madcodger

Would this work for paired Sonos players? We have some rooms that use Play 3s as L and R stereo pairs rather than having a single Sonos for the room. And for the family room, we have a Playbar, subwoofer, and two Play 3s to creat surround sound. Could we just say, "Alexa, trigger kitchen..." Or Alexa, trigger family room..."? I get the problem with, say, party mode - but what about Sonos devices that always work together? Also, this whole "trigger" business they require is not natural speech. I can see my wife saying, "Alexa, play ___ on Pandora in the kitchen". But requiring unnatural phrasings like "trigger" is not helping. For many non tech enthusiasts, may as well be "walla walla humballa", or some other goofy phrase.

ROFL. Yeah, like that whole internet thing.

Thanks, Paul. I also found that thread and read through, but had not considered IFTTT. Will now check that out. I have to say, the Harmony works well and has very high WAF. Winner in my book. Now if only I can find the time to mess around with it. I think that's the thing I most desire about retirement one day (quite a few years off): Time to play around with cool ideas.

Correct. Communicates via wifi as I understand it. Given that others appear to be using REST commands with it, this gives me something to explore.

So, I purchased and installed the Hub and basic companion remote, and as oberkc notes, it is thus far the best remote I've ever used. Easy setup, works perfectly, and no interference with Insteon/ISY. I was under the initial impression that it "spoke" Insteon, but it simply receives and transmits wifi and bluetooth, and transmits IR. I will check into ISY communication at a later point via wifi, but for now, it solved the immediate need very well.

Hi everyone. Apologies if this has been discussed elsewhere, but a quick search left me a little bit unclear. I need to purchase a new remote for our new living room TV (LG 65UF9500), which uses LG's RF-based magic remote. This is necessary because, while the magic remote is fantastic for controlling the TV and Sonos Playbar, it lacks the ability to control DVR functions on the attached Tivo mini (enormous fail on LG's part). Conversely, the Tivo remote can't control the Mini, LG TV AND the Sonos Playbar simultaneously (basically Sonos' fault, but that's another story). Anyway, the solution appears to be either a Logitech Harmony "Companion" remote, or their "Elite" model, both of which have IR and RF control, and both of which use the Harmony Hub. So: Biggest question: Is the Logitech Harmony Hub compatible with the ISY994, in terms of not interfering with the ISY? We do not use any of the IR functions of the ISY, and I have little interest in doing so at this point. But I do not want to have issues with the Insteon system, which is the backbone of my automated home. Am I OK to add this Harmony Hub? Other questions: 1) Is there anything to be gained from adding the Harmony hub, in terms of communicating with the ISY? 2) If anyone cares to recommend other IR + RF remotes, I'm all ears. Any ideas? 3) Any opinions on whether I really need the "Elite" model? I really just want to use the remote to control the Tivo mini, LG TV, and Sonos Playbar. Anything extra, such as turning on / off Insteon-controlled lights, is just a bonus but not necessary, and not worth the additional $200 they want for the Elite model. Thanks for all help, Joe

Thank you, Jon. So, if I buy an Echo to play around with, is it safe to say I will RETAIN my Mobilinc functionality? I use Mobilinc all the time, and need it far more than Echo capability.

Sorry, but that is no help in answering the question. It just opens up a purchase page. I am following the thread as I contemplate buying an Echo, but do bot want to lose Mobilinc either. Can someone enlighten us, please, on the question of using both Mobilinc and Echo, and the effects of this?

Same here. Port forwarding seems to be no problem, so still can't figure out this portal business. Haven't spent much time on it, admittedly, but much of HA seems to operate in this space of few clear explanations, and much chatter between members. Confusing for those of us with much interest but little time to follow along.

So, I don't really want to flame you, but your comments invite a response. I probably contributed to taking your thread to places that didn't directly address your problem, but it wasn't an intentional slight at you, and many of us did try to help. You even thanked a respondent early on, before you got bunched up about something. And when you go off about how you almost burned your house down, you do invite a general "safety in automation" discussion into whatever specific question you wanted answered. What I think you fail to understand is that this is sort of the nature of a forum. It's a bit like a bunch of old guys sitting around having coffee or beers, frankly. One of us brings something up, the others actually do try to address it, but almost inevitably the topic strays a bit. And while it can get out of hand now and then, most of us sort of enjoy the conversation and if we don't, we just sort of wander into another one. I got called out by a guy in this thread, but he had a decent point. And while I may grumble and poke back a bit, I'm not packing up my marbles and stomping home, 'cause I probably want to come back and have more virtual "coffee or beers", and maybe give and get some reasonable advice overall. As shocking as this may be to you, none of us were sitting around like we're your personal Helpdesk, hoping that you asked us something. But if you want to pull up a virtual chair and mug, talk about "ISY stuff", and can deal with the fact that not every comment will deal with your immediate and specific concern, you might get more out of this. Otherwