For one, custom layouts? I am not a C4 dealer, so you'll have to let me know if this has changed.

And I'm not talking about adding or removing buttons. I'm talking about custom templates.

see my post right before yours.... multiple TVs in one room, pin code lockout of sources, maybe even a freakin' blu-ray icon for blu-ray players? :)

as I explained to another dealer asking about c4... it's great when you keep it inside it's little box - it really is - and if a big job is just 100 of those little boxes then you're fine. you just have to know what's outside that box.

in fact, now that I think about it, we haven't really had a job that wasn't suited for C4 in the past 2-3 years.

I believe they are two different style of systems from top to bottom and when digging into the details, the depth of the difference can be seen.  C4 is faster to program, initially.  C4 Composer has very powerful features that can be added quickly to programming.   Everything is more modular based and pushed into a templated UI.  Crestron allows a completely blank sheet of paper in programming, a total open architecture... And for a large part this is true even within the SystemBuilder environment.  A Crestron programmer can write his or her program, and fluidly control how the logic flows, interface style and layout....Core 3 UI, or a simple graphical layout.  What you see, when you see it...and control precisely when logic does whatever it's designed to do.  From my perspective, Crestron programming is more mathematical and consistent.  On the other hand, C4 is faster to get powerful features running quickly, but QC must be paid attention to....at completion of the project and even after.
Both have advantages, and it really is about the dealer, the project level, and required complexity of the system.

What about Elan G? How does it compare in the marketplace? From reading the threads here, the glaring difference between Crestron and Control4 is the customization aspect that Crestron allows. Would Elan G be on par with C4?

It's not only customization--which I'd confess few take advantage--but the number of solutions at your disposal. You do have DM 6x4 and 6x6 and there is no alternative at this price point from anyone else that is as reliable. You also have the MLX3, MTX3, TPMC-3SMD, TPS-4L and TPMC-4SMD. You can use RTI or URC remotes in a Crestron system, including their RF keypads. You have a of options and different price points and none of them make use of the room's display.

C4 only keeps pace with Crestron by making use of displays for its OSD. Its remote is realy 1-way as its display is too small for much more than telling you what room you are controlling. How are you selling? Is it price, features, are you in a feeder system obtaining jobs or do you send out blind bids? Are you able to take advantage of what Crestron does better and can you do so economically? Do the programming advantages C4 or Savant offer better fit into your company? Do you do commercial or are you primarily residential? Are most of your jobs at the lower end or higher end?

I may not like using displays for touch panels but it has proven successful and it does lower price points. The app store does allow its dealers to take advantage of solutions that the native system does not enjoy.

As for Elan? It is a sorry system that is not half of what C4 is.

Alan

One REALLY big difference for me is that if I sell C4 I have to compete with Best Buy. I don't have that problem with Crestron.

Another big difference is that I don't want to sell a client a solution that isn't scale-able. It might be a smallish system now but what happens when you hit C4's limit and the client wants to go further? You throw the C4 in the trash and start over? With Crestron that's not a concern.

I'm an old Tweeter guy and the crap I had to put up with back then has kept me away from C4 still. Kinda like how I won't put a Kenwood head unit in because in the mid-90s changing settings was horrible. C4 might've fixed all the issues I had but still don't like the risk.

All of those comments are valid, and clearly make further the points of separation AND, now with the 3 Series processor and latest firmware, OSD UI is possible with Crestron as well.

Jim, I have a media room with 3 tv's in one room that C4 controls just fine. So it can be done.
Also heve you looked at the blackwire app, as this is another way it can be done.

Hey, I'm an old tweeter guy too! although I left before C4 made it into tweeter. Anyway, if your selling against BB and you can't win, then its time to retire and move on.
Also, I understand your reservations as to your earlier exp. with C4, however at this time, with their current lineup of controllers you will have a very hard time out growing a system if it is done right (just like crestron, if its done right its great! If its done poorly well.....)

On a side note I do think that one of Crestrons strengths vs C4 is that Crestron has many more commercial and industrial solutions than C4. So in that regaurd, they do have a HUGE advantage over C4. In the residential area, I really believe that the difference between them is much smaller.

