Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
Custom Installers' Lounge Forum - View Post
Previous section Next section Previous page Next page Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Page 6 of 24
Topic:
EI going straight to builders with Lifeware
This thread has 350 replies. Displaying posts 76 through 90.
Post 76 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 00:04
AHEM
Select Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2004
1,837
One could argue that on of the reasons why the upper echelon control systems are doing fabulously well is because the other companies who are potentially trying to grab a share of the Crestron/AMX business simply cannot design products to compete with them.

So instead of anyone attempting to better what's already being shipped, we're constantly trying to dummy up the market with one-interface-fits-all types of products.
Post 77 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 00:05
AnthonyZ
Select Member
Joined:
Posts:
September 2005
1,987
On February 18, 2007 at 22:34, [email protected] said...

Microsoft is our dominate platform, nearly every customer
you will have in the next two years will already own a
PC with the Vista OS and be using it for movies, tv, pictures,
and music.

I think you may be ahead of yourself, Steve. Despite EI's pricing policies to the contrary, your co's claimed mid-market (and up) target audience is still, in large part, getting used to having a PC in the office. Let alone, multiple machines, networked throughout a home, tied into A/V (and by A/V I mean EITHER DA or HT as outputting digital and analog simultaneously is cost prohibitive to the self same mid market client) and running "complete" home systems. Two years is probably, and I stress the probably part, a bit premature.
"Just when I thought that I was out they pull me back in"
Post 78 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 00:45
roddymcg
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
September 2003
6,793
On February 18, 2007 at 23:33, juliejacobson said...
A lot of passion on this one.

A lot of high-end custom integrators have gone out of
business for this very reason--over-customizing, saying
yes to anything. How do you keep your programmers in check
when it's oh-so-tempting to perfect every little detail
of an interface?

I happen to have Crestron, got to pick any interface I
wanted, and it's nice (guifx). But if the integrator had
come to me and said this is what your interface will look
like, I'd have been fine with that. That's why I went
with Guifx, using the same template that so many integrators
seem to use.

Would I like the design to match my Frank Lloyd Wright-style
mid-century modern home? Sure, but I wouldn't pay a programmer
$100 per hour for the extra effort.

High-end, complete customization is a good business model
for some, but it represents a very small portion of this
industry. The large majority of integrators use less-customizable
products like HAI. That's a swell business model, too,
and shouldn't be pooh-poohed. (ha ha, I said pooh-pooh)

When working with programming and developement we leave the final figure open in regards to customization. So far this has worked out to cover us and keep our clients happy.

The 2 projects I mentioned total came to nearly a million bucks in parts, labor and programming. Almost everything was laid on the table and all options were covered. Very proud to be a part of these projects.

Granted, this is not with all projects and many go with a basic cookie cutter set up. But knowing I can take the projects a notch up is very important. We can and do give basics when the budget calls for it.
When good enough is not good enough.
Post 79 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 01:25
Audible Solutions
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
March 2004
3,246
On February 18, 2007 at 23:33, juliejacobson said...
A lot of passion on this one.

A lot of high-end custom integrators have gone out of
business for this very reason--over-customizing, saying
yes to anything. How do you keep your programmers in check
when it's oh-so-tempting to perfect every little detail
of an interface?


High-end, complete customization is a good business model
for some, but it represents a very small portion of this
industry. The large majority of integrators use less-customizable
products like HAI. That's a swell business model, too,
and shouldn't be pooh-poohed. (ha ha, I said pooh-pooh)

This is a completely different arguement then the one that says we will use the identical front end hardware as our backend backbone. You are correct in identifying one of the problems with this integration business. We do need repeatable solutions rather than customized solutions. The problem is that too many firms take a retail attitude to this problem. They sell 4 receivers, 5 DVD players, 4 projector lines, and on and on. This is nonsense and ultimately they will pay the price in software devleopement and unrelible sysetms. But so long as retail see custom as an other means for moving boxes this will be the paradigm. And don't confuse yourself by thinking that the biggest CI firms do not fashion themselves after these retail salons. They sell the same old expensive crap as do the hybrid organizations.

