Thanks Dean for the honesty, I can respect that. You will do fine.



OEX- Same as the "Proprietary" control systems. My issue is with the PC and the ever crashing always unstable Microsoft OS.

Dean, Your problem is whenever someone questions your software or points out any potential problem there might be with selling your product you get defensive and tell them they are going to be left behind if they don't listen to you. You have no idea how to sell your product to us. Insulting us won't do it. If we are your target demographic try listening to us for a change and take a little "pee" now and then. I suggest you take some of your research money and buy a Crestron or AMX system and find out why every decent integrator out there uses them. You may learn something about your product by researching theirs.

How about this. Instead of ripping this guy, why don't we evaluate his software. I'm sure he'd allow us a free demo. That way we can make a more valid agruement for or against based on our findings.

oex,

There is a long history here you are not aware of. And if you go to his web site you can get a free demo.

This is my biggest pet peeve regarding these PC based systems. The Close-mindedness of the companies. I must admit I have not looked very deeply into your product at this point, but I plan to do so.

Heres the problems I see..........

We make no money on hardware, and the software is closed, Which forces us to rely on the manufacturer to provide updated modules and control drivers. So then we make no money on programming either....

Why do I want to sell this?

Xplore actually allowed me to make a fair amount on the hardware, but was always reluctant to share coding information. I installed 2 systems, one for a customer that liked to upgrade his componets regularly. Getting Xplore to create and IR driver for a new product was not easy. With AMX, if I dont have a driver, I can create one in about 5 minutes and upload it. done.

Maybe your system is more open, Like I said I havent looked into it yet.... But I'm a skilled programmer, and forcing the coding away from me is not going to win any manufactuer my support.

True custom installation companies have a real staff which includes sales, project managers, and installers and Programmers. Sometimes one person wears more than one hat, and sometimes Programming gets outsourced.... In any scenario, we make significantly less money selling PC based systems. Both up front and on the back end in Service.

ANd lets face it. We all got bills to pay, It would be wonderfull if all of us could treat this industry like a hobby and not worry about the paycheck every week.

AMX and Creston make Solid products, Allow us to make a resonable amount of money, Provide great support, and provide us all the tools we need to be self sufficient. PC Based systems cant fill all four of those categories. Custom companies NEED all four of those catagories to be in business 5, 10, even 20 years down the road....

That's not being defensive. That's telling you exactly what I believe to be the absolute truth, and what lies behind my getting into this business to begin with, and what has happened to many other industries in the past.

I don't believe I insulted anyone. If you can point out anything above that you believe is an insult, I will be happy to appologize.

That's definiite not the case. You can definitely write your own device drivers, and third party drivers currently outnumber the ones I've done probably. If you are into it and hvae the skills, you can write quite elaborate macros using the built in CML macro language.

In fact, that's one of the biggest advantages to a custom installer. Because of the object oriented nature of the macro language, you can actually create quite reusable chunks of code that can allow you to deploy each new system in less time with less programming (but does your client know that?)

For instance, I'm working on a set of macros that can very easily adapt to many (hopefully most) home theaters with just a little modification. I will be releasing them soon, perhaps in this next release. So those types of macro packs offer both the opportunity in many cases to get a lot of functionality done for a little work, but also the ability to modify them as required so they are flexible, but you still don't have to start from scratch.

You can create similar macro sets yourself, and just deploy them in various configurations in each new installation. Over time, you should be able to create a very flexible setup that you can customize easily, to minimize the time invested per-installation.


You can ask any of my existing users. Getting a new driver is pretty easy. I will do them free for you if you'll send me the device for a few days, or you can do them yourself. You can either either do them in CML (which provides a full graphical development environment in which you can build and test the driver offline), or you can do them in PDL (the protocol description language) which allows you to do simpler control by just defining the protocol which a generic driver will then parse and animate.


