Steve,

Oops, hit enter while typing.

As opposed to an "expert" who appears to have 0 experience in the industry and refuses to say how many installs he's done? Let's see if one of us Neanderthals can offer an analysis of Lifeware.

1. Lifeware wants to change the home automation paradigm as have many before them such as Premise Systems, and their compatriot Control4 (though I am no C4 fan, I happen to think they have quite a good grasp of the industry and the paradigm they seek to create is a sound one).

2. Generally a company that seeks to change the paradigm under which an industry operates can challenge it in one ore two major ways. But it's exceptionally difficult to challenge virtually every paradigm in an industry all at once. More on that in a moment.

3. Some of the paradigms LW is challenging:
a. The product is software based.
b. The pricing structure is unprecedented (in THIS industry). For instance, they want to charge the end user based on the number of devices the system will control. Want to control 50 lights instead of 60? Your price changes. Want to add 10 more lights a month down the road? You have to pay LW more to control them even if you already own all the LW hardware!
c. It is heavily integrated with MS media center product.
d. It can be very expensive while not offering customization capabilities dealers playing in those price ranges are used to enjoying (and yes I DO understand the potential advantages of a unified and consistent UI).
e. and on and on...

4. LF doesn't even seem to know how to define their own product in a few sentences or less. Is it based on Media Center? Is it a piece of software? Does it just offer an extender that happens to integrate with Media Center? LW may respond that these things do not matter to the end user, that it's the *experience* that matters and they would be correct. But they DO matter to the dealer and it is dealers they need to sell their product.

5. LW seems to be very secretive about their product. I recall reading that people had to sign an NDA to see the software or see price lists (I am sure I will be corrected but I remember it being a bit bizarre)? Again, this indicates a serious disconnect from THIS industry. Sure, I've had to sign NDA's when beta testing something etc., but come on.

_____________________

I could come up with more but that's a start. Now does all of that mean I think I know everything or that I'm sure they cannot succeed? No, but I am darn skeptical, and it has nothing to do with the fact that I hate MS or am threatened by change ot any of that nonsense. It has to do with understanding that they have a touch nut to crack here. One thing I notice EVERY TIME a software company enters this market is that they do NOT understand it. I remember smiling to myself the first time I looked at Premise Systems and thinking "ya, this is pretty cool, it's ashame you don't know you won't succeed". I do have to give LF some small credit that they are at least trying to develop a model that will result in recurring income and not just depend on software sales.

Final thought in this post is that I'm not about to get on a plane to visit them nor attend their training. If they want to attract successful high-end dealers who can sell a product like this, then put up an area on your website where potential dealers can get technical information about the product and (gasp) download the software and evaluate it.

The interface would be determined in how the system designer and homeowner chose to configure them on the guis, but just typing in names and associations, just like asigning stuff in lutron homeworks software. The magic is the elimination in the timing writing the code to get the interface and association with everyhting including phantom keypads, and debug and such. I haven't seen a programmer blwon away by getting everything out of a network connection yet. no diagrams, no polling, just did it.

But my Infusion controler is already programmed for everything. What do I get by using Lifeware that I don't already have? I already have a HiRes touchpanel, I already have keypads, I already have handheld remote if I want it. I can use any third party remote like RTi for full control. What does my extra 7k get me?

Still got to have amx cable or cresnet, so additonal cat5e wire on top of the building network is what i am refferring to.

Freudian?

I only skimmed Jason's spec but did you read the same one that I did? Only reference I saw was hold down off for 3 seconds turns all zones off as opposed to the room you are in. Not the way I like to do it but that was the only reference I saw other than holds down a preset for 5 seconds to store it.

Otherwise the very essence of everything he wrote WAS one-button control. If as you say you are just going to use the transport commands in MCE, don't even try to tell me about usability because you just lost have of the population right there! Many people do NOT know what the "universal" transport commands stand for.

Seamless integration with all other subsystems and logic, such as, i have a security system, in two clicks i can have it turn on a path of the lights when i disarm the security system after dark. Or i have it so if my motion trips in my master after 1:00 in the morning it turns my bathroom light on for 5 minutes. No code to write. Goodnight on the lighting keypad arms the security and turns off all the audio and video in the house

One, I take issue with your use of the word "seamless" when applied to, and I quote, "all other subsystems". You would still need to write scripts or drivers to control those devices with which EI has no previous agreement. In other words, if I add RFID to a clients home, there will still need to be "custom" programming involved. Second, logic is not exclusive to EI. Virtually ALL HA systems can do all that you used as examples and much, much, much, much, much, much more.

So every peice of equipment listed, you have already written code for except for a few misc commands? How hard are those commands to add? Are they 2-way?


Actually, what is requested is a simple one button push to do any action on the system with the exception having a global off button on the keypads. This is a function where having to hold a button ensures that there is no accidental activation of this function. Are you saying that the GUI you are using meets the required spec?


This spec was kept simple for a reason. The system and equipment chosen were kept simple for a reason. Every button was defined for a reason. Either a system can or cannot meet the required spec. If a system cannot provide real-time volume feedback on every touch-panel page, then it doesn't meet the spec. Can your system meet this overly-simple specification for all required parameters? I know the Crestron guys are nodding thier heads. If so, then we can move on to discussing metadata and advanced functions.


