your racks to deal with the heat issue so why bring up a non issue? Both companies have histories where one has a product before the other and the following year the other comes out with the same product. Big deal. What have you added to the disscussion.

Crestron offers control modules for Lutron too. I believe I made the point that either system works as a control system and both systems try to help their dealers who might not be great code jockeys by writing macros or drivers for third party products. Nonetheless, Crestron has hardly given away its lighting products and surprise, surprise, Lutron has reduced its prices due to the competition. The actual problem with Lutron was their choice to screw the A/V dealers who built the integration line ( Homeworks and Homeserve ) by selling via their distributors to any electrician who wishes to put the product in. The back story, which I am sure you know, about the relationship between Lutron and Crestron and why Lutron has partnered with AMX again is good gossip but does not add to this discussion. The fact is undeniable. A product sitting on a RS-485 bus is easier to integrate than a thrid party product that communicates via serial or TCP/IP as that information must be parsed in order to be used. The AMX lighting skew hardly counts as such, which is why they partnered with Lutron. Crestron lighting goes way back ( and was the reason the original Lutron reps were AMX reps when Lutron first came out with Serina ) but it was a marketed as a commercial product.

Of couse both systems have I/O ports, support RS-232, RS-422, RS-485. Why state the obvious and why suggest that AMX has something that Crestron does not? AMX has gone with VNC while Crestron prefers a RGBHV connection. This is hardly germane to someone chosing one product over the other as these are not solutions typically used or important in the residiential market. The superiority of VNC, a compressed video and unsecure connection over full resolution RGBHV is hardly self evident and project specific. I suspect even you would acknolwdge that you did not become an AMX dealer because they have VNC as opposed to a hard wired solution. Crestron offers TCP/IP control and the differences while important are technical and as a practical matter irrelivant. Just like the VNC/RGB debate.( Although I would think that as a high end guy you would always side with full resoluton video over compressed but why let facts get in the way of your argument. ) It hardly matters that you need to add extra TCP/IP client symbols with specific IP address while with AMX you do not. Ultimately you get the same result.

But to compare Crestron PVID/RMC solution to a composite switcher not only distorts but deceives. With Crestron video, as you damned well know, you can send analog video of any quality, from composite to component, over CAT5 with no signal degridation. You can send audio and video from upstream locations down stream to the main system for distribution to other locations. Whether this pricey solution works for you is beside the point. Crestron video is not just a matrix composte switcher ( they have that too ) but the point is that Crestron Video is part of their Crestron box solution.

Ultimately both componies offer expensive products that work, if you can program them. Crestron has resorted to a box solution while AMX has remained faithful to the control sysetm concept. Do you really feel that is inaccurate, Ipacqt or do you just feel the need to argue? Finally, if OEMing equipment is so bad has it prevented you from selling Runco?

I am still awaiting your name and location. I would very much like to meet-on my dime.
Alan

This message was edited by Audible Solutionns on 09/21/04 08:52 ET.

Both are good, for the most part, offer most integraters the solution they are looking for. If you are not a dealer for a lighting control company, Crestron can get you into that market, so can AMX but most AMX dealers and programmers I meet use Lutron. The only big comment I have seen is, that if you were doing a very large scale project (a university eg.) , many people say you would want to lean to AMX then.
I am sure there might be a few Crestron people that may disagree, but that is something I have heard from more than a few fellow integraters.
If your a small company, you may find a local guy that just does programming, both systems regardless of which one claims to be easier than the other will take alot of time to program, you still need to know how too.

Give me a break. I purposely stayed away from saying anything that might hurt your feelings this time. All I did was talk about AMX vs. Crestron. Of which I am obviously AMX biased on the subject.

I didnt say either was better than the other.... I know Crestron has more advanced video switchers, I would love for AMX to have the Pvid, thats why I put "Only COmposite" in my thread onthe AMX switcher mention....

AMX is finaly adding a VGA connection to ther Modero panels.... Long overdue, but I kinda like being able to check my email wirelessly from the couch on my MVP-8400. Very few of my clients would actually use the VGA conection, while many of them use the VNC......

sheesh, and Its NOT hard to find out who I am if your really all that desperate. Look at my profile and follow my companies Home page.

My Opionions and feelings are not necessarily those of the Company I work for. Thats why I use a Handle in the discussion forums, not because I'm afraid of you beating me up.

I really dont understand any of this this time.... all I did was talk about the product. and you've turned it into some sort of personal vendetta against me.