FACT: no firm in this industry does not subsidize installation and programming with equipment sales. No one will pay the real development costs it takes to make a system work. Thus we need repeatable solutions. That doesn't mean one cannot invest in in a superior GUI as you did with GUIFX or build one yourself.

But it is entirely different argument to suggest that the front end hardware, open to attack and hacks, and loading issues, will be reliable back end for a control system. Just look what can happen when a computer becomes inflicted with adware, spyware or viruses. How slow will it run when burnning a DVD? Segrigate the front from the backend and you have a vary different pardigm. Mr. Roddey has made a successful case for this. But these guys are either snake oil salesman or fast buck artists. Microsoft may be the answer but not with the hardware toplology suggested above.

I can program an Adagio to work faster than it can be installed. I earn a significant portion of my income from programming and I agree programming fees need to come down. You can do that by eliminating programming as in this model but also by selling repeatable systems and provide the illusion of custom progrmming

Alan
"This is a Christian Country,Charlie,founded on Christian values...when you can't put a nativiy scene in front fire house at Christmas time in Nacogdoches Township, something's gone terribly wrong"
Post 80 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 09:47
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
February 2007
31
On February 18, 2007 at 23:16, Audible Solutions said...
I've stood out of this debate as I do not believe in my
ability to predict the future. However, you are now making
a dangerous argument that cannot go unchallenged. Mr.Roddey
has made a convincing argument elsewhere that stripped
down XP can be a capable backbone to a control system
but it must be left alone in the back ground to operate
by itself. It has to be closed down. It needs to be
closed down to applications and viruses. But you are preaching
about putting a MS OS not in the back ground, stripped
down and free from any applications to one that is a quasi-server--but
not quite--and susceptible to every possible virus and
ad-ware attack some Eastern European 15 year old suffering
from anomie can dream up. Of course it's cheap. You've
developed nothing but an application and a skin. But
this is not a car where you have full control of the manufacturing
process. This is a control system running people's homes
and you are suggesting a control system paradigm where
the back-end control system is the same as the front end
DVD/music server?!!! Other than gas and oil what can you
put in a car. If you don't close Windows down you leave
it open to every possible attack known to man. FYI, my
brand new laptop just stopped running crucial software
after 1 week. And you'd leave that system's architecture
unprotected and open to attack?

Even your example of XBox is suspect. That too, is a
relatively closed system, save for the game developers
using the SDU. But you are leaving opened ended Windows,
completely vulnerable to attack, without any systems engineering
for any UI. If this is how you hope to reach the high
end then you will go the way of Phast and C4. Crestron
has already lowered the bar with the Adagio and it's entry
price is half of yours. That includes a pre-engineered
system that takes 15 minutes to program. AMX has made
purchases that suggests that it too will be entering the
entry level system's integration market. These are companies
with both the engineering talent, the marketing power
and the experience. What would have happened to CQC if
Dean Roddey had only the financing to hire a high powered
marketing firm? At least his system makes sense and I
have problems with his system's integration as it is purely
a software based solution that depends on third party
hardware upon which he has no control ( touch panels,
not the PC ).

Everyone wants to go after Red State value consumers.
But I'll promise you this. If your paradigm is to suggest
that the same HTPC or media PC that will act as the front
end source also serve as the back end control then you
are a snake oil salesman. Enterprise servers have a different
topology and Microsoft is even marketing a stripped down
version of these enterprise solutions. So why would you
wish to suggest, what Mr.Roddey has here suggested is
a bad idea, that Mr. and Mrs. RedState, who value reliability
as much as their bank account, follow a typology that
has been proved unreliable? Because you have a horse
in this race? I understand why Best Buy has partnered
with you. They don't wish to commit to the one solution
that works. they'd rather sell a pseudo solution that
doesn't work. The Tweeter model is what will eventually
happen. Centralized integration by programmers for the
national chain, running on a reliable hardware and software.
It may be Lifeware or life support but it will not be
the hardware typology you've suggested.