This is system and these are features that we see being asked for. Especially from older, retied clients. They are not asking for lots of menus, but are asking for simple, reliable, inuitive control. We are looking for something like this:



That is exactly what was requested and what the spec calls out for.


Holding the button down is only used for Global Power as discussed above, and for editing presets. How would you do it that makes more sense to a client? This is how thier OEM car stereos work. It's how other audio components work. Are you suggesting that we shouldn't use a system that they are already familiar with for editing presets?


Actually, with the exception of the VCR/DVR, there is no IR in the system. Can EI handle these "complex IR macros and such" as required by this simple job?


This system is designed for no instructions needed. If you can read at a 2nd grade level, you should be able to operate every portion of this system with no instructions. For instance the DVD player turning the system on when a DVD starts palying. Does EI have a system that works better than this? I know clients love this feature and to us, there is no simpler operation. There is an example of a touch panel that would fit well in this system above. Are you saying that this is a difficult panel to operate? How would EI handle this?


There are other items in there that you didn't get a chance to answer. For instance the hardware. Do you supply all the required parts for a job like this? Do we have to peice it together with parts from PC vendors? Do you have a solution for the UL approved in-wall panels? What about two-way keypads? What do you advise for those? What about having the touch-panel in the room and the hand-held remote be in sync at all times? How does EI handle this? Are you suggesting that this is not an important part of an automation system? When I push a button on the wall, I don't want to pick up the remote and have it doing something else. What about the one-button push for all source commands? What about the feeback from the projector? As a user, I want to push the video button on the touch-panel, have a page pop-up that says what mode I am currently in and give me a few choices that I can change it to. All discrete, no toggles, I want to know which one it is, and I want feedback. Same with sound. Is this possible with EI?

This system was kept simple for a reason. If an automation system cannot handle simple requests on simple systems, then they are not in the same league as AMX/Crestron.

No AMX cable required unless you are using some older axlink keypads/RF receivers. The Netlinx platform uses existing network connections for all keypads(dms)/touch-panels/masters. Netlinx was designed to utilize an existing network for all communications. Has been that way for years. All IP devices, no special cables, just a connection to the client's existing network.

I'm having a feeling a deja vu in this thread, which I've read before, only the last time, it was under the Control4 heading.

QQQ challenges that Lifeware cannot easily define their product. I would challenge that Lifeware is spending hideous amounts of money on advertising, but what is your long term goal?

Are you gunning for the Crestron market? That proverbial nut is going to be extraordinarily hard to crack.

Is the objective "home automation for the masses"? You seem too pricey for that avenue.

What's to keep Microsoft from developing their own in-house version of what you're doing?

I'm 11 pages into this and still don't even have a general idea how much any of this actually costs. I'm wondering why I would need the secret-decoder ring to access even retail pricing.

If LW has a new pricing model, then great, lets see it. I'm open to new ideas. Ducking the simple questions asked here makes my spidey-sense all tingly.

Basic operation & functionality is also pretty vague. I hate vague.

Nothing. Or, maybe they'll just buy LW when they deem them ready for prime time.

This industry isn't SW based, it's hardware based and it will always be that way until everything is wireless TCP/IP and truly plug n play. AMX and Crestron have a large sku and so do the other successful companies. All they sell is hardware, they provide the SW to run all those parts.

What they have in common is that the SW is just as good as the HW.

LW and CQS seems to me SW based companies. Nothing wrong or evil with that. But, Crestron, AMX, and even CQS seem to have an identity and a market/s. I don't quite understand what LW's is and what they're trying to do. To be cynical, it seems like SW guys and marketing people have the reigns and are driving this company. So, a bigwig in LW has a CI firm in Florida... why? As of CEDIA, LW had almost 100 employees (according to a LW rep there) and was privatetly owned.

It seems to me that some pretty clever guys have this great idea to create a SW platform for CI's that does (insert cool thing here) and (here) and (here). Then, when it seems to be taking off, sell it... maybe to Microsoft. A SW platform that cuts out the expensive and evil programmer. I know of another company that sells SW that is installer configurable based on AMX hardware. I doubt that they're going to go as far they think they will, for one fundamental reason: CI's won't utilize it to stay within it's limitations. They drink the Koolaid and try to fill shoes that are too big for it.

Maybe this is a big conspiracy theory, but I'm pretty sure that the guys I know didn't make the SW/AMX hardware package to change the industry or get their pictures on the front of CEPro. They're doing it to get rich, and they're hoping that somebody will buy it. Is LW doing the same thing?

It seems to me that once LW is running stable on real jobs within their target market segment/s, they will be viable as a long term solution. This thread does have a little deju vu to it, no?

Either way, I think Steve and joshod have held up well to many tough but fair questions and comments, and I wish this thread to continue.

But determing what the homeowner wants and creating that is what custom installers do, it's not what your product is doing for them. And it's still hard and it still oftne takes multiple iterations since the customer doesn't always really want in the end what he thought he wanted and so forth.


This isn't very magic. The Lutron system provides access to the configuration data to the automation system, and it sucks that out and knows what is available. Our Vantage driver does the same. If that's magic, it's pretty common magic.