Maybe I'll just never respond to any message youve posted in ever again... Would that be satisfactory???? I hate having to walk on eggshells to express my opinion. I'm posting from americal where the Freedom of speech is pretty important. and again, I said NOTHING personal to or about you, but you come back at me with persoanly attacks and physical threats.... Get a grip dude..... Its only a discussion forum.....

Fact: Both AMX and Crestron make control systems that can control any device with some sort of control protocol. AMX has chosen to remain a control system and control third party devices while Crestron, especially through its Crestron Home Skew, but also via its Media Manager Skew for commercial/education markets, has chosen hardware solutions. Both have advantages and disadvantages. I suspect even Impaqt would not argue that it is easier to integrate devices that sit on the system's own RS-485 bus than those that do not.

This would be one factor for someone considering which company to choose. Which is why I said that I would confuse the issue. If you are more familiar with one company's programming language or think it superior then I would think that would tip the scales. On the other hand not having to write drivers or fix the drivers that either AMX or Crestron supplied to obtain the data required for the program is a nice benefit and not to be underestimated. Sending audio and video up and down stream with either PVID or Media Manager is a nice solution but also hardly an ultimate reason for selecting Crestron over AMX. Crestron offers a superior lighting solution that sits on Cresnet which is a big advantage over a driver parsing return strings from Lutron-unless than driver has been proved bullet proof. But again it would be easier to accomplish certain unusual programming needs in Simpl or Simpl+ than in that kludge of a program Lutron uses as a programming unility.

The only relevant point to this debate is the following: AMX markets itself as a control system and Crestron, while it can be a control system ( and control any thrid party device ) has chosen to market hardware solutions to the same problems. Ultimately it comes down to your ability to write software to deal with the devices you control.

fact: differences in touch panel resoluton are in the typical job irrelivant. VNC vs RGB are non issues. CAT5 video vs Coax also non issues. AMX supporting multi-casting IP address while Crestron requiring multiple client symbols is an important difference but in the end also beside the point as you can obtain the same result with not much effort.

Fact: to review each product and trash it is also useless as it is subjective. You seem to have this need to trash and destroy. Crestron's amps are OEM'ed and run hot or hotter than AMX's. They give away their lighting products. They OEM remotes and charge too much. AMX has solution a, b, c.d but you neglect to add that so does Crestron so it's meaningless.

I chose to be a Crstron dealer because I live and work 20 miles from their factory. If something broke or they claimed the system would not work was the result of my errors I wanted the ability to cart it into Crestron and challage them to make it work. I actually did this once, in the bad on CNMSII days, and the result was a new chip set supplied by one of the back room boys. It also led to a different attitude when I called in for support from then on.

I would think that the decision on which company to go with would be based upon 1) the programing language. 2) the maketing philosophy ( hardware solution vs traditional control system) 3) company's history and reputation ( AMX is a publicly traded company while Crestron is privately held. AMX had phast while Crestron, despite many issues with their products' firmware has made each of them work-even if they had to fly engineers out to the job site. This never happen to me but a buddy in New England has had this happen. ) What is not important, in my opinion, to anyone trying to select a control sysetm company is whether a PAD 8 is better than a AS-8 or if a G4 is superior to a Isysis or I/O panel. Why? because the differences are only important to us geeks and not to the end user. In fact, I do not believe you have any issues with OEM'ed products in general and the fact is that both comapnies charge far too much for the products they sell. Either system costs about the same. In some cases Crestron is more expensive or others AMX provides a better deal. In neither case are we talking about price points such as Control 4. Crestron for years had better wireless product AMX had better keypads ( to give one example ). The following year that would change. It is futile to argue that AMX or Crestron is better as ultimately the hardware solutions cannot compete with the difference a good programmer makes.

If we examin the issues issues the original poster wished covered it was what are the advantages of either control sysetm and which would provide him with a better ability to control lighting sysetms. He felt more comfortable with the fact that AMX was moving to Java as he could program Java. I only sought to inform him to the other important philosophical issue and that is hardware solutions that sit on the control system LAN vs open archetecture. All else is marginal save perhaps the reputation and I would agree that AMX has put Phast behind it although you have to keep what they did in mind. How does the pissing match, where my product is better than yours help when in the end the differences are marginal and ultimately irrelevant save in a particlar job. The differences are at the margins and come down to sales. You like to debate Impacqt, but at least address the arqument to the facts the poster is interested in.