If you are a skilled programmer, then you are my kinda customer. My problem, if anything, is that CQC is too powerful for non-programmers. CQC was really designed in many ways on the assumption that just being a 'wire puller' isn't going to cut it in the future of C&A, and that software development will be what it's really all about, and where the real money will be made. So CQC is designed to allow you to build up your own customization 'tools' that you can deploy over and over.


In terms of making money, I believe that, as in all new business paradigms that come along, the means is there. You just have to find it. I believe that the move towards systems based more on programming languages will allow (as discussed above) the creation of code bases of your own proprietary advantage that will allow you to deliver functionality that you feel is best for minimal time, through maximum reuse from installation to installation.

On the hardware, if you add value to the hardware, by creating configurations that you know are robust and flexible (and in some cases turn it into an 'appliance' even though it's a PC inside), then I think that you can get the markups on that that will make it worth it. If the customer is looking at buying a Dell and doing the work themselves, or buying a built system from you, but confident that it's appropriate to the task and that you will do the customization work, I believe that you can arrange to get your markup.

I'm not trying to be flippant about your problems by any means. But, I just think that the market is going to go this way, one way or another. There is always a concern when this type of paradigm shift occurs that you won't be able to make money in the new world, but a way is always found, and those who find it will prosper most moving forward.

I'm certainly not getting rich on a per-sale basis. My software is only a few hundred dollars. So there's a lot of wiggle room there to add value to my software via customization work and sell the software package you eventually deliver for many, many times more than what you are paying me for it.


This message was edited by Dean Roddey on 05/29/04 15:23.

As QQQ said, the product is available for a 30 day trial period, completely unencumbered. So try it out and give me any feedback you have. Of course, elsewhere QQQ also said that Xplore was a software based control system who 'had their shit together', or something to that effect, the point being in contrast to me, so I guess he mis-called that one.

Unlike what some believe I always take constructive criticism and apply it where it's possible. And, unlike a big company, I can move quickly and if there's something you need in order to make it useful to you, tell me and I can often get it done in short order.

Oh, just to make sure I got my point over above about Xplore allowing you to make more profit on the hardware.... I guess what I was trying to get at was that if you were selling Xplore's hardware and making money (after Xplore took their cut), then why wouldn't you be able to do just as well or better by taking Xplore out of the picture and selling the hardware yourself and leaving out the middle man?

In some cases you may go into a home where there is already a comprehensive network with a domain controller and you'll be looking at a pure software job to install on their domain controller. And there you'll depend on the advantages of a library of tools that you've built to allow you to deploy a solution for minimal possible time.

And in the DIY world, I definitely think that it is to my advantage that I'll often sell to someone who already has the hardware that they want to use (and are using it for other things, so it doesn't count against me as a cost.)

But, in the high end, I think that more often you would be selling a hardware/software combination that you put together and customize, so you'd have the ability to sell the hardware with as few people between you and the factory as possible. If you come up with a (or a couple) standard configuration(s) that you can always work with, then there will also be minimal effort involved in getting the hardware together.

It seems to me also that, as we move forward into a world where software becomes more important (i.e. customization of the system via software), that just delivering a product based on billed hours won't be the way to go. Maybe I'm fooling myself here but it seems to me that you would want to move to a scenario where you charge X to deliver spec'ed functionality Y, and those who can deliver Y with less time and work on their part will do best. And highly reusuable software components will be a key tool to delivering more functionality for less time.

In the end, it seems to me that, from the high end customer's point of view, that the equation is something along the lines of "I want to get this functionality, and these companies are charging me so much, which do I choose?" He doesn't care how those prices are come up with, just whether he gets his desired functionality for a good price. So just because it only takes you 40 man hours to customize your software tools to do the job, doesn't mean that you can only charge for 40 hours of work at X cost per hour. You can charge a price that is competative with what the going rate is to deliver that functionality.

I'm not putting all of this forward as a scholarly analysis or anything, but it's the direction I think that things will go. I'm sure you guys will rip me a new one because of my simplistic financial analysis, but I it just seems as though, in a software based world, that this is the way it will go. If you can deliver the same functionality in considerably less time than your competitors, then you can charge less and make more at the same time.

Well, sort of. I did express interest in XPlore as a company doing some very neat things and the first real competitor I had seen to AMX and Crestron. That statement was 100% accurate. And I was hoping they would succeed. They were NOT a manufacturer of a piece of sofware, they were a hardware based system.

And I think I said they had some people with a strong background in the industry. I also never had anything to do with the product because the product was new and I knew there was a very good chance they would fail, as SO many companies in this industry have. And FWIW I knew that they were in trouble long before it became public.

As for you, I was perfectly happy to have little involvement in this thread and let you have your little debate over here just as you have at AVS Forums 1001 times.

So I have a question for you (the one I've been asking for about a year). Have you sold a single copy of that software yet? You might also want to fill people in on your history and all of your experience in this field (oh that's right, you don't have any but you don't think that's important).
Or the fact that you don't feel it's necessary to familiarize yourself with AMX or Crestron. And on and on.

Do we now get to look forward to this forum being filled with CQC plugs now that you've been banned from making them over at AVS forums?

Oh, one other question. Do you think you might want to start another thread called "Dean's endless debate" where you can promote CQC and endlessly lecture us all about how PC based systems are the future?

So that eastonaltreee could actually have his thread back instead of turning it into another long debate, as you have with so many in the past.

I even have a thought for you for that thread. has it ever occured to you that EVEN if PC based systems are the wave of the future, that has nothing to do with NOW, when they are no robust PC based systems.

Sigh... You are really a petty person, QQQ. You seem to feel as though my getting any respect for what I've done is an insult against you.

|

I have made some sales, and as far as being banned on AVS, that is not true.

|

Again, not true. I told you that I worked in industrial control and automation on multi-million dollar jobs. As far as the home automation world, I'm not a custom installer if that's what you are implying. But how many custom installers do you know can write half a million lines of code? I was a little busy to be pulling wire.

If your implication is that only someone who has actually been a custom installer can create a good control and automation system, you are wrong. It's not like I can't read and that I don't know what I'd want and haven't asked many people what they would want. And I will continue to take feedback and improve the product as possible and appropriate.

|

I made one comment, and would have left it that if not challenged. And one of my sales was to Alan Gouger, who owns AVS :-) So clearly they don't think I'm just a self-promoting moron.

Huh? More paranoid grand delusion hey?

Well there you go. You see, it might actualy be worthwhile to have some clue about the industry. Why would you assume that having experience in the CI industry means you need to be "pulling wire". Larger CI firms typically have programmer/s on staff that do only programming.

And I didn't say you had been banned from AVS, I said you had been banned from constantly plugging CQC on AVS. Start a dedicated thread and don't start hijacking every thread here.


This message was edited by QQQ on 05/29/04 17:27.

Ok, whatever. Moving on...

There will always be (IMO)a significant need for integrators / installers with any real success that PC based automation gets. The variety of capabilities and solutions for these capabilites is getting staggering. Some work well, others less than. It takes a knowledgeable integrator with good customer communication skills to bridge this gap. Not to mention the business savvy that it takes to make money doing it. There will be "out of the box" solutions (being designed now) and then there will be "custom" solutions. Not unlike the blackbox HA integration business. It's just another large set of tools for the toolbox.

Installation is a need for PC based solutions too. Only a percentage of the system is actually the PC. The rest of the solution are hardware boxes that requires wires (or wireless) connections between them that an expert needs to consult / design / install / support.

The reliability of PC systems (configured correctly) is also achieving excellent levels. Remote management of those systems is also supported with PC solutions.

So, Integrators and Installers, fear not, this is just another flavor to offer your customer base, when it makes sense for that customer's needs and pocket book.