Just strapped my flame suit on.

Guys - I want to ask a question: are you selling C4 and Crestron because it's good for you and your wallet, or good for your clients?

My point is this. Let's imagine a "typical" large project. Let's say it's a 6,000 square foot home. There will be a nice 5.1/7.1 surround system with a flat panel in the family room, maybe a second similar system for the kids' playroom, and maybe 2 or 3 standalone TV's in bedrooms, the kitchen, etc. There will be DA in 4 - 8 rooms. There will be a Lutron Homeworks panel, a security panel, and an HVAC panel. All of the gear goes in a rack in a closet somewhere, or in the mechanical room. We'll distribute HDMI via a matrix switch or whatever, using any of the now-mostly-sorted Cat6 extender products.

We don't sell Crestron or C4 - don't believe in them, never have, probably never will. Because I don't see the point. The 5.1/7.1 rooms get a nice wand remote from RTI or URC - the client is happy. The secondary rooms get more basic RTI or URC wands. They get Sonos for DA. And in terms of integration - hello, iOS and Android apps. Here's what I mean.

Back in the old days, integrating the control of things like music, lights, HVAC, security, etc. meant RS-232 programming and building a custom interface to issue the serial commands. So a Crestron or AMX or whatever box goes in to tie it all together, with touchpanels, etc. displaying the custom interface to the user throughout the home.

But hasn't the world changed? Don't many/most subsystem builders now offer their own, native iOS and/or Android apps? My point is that the iPad or iPhone is now the integrating device, rather than Crestron or whatever. I don't understand why, now that we're in a world where the subsystem panels can just hang off of the LAN, and be controlled by apps written by the subsystem manufacturer themselves, why we put in another layer (Crestron, AMX, C4, etc.).

I get that C4 and Crestron offer the potential for a common interface for everything. But at what price and what level of complexity? And who really cares any more anyhow?

I would really like for someone to explain to me why Crestron, C4, AMX, etc. is really necessary at all . . . and my flame suit is securely in place. I can hear the choruses of "you don't get it" - but details, please, not just the same old justifications.

Level of complexity? So by being able to control everything in the house from one COMMON interface is more complex than having multiple individual apps? Really? Sorry but it's painfully obvious you don't get it.

In your scenario it's, pick up the URC/RTI remote to watch TV, then put it down, find the iPhone/Android to turn on the music, want to adjust lights? Sure, just close the music app, find the lighting app. Want to adjust HVAC? Sure, close the lighting app, find the HVAC app. Want to check security? Sure, close the HVAC app and find the security app. Phone rings, answer call, get person to wait while you exit the phone screen, find the music app, open it up and pause, then continue conversation. I won't even get into what happens when they all update their individual apps and break things.

Our scenario it's pick up Crestron/C4 remote and start watching TV, use same remote to turn on music system and select source, use same remote to adjust lighting, use same remote to adjust HVAC, use same remote to check security. Do you find this more complex?

What happens when guests/family come to visit? They have to borrow the iPhone/Android to turn on the system? Or download the apps onto their own phones and set them up?

I honestly hope you don't ever get it. We make so much money off of companies like yourselves that don't understand usability and integration. We get to come in, fix it, make it work easily and look like the good guys!

^^^ agreed

And since you are fishing for a debate...


Both. I like having my company's "wallet" full of cash...you know, so we can continue to service clients far into the future, pay bills, pay employees and vendors, etc. It's a business (as opposed to a hobby as many are treating it), formed to be profitable and increase earnings yearly. Are you content with declining earnings just because all of the cool kinds have an iPhone and control their commodity items with limited functionality?

I would like for you to explain why you need iOS to control things when free remotes are bundled with every item. Most even include batteries right in the box.

Then we can discuss luxury cars and how a used Geo Metro can get you from point A to point B so whats the point?

And please... do not use the same old justifications like air bags, heated seats and other comfort and safety features that come with a more expensive & more profitable product.

Everyone cares......Your analogy of a system is the IOS version of 6 remote controls in a home theater system.

+1 on Kgossen's reply
+1 on Tweeterguy's reply