If he feels more comfortable with Java and AMX has indeed shifted its language to Java from Axlink then he should become an AMX dealer. Programming is the most important factor in a control system. But Crestron's decision to sell hardware solutions to system's integration problems is a factor he should consider. If he is more comfortable with procedual languages I would still lean to advising him to go with AMX but the above advice about the hardware solution should still be considered. This it seems to me is the matter to be debated not touch panel reslotuon, matrix switcher differences, amplifier design and other differences in similar products offered. Sell against Crestron all you want but the fact is that either system will control any product extant and the differences in hardware are far less important than differences in the programmer's ability to write code or formulate a successful GUI. You are in love with argument, Impacqt, but at least debate the relevant facts and not the irellevant ones. One does not become an AMX dealer because a G4 panel is superior to a Isys panel or because AMX supports VNC but not RGB. On the other hand you might become a Crestron dealer because they offer a touch panel at a price point ( 650-1100 ) where you think the bulk of your sales might lie. The ability to sell a solution to your market at a price point is important too. As we will see if Control 4 is a real product.

One additional note as I have gone back and read the original post, I am a long time Crestron dealer so I am not current with what is currently required of a new dealer. I have never been required to purchase lots of equipment as a condition of obtain the franchise. Like every manufacuturer with a rep they want an opening order. No one has told me I must have x amount of processors in house, y amount of touch panels, z amount of video product, w amount of lighting products, n amount of audio products or o amount of tuners. Crestron has made a big play for the residiential market and their madia manager skew will attempt to do the same for the commercial/education market. They have become a hot company and are arrogantly riding the wave of success. The size of your opening order may very well be based upon how much the rep values your business. If he/she believes you will be a significant player then you will get the line without the high buy in. If your business is considered to be at the margins then they may wish to determine how serious you are by requiring a large opening order. I would find the rep and try to determine what he/she would expect and not base my expectation upon the experiences of those on line as who knows what is currently reqired or what might be waved. [added]

Alan

This message was edited by Audible Solutionns on 09/22/04 09:50 ET.

Impaqt:
Rather than respond via e-mail let me state the following publicly.
I was not isulted by your response to my post nor were you insulting.

Might you also consider the possibility that your post failed to addresss the issues of the original poster and were a tad argumentitive just for the sake of being arugmentitive? I would be happy in an other thread to discuss item by item each product in both company's skew and then determine their relative strenghs and weaknesses. If you believe that useful to the community then let's get to it. But if we are going to get into a debate about whether it's good or bad for a DAP8 processor to not have front panel controls then on what are we arguing? Should a Crestron system fail the client would be unable to use his system? A DAP8 is a rather high end device and while it could be used in any size sysetm I suspect it will be placed in systems with front projectors, motorize projection screens and all sorts of other complicated switching and control. If the control system goes down, and if it's a DAP8 it has to be a Crestron system, that system will probably not be useable no matter how long you stay on the phone and try to help the client. It's a Cresnet device. If Crestron goes down so does the whole network. And if it's just limited to the failure of that room's touch panel it sitll might be daunting to get the system on line knobs or no knobs on the processor. On the other hand if your design philosophy is such that you want a system that can be made to fuction if the control system fails you can do this with Crestron as well as AMX. Because Crestron offers a box solution does not mean you must use it. Don't use a PAD8 for audio distribution. Use an Autopatch or Extron in place of the PVID. Use Lutron, Vantage, Lightolier or some other lighting sysem in place of Crestron lighting. Use your favorite tuner in place of the C2N-TFM or anyone elses satellite radio. You do not like the design of the CNX-AMPs then use your favorite amp instead. Last time I checked, Sonance, Niles, Audio Control to name but 3 offered multi channel amplifiers for sale.

You think the G4 panels out perform Crestron's? I agree. But so what, as either interface can be made "cool" and in the end a cool button and an ugly one perform the same function. And how many G4 panels are sold in comparison with the lower resoluton and less expensive panels in the skew? You wish to claim that VNC is superior to hard wired RGB? That is questionable but again this is a debate at the margins. A PVID/room control are a cool products but also an expensive solution even if room control boxes permit decentralizing control and not just video. Ultimately I beleive this a futile debate as we will be parsing are responses ever more tightly and arguing over minute differences that in the end come down to personal preference of features and system design. Is DVI superior to component? Not as much as the absence of programming that supports either resolution would be. How about compsite vs S-video? Personally I have almost always found comosite to be at least as good and often better. If I think a Simm2 is better than a Runco can this argument be won? How about if I think a Lumigen ultimately better than a Faroudja because it comes close enough in performance at a much lower price. In a high end equipment forum we could expend all the energy in the world to see how many angels can fit on a pin head. Small differences on the economic margins matter at that price point. This is an integration forum where I would think discrete IR codes or a serial protocol count more than picture or sound quality ( of course the holy grail of having all of the above would be great ). Does it ultimately matter if we use 802.11 or 802.14 as a wireless platform? Might a propritary platform also have its strenghts and weakness? These are not Cray II or Sun Workstations we are speaking about.

