Hi guys and gals!

I'm trying to research different automation lines right now, and I thought I'd seek out your opinions on this topic.

I've been in our industry for about 7 years now and am an accomplished audio/video/security installer and sales person. The area where my experience is lacking is automation. My company is a dealer for Elan, and I've done some elaborate z-systems with multiple Via!s and such, but they just don't cut it when it comes to more advanced automation functions such as remote location control.

I realize that many of you are going to start shouting Crestron, Crestron, Crestron, and I have considered it. There are a few factors preventing me from going this route. 1. Startup costs for buy-in and training are close to $30,000 all said and done. That's a considerable amount to recoup, especially considering that I only openened my shop a year ago, and I'm trying my darndest to finance everything out of cash flow. 2. I'm not sure my market can support enough jobs to justify this investment at this time.

That being explained, I would appreciate recommendations of a system that can do the following:

Remote Access (Telephone or PC)
Water Heater Control (Gas Preferrably)
HVAC
Security Control
Remote Video Monitoring (I know this can be separate with static IP

Any help is appreciated!

Easton Altree

using the elan system you can tie into alot of what you want wether be through Elegance or HAI. The Elegance system will do alot that they dont really show anyone and I didnt find out till I had the rep come out.

Your best bet would be to team up with someone that does write code and has experiance in this realm, in the mean time you can start learning the code and quarks involved with this side of the business. That way you aren't trying to figure things out at the clients exspense.Crestron and AMX, right now, are your only viable options for this kind of control with the flexibility I'm sure you are going to want. Don't discount the future. though, diffenetly learn XML, Linux, ect. to some degree. Anyway you look at it, there is going to be a learning curve, one that doesn't make since for you to just pick up a line with a buyin to worry about. When you are ready the need for the buyin and extra training will still be there and will make more sense. I hope this helps a little, I went through the same scenario about 5 years ago, with enough watching and self taught training I was able to make the transistion fairly seamless.

I'd argue that your best best is to consider PC based systems like ours, CQC. It's inherently IP based and network distributed, very flexible, and I'll be happy to help you get drivers done for anything that you need that we don't currently support. It'll end up being a lot less expensive, and I believe that PC based systems are the future of automation (in the same way that they have knocked expensive proprietary hardware based systems in many other industries.)

Check it out at www.charmedquark.com

PC Based Systems..... Yeah.. Look how great XPlore Solutions has done with their PC based system....

Oh....

(For thouse of you that dont know... THey're gone.....)

I'd look into AMX. Initial investment will be much less than crestron, and from an Automation standpoint, it will do everything you need.

No automation companies prior to PC based systems ever went out business? If you depend on a revenue stream too large for the current growth of the market, things like that can happen. Xplore, as I understand them, was trying to sell basically a replacement for traditional proprietary hardware-base systems. CQC is not trying to do that, but is unashamedly making a product that builds on the advantages of modern PC and network infrastructure. If you want to package it just like a Crestron system, that's perfectly possible, but it can also be a truely network distributed control system that takes full advantage of your IP network.

Anyway, the folks in graphics design, music production, film production, movie special effects, publishing, secretarial equipment, payroll management, and others all kept yelling the same thing, most of them until it was too late and computer based systems made them irrelevant. The move to PC based systems in control and automation is so inevitable that it's not even really worth arguing about much.

Someday, PC's may be reliable enough to run an automation system. Unfortunatly, today is not that day for specialty retailers and custom installers. It is inevitably a hobbiest product. I cant afford to be running out to clients homes to do a "Control-Alt-Delete" every week or so.

PC's arent quite ready for critical home automation needs. (And if you think a home theater isnt critical to a person who just spent $100k, your fooling yourself.)

By the way... Advertising is available here on Remote Central. Daniel would be more than happy to set you up with some banner ads I'm sure.....

You are assuming that the control PC is just another PC sitting out in the house and being used to surf porn at night, but that's not necessarily the case. A PC which is set up on good compatible hardware and some precautions taken (e.g. CD or flash boot image) will be every bit as robust as a proprietary hardware-based system, which is effectively the same sort of hardware just sold for a lot more. Many bank ATMs out there are just PCs running a general purpose OS, and they do quite well in a far more abusive environment than a home theater.