However good your software application, I will promise
you this. As long as you permit your application to run
on an open source open ended architecture it will fail
as a control system. It will be bogged down by applications
( as in anti-virus ) by DVD burners, by virus and spyware
attacks.

Alan

Here is a prime example of talking out of sequence. I have not talked about system architecture once in this blog, just talked about PC in general. If you would take a second to visit our website, you would realize that we have an XP embedded control box that sit in the background that acts just like a crestron or amx controller. XP embedded runs like an aplliance, no reboots, no antivirus, no problems. XP embedded is very, very , very stable. If you are unfamiliar with our system, please take time to do some research or meet with a sales rep. The simple fact that you attack our product without having any background to our approach disappoints me. At least I have installed the products that you are currently selling, and have a reasonable understanding as to what they do and how. We do a MCE Boot Camp at EHX, if you want to learn more about it. Most guys that attend say it is well worth their time.
SC
Post 81 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 09:52
joshod
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
July 2006
58
I'd really like to know where the great margin would come
from on a Samsung Q1 when they are availabe all over the
net for less than a grand. I also find it funny that instead
of one of EI's own wa expensive touchpanel, the VP of
sales uses a cheap third party panel.

This is something that has gone unaddressed so far, so I thought I would shed a little light on the subject. I've seen multiple posts about how the Life|point TP's are so overpriced compared to the others on the market. Though the Life|point touchpanels may cost more than the others, they also DO more than the others. The Life|points are the only high-definition TP currently on the market. Not only are they the only HD panel out there, they are also capable of displaying up to 4 HD feeds AT THE SAME TIME. Certainly this places them in a different category from the others and justifies a higher price.
If this functionality is not something that is desired by your customers or for that matter just doesn't interest you, by all means, use one of the less expensive models, as Steve has done. The others will work just as well for controlling automation. The beauty is that you have options for controlling your system, unlike the other systems that require the use of their own proprietary TP's. The Life|point TP is simply another option that EI has offered to work in conjunction with the Life|vision component, and for customers who enjoy the option of viewing content in HD.
Life|support
Life|ware by Exceptional Innovation
Post 82 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 10:17
QQQ
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2002
4,806
On February 19, 2007 at 09:52, joshod said...
The Life|points
are the only high-definition TP currently on the market.
Not only are they the only HD panel out there, they are
also capable of displaying up to 4 HD feeds AT THE SAME
TIME. Certainly this places them in a different category
from the others and justifies a higher price.

I have not made any derogatory comments re: the price of your touchpanels, in fact I don't even know what they cost. However, both AMX and Crestron have offered high definition panels allowing multiple video feeds for years.
Post 83 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 10:21
Audible Solutions
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
March 2004
3,246
On February 18, 2007 at 22:34, [email protected] said...
Microsoft is our dominate platform, nearly every customer
you will have in the next two years will already own a
PC with the Vista OS and be using it for movies, tv, pictures,
and music. Think about expanding that platform and making
it better and more powerful, rather than trying to sell
against it. You can not convince a lexus owner that there
is anything better and they have the hgihest return buyer
rate of any luxury automobile.

I did not write the above. I agree that nowhere previously did you suggest a hardware paradigm but I think it reasonable to conclude from the above that you expect to deploy your software into this sort of hardware configuration. Otherwise, who gives a damn whether you are running XP, Ly nix, or a proprietary OS? As long as your application is residing safe and secure in a separate box from the one being used for "movies, TV, pictures and music" I have little problem with your point. But no client cares about the OS. He wants a system that works for a price he is willing to pay. What you wrote above suggests that you expect to deploy your application on the front end not the back. These are very different solutions.
"This is a Christian Country,Charlie,founded on Christian values...when you can't put a nativiy scene in front fire house at Christmas time in Nacogdoches Township, something's gone terribly wrong"
Post 84 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 10:32
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
February 2007
31
On February 19, 2007 at 10:21, Audible Solutions said...
|

I did not write the above. I agree that nowhere previously
did you suggest a hardware paradigm but I think it reasonable
to conclude from the above that you expect to deploy your
software into this sort of hardware configuration. Otherwise,
who gives a damn whether you are running XP, Ly nix, or
a proprietary OS? As long as your application is residing
safe and secure in a separate box from the one being used
for "movies, TV, pictures and music" I have little problem
with your point. But no client cares about the OS. He
wants a system that works for a price he is willing to
pay. What you wrote above suggests that you expect to
deploy your application on the front end not the back.
These are very different solutions.

We finally agree, I was simply making a point that they may already own a peice of the system, this is where the CI company comes in and has the attachment sell in making the PC into a properly designed and architected home automation and media sharing system that takes advantage of the platform. The architecture, now exposed, is to have a dedicated XP embedded controller running the critical peices of the home control system that is not subject to any of the peices that have been raised as concerns in this blog. The MCE boxes are just the front end, and still can be stripped and made very stable.
SC
Post 85 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 10:40
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
February 2007
31
On February 19, 2007 at 10:17, QQQ said...
I have not made any derogatory comments re: the price
of your touchpanels, in fact I don't even know what they
cost. However, both AMX and Crestron have offered high
definition panels allowing multiple video feeds for years.

AMX and Crestron do not offer digital video on their panels, they simply pass analog video over cat5e. Very different. The advantage is resolution, and local dvr functionality of video on the TP. Not to mention you could have multiple TP and MCE boxes watching a video or recorded TV show all a few frames a part with independent DVR functionality. Let me add that no more hardware is required to do our TP, just the panel , no NXI or anything else.
SC
Post 86 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 10:40
joshod
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
July 2006
58
<< If you are unfamiliar with our system, please take time to do some research or meet with a sales rep. The simple fact that you attack our product without having any background to our approach disappoints me. >>

It's a very good point you make Steve. There are SO many misconceptions floating around out there that it's difficult to know where to begin. If folks spent less time blogging hatemail, and more time actually researching, there would be far fewer misconceptions and much less need for clarification.

This is what I would advise:
Guys, set your notions aside and take the time to really give the system a fair look. I have no doubt that you will find things that you would do differently, and that is why we value your input. But I also have no doubt that many of you will find factual information that will change your way of thinking a bit. If you decide our solution is not for you, fair enough. But let's keep it professional and frame your evaluations in a respectful manner. In other words, "Lay off the Hater-aid." EI is not out sell you snake oil. We simply want to provide another (and we believe better) option to our dealers and their customers. If you have questions about what you find, there are several of us here who can answer them for you, and would be happy to do so. We are all professionals here, so again, let's keep it above the belt, shall we?

Last edited by joshod on February 19, 2007 10:48.
Life|support
Life|ware by Exceptional Innovation
Post 87 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 10:55
AJF
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
November 2002
196
This is a Forum not a "blog" . (Of which the distinctions between the two you seem to be blurring . ) :)
Post 88 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 10:58
joshod
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
July 2006
58
This is a Forum not a "blog" . (Of which the distinctions
between the two you seem to be blurring . ) :)

Has this discussion really come down to the splitting of hairs? I'm sure my point was clear.
Life|support
Life|ware by Exceptional Innovation
Post 89 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 11:08
AJF
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
November 2002
196
It is not hairs that are being split.

A blog is a user-generated website where entries are made in journal style on a particular subject .

A forum is a facility on the World Wide Web for holding *discussions* on a particular subject .
Post 90 made on Monday February 19, 2007 at 11:21
joshod
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
July 2006
58
On February 19, 2007 at 11:08, AJF said...
It is not hairs that are being split.

A blog is a user-generated website where entries are made
in journal style on a particular subject .

A forum is a facility on the World Wide Web for holding
*discussions* on a particular subject .

Thanks for the definitions. Now that we are all clear on what we are posting to, did it really have anything to do with the point of the conversation? Let's move on to something worthy of discussion, please.
Life|support
Life|ware by Exceptional Innovation
Find in this thread:
Page 6 of 24


Jump to


Protected Feature Before you can reply to a message...
You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now.

Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.

Hosting Services by ipHouse