More to the point, if you wish to debate let us not debate for the sake of debating. Let us try to limit the debate to the parameters of the post in the original thread. If you believe I have mis-characterized AMX as a control system then feel free to dispute but you may wish to argue with the marketing department in Dallas and not with me. You wish to argue that Crestron has not decided to offer hardware solutions to integration problems? You wish to being up some other philososphical issue I have left out or have over valued then let's get to it. To argue over each item in each company's skew is an exercise in futility as where there are differences in performance they are at the margins. A G4 may be better than an Isys panel but the Isys panel is still damned good. Crestron has E-control and while it may not be as "neat" a solution as is offered in a NI series AMX processor you can still perform wireless and or computer control with the Crestron. Is it as seamless? Does it really matter so long as it works?
I am willing to bet that most on this board do not know what VNC is and what the differences between it and a hard wired VGA connection are. Nor the advantages of Crestron supporting SSL while AMX does ( or did ) not. While these differences might be important in a specific application I would doubt that it would be responsible for anyone choosing one platform over an other. The fact that you were needlessly insulting in an other post has nothing to do with your arguments in this post not helping the original poster. Both AMX and Crestron offer the integrator the tools to perform the job. While there are differences they tend to be at the margins and ultimately they come down to the company's maketing decisions. Crestron offers box solutions and AMX does not. Both offer software that makes possible integration and whether you prefer to sell only a control system and use it to control sub systems or you buy into the one company solution is for each business owner to decide for him/herself.

I am sure you are a nice, church going guy who would never vote more than once per election who speaks often to his mother, eats apple pie and supports our troops. You obviously possess a lot of knowledge and hold strong beliefs about system design and control. Might it not also be true that you are a tad argumentitive and perhaps went just a bit off the thread topic with your line item equipment evalutation. Might you not also agree that the differences between the two company's products is really much ado about nothing? Or do you actually believe that the minute marginal differences between both control company's products are so important as to justify one compny being the choice of an integration firm over the other?

Alan

This message was edited by Audible Solutionns on 09/22/04 11:15 ET.

Then why re-new your Physical threats against me? I could care less if you agree with my opinions, but these rediculous threats are childish and immature to the max.

In your initial post you implied that AMX did not have their own Thermostat and Audio Matrix switchers that ran on their own bus. Thats was what caused me to ramble on quite a bit

The only things I know of that Crestron has over AMX as far as non-control related boxes are the PVID System, which is a great video solution, the DAP8, which I dont like, and the big 4 output scaler/PIP/POP thing, which is a RGB Spectrum box with a Cresnet interface. Theres probobly a few more, but those are the ones I would[of] use[d] if I was still dealing with crestron.

ANd I dont recall saying I like VNC better than Direct connections. I said its more convienient to be able to check my email from the couch, but a direct RGBHV is definatly better for speed and resolution....... And thats why all the AMX dealers have been on AMX's ass since the original Moderos were released to add direct feeds... WHich they did.........

Well, I do regret just a bit that I asked a question that may have gotten personal for some, but I want to thank audible and impaqt (and the others who responded). This discussion highlights the very issue I have been having in looking at the two products: There are many subltle (and depending on one's personal preferences), important differences between this panel or that one, protocals, etc. However, when you look from an "overview" standpoint, Audible's point is well taken - and I felt it last week touring their booth at CEDIA - that Crestron is going after a "in-house solutions" approach whereas AMX is saying "we can do anything with anyone."

This is a key difference and one that is really hard for a guy like me to discern prior to doing business with either company (at an initial glance anyway). It is way too easy to get caught up in the shopping process of "oooh, I like the panel's hard buttons" or "cool, all outputs I can imagine needing on that controller." Then, we spend oodles of time and money getting started only to find that we might have been better off elsewhere. Again, many of you offer both systems and that seems ideal to me, but that won't fly at this stage of my business so I gotta do my best to consider the less than obvious variable that might come up with the stuff I am already selling and am comfortable with.