With a PC-based system you can choose to run loose and fast or to be very closed and stable. It's your choice based on what you want and what you want to spend. CQC can be run in a kiosk mode in which the end users never sees a keyboard or mouse, and any configuration is done over the net from another machine on the network. Or it can run on your existing PC network, whichever you want. And there are probably a thousand times more $25K home theaters than $100K home theaters.

As to advertising, when I can afford it, I'll do it. Until then, I'd prefer not to go the same route as XPlore by spending more than I'm taking in. In the meantime, if you think my fundamental concept isn't even workable, then you should have little concern about my arguing for it's capabilities here, since it's not going to sell anyway.

I think the point was just proven, as I originally posted, that right now and in the forseeable future you should think about reliable obtions unless you have the skill set to write the necessary drivers and code to support the system. Not to mention building a bullet proof, probably Linux based(god forbid you would even think of relying on Microsoft products for this scenario),hardware solution. Most people here don't have the gonads to pull this off in a real clients house without fear of ever crashing while running critical lighting or security apps, except if you're trying to plug a business.

You don't have to have the skills to write the drivers and the code, any more than you need to know how to build IR emitters to use a Crestron system. I've already done that for you, or will do for you in the case of drivers that you might need. All you need is the skill to configure drivers, set up the actions you want to be able to invoke, and draw the interfaces using the interface designer (and of course install the hardware, which is a requirement either way.)

I think you guys must feel really threatened by PC based systems, or you wouldn't go so out of your way to run down something that you claim has no chance to succeed anyway. But, as I said above, there were people in all those other industries who were saying that PCs would never replace their dedicated hardware tools until it happened.

So it's kind of hard to believe that people would still believe that of the control and automation world, when it might be even more functionally amenable to general purpose computers than some of the ones already replaced. As media management becomes more important, the general purpose PC's ability to offer rich user interfaces and to do heavy multi-tasking and it's natively IP based networking, will just make it even easier for them to replace traditional automation systems based on proprietary hardware.

Obviously, the entrenched companies will try to spread out. But they will be caught between a rock and a hard place. They can't sell you a proprietary system that you are going to live with for the next 10 years, at the same time that they are telling other people that PCs are the future and that they are moving in that direction soon. And those companies that now survive on high margin, proprietary hardware are going to find it hard to compete in a world where the software is really what matters and hardware is a commodity.

You can dismiss it if you want, but before too much longer, you'll either be installing general purpose PC-based systems (whether openly so or effectively so just behind a pretty enclosure), or you'll be getting left behind.

It isn't necessary to twist our arms on this matter. I concede that the future is open protocal and possible PC based. I mentioned this in my first post in relation to learning certain languages and operating systems. We are talking about right now. The guy was asking for solutions to grow upon. Do you really condone a risky endeavor for someone who has never even dipped into this part of the business or would you want someone to benefit from a huge network of information from veterens that know things work. It's not just the processor but also how a programmer interacts with other systems that he knows inside and out. Learn first than experiment for the future.

Given the resistance to things new exhibited by so many 'old hands' in any industry, I think it will often be the folks without any existing vested interests and 'less to lose' who will take the chance on the new technologies and make them happen.

Anyway, what direction he ends up going depends on what he wants to accomplish and where he wants to end up, and I was just offering an option, and only twisted because my offered solution was getting pee'd on.

Not peeing on, just questioning the solution for this gentleman. You sometimes have to question the true response on a site like this when the best solution for the persons problem seems like a personal plug to sell something. It's evident that this is now not the case with you. BTW, I checked out your offerings, it looks great. Good Luck.

Well, to be fair, it was a personal plug to sell something. But, I just don't have the revenues yet to buy any advertising, so I can only get people aware of it like this. Though I'm one of those engineer types who traditionally looks down his nose at the sordid business of sales and marketing, I've learned a new respect for those who can do it well, and the difficulties involved.

It's a serious product, and I've got about 15 man-years in it (about 12 years of almost full time on top of a a 'real' job and the last two and some odd at 2x full time), but it's tremendously difficult to get people interested in a new product, much less one of this complexity.

Though I do want to sell into the high end of the DIY market, you guys are really my ultimate market, so I have to get it onto the radar screens of my primary market however I can at this point.

Dean is kinda right about the hardware/software issue. All mp3 file servers are nothing more than a simple piece of pc type hardware w/hard drive & simple os running the manufacturers propriatary software. whether it be the Integra, Yamaha MusicCast or Escient's Fireball. All three are almost identical hardware with very different 'software applications'. My dumbass 2 cents