Alan: You remembered that I was enthused about AMX's open programming and their move to Java as that is something I know somewhat... The truth is that your broader look at the lines is FAR more important to me. I have learned that while tinkering may be fun personally, it doesn't pay the bills. On the lower end of control, who here hasn't stopped selling Prontos because, while incredibly flexible, you can never feel like your done programming the damn thing! Nothing like trying sell a $350 remote for $1,200 with programming and constantly go back to tweak even way past the $1,200! Great for my own system on a rainy day when I have nothing else to do (ha ha!), bad for working with my clients....

For me, as a smaller shop, the packaged approach that Crestron might provide me is very attractive. I would easily give up - again, at this stage in my business - niche levels of functionality/features over the ability to quote and deliver predictably any day of the week!

Thanks again for the time you have taken to provide info. This is the kind of stuff you cannot gleam from the brochures!

I suspect Impacqt will agree with the following: if you sub contract your programming make sure it is to a reputable firm. The only time I subed out programming was on my first two jobs. The first was to Crestron and there were issues and it was difficult to pursuade them to come to the job site ( remember I am local to the factory ) and fix the issues. The second time ( second job ) was to a local dealer I partnered with and all went well. The moral to the stroy was I learned to program as I was ultimately responsible for making the system work.

I now program for other companies and I always show up at the job and do not only send code in via Ethernet or PC Anywhere. Hiring the correct programmer or programming firm can lead to a fine symbiotic relationship where all involved make out well. However partner with the worng firm and you will regret moving up to the integration market. The good news is that both AMX and Crestron offer programming wizzards that can at least get you started ( and maybe paid ) and while that is a poor long term strategy it may prove attrative in the short term.

When I made the jump to high end integration Crestron and AMX mostly fought over commercial projects as both did not understand the residential market. However many of us saw the benefits of professional integration equipment over universal remotes, no matter how fancy (pronto) and eventually Crestron moved to the Crestron Home and Media Manager product lines. AMX went public and made its original owners and investers a lot of money and partnered with Phast as their residential solution. Crestron has become very successful as a result but Impacqt's implied point that a one manufacturer solution has dangers should that manufacturer disapperar is valid. I doubt either company is about to close its doors no matter how successful control 4 is and most lighting systems work for years. Surround processors can alwas be replaced and the beauty of the CHV-TSAT is that it can be used without attaching it to Cresnet and it will still function as a thermostat. So if your processor goes down your HVAC system still works. I did not know AMX had its own Stat as on every AMX job I have been on April Aire or Enerzone was the stat installed. Ironically, if you have no training in programming learning Simpl may be easier than a procedual language. And Crestron has Simpl+ which is a proedual language.

Obviously I know Crestron better than AMX but you should weigh both systems carefully as either will enable you to enter the world of big time integration. I would pay less attention to whether Modero touch panels are superior to Isys as I doubt either will be a staple of you typical job. I have never used a VNC connection (nor have I had to telnet ) and I have used VGA connections a few times. So VGA vs VNC may not be very relevant to you. The basic sysetms I sell include the overpriced OEM'ed remotes Impacqt spoke dispargingly of, 1 way wireless touch panels, 1000 and 2000 touch panels. I have yet to sell a 4500,5000 or 6000 which are equivilent to the Modero panels. My point is that however cool you will probably not sell tons of these products so debating the relative benefits may not be useful to you..

I would price out the typcial system you expect to sell and see which has solutions you CAN sell. If that includes lighting or other sub systems include those costs, including programming. A show room with lots of expensive cool looking equipment you cannot sell will be no help to you. If AMX has the equipment or the philosphy best suited to your business plan then go with the good buddies from Dallas. If you buy into Crestron's hardware solution ( as I have ) then go with it. Which ever company you choose will provide you with the software and hardware tools to integrate. Ultimately, Impacqt and I are debating soltuions and differences that are irrelivent to the typical job you will sell and install. You may find that AMX with its coposite switcher, audio distribution system keypads and touch panels may be the right product for you. Or you may find that Crestron offers the best path to your success. At what level do you want to play. If it is super high end than the differences Impacqt and I are debating matter. If its entry level you will never encounter them. If it's in the middle I still doubt it will matter. Ultimately a client is buying your sevices not the products you are selling. Find the compnay that works best for you.

An other factor is that the Crestron programming site on Yahoo ( no relation to the company only folks programming the product ) is much better then the AMX site. So if you need help the Crestron community seems to be more active and helpful than the AMX community-although there are plenty of AMX programmers on the Crestron site. After all, a for hire programmer does not want to place his eggs in one basket when programming is the sole source of his income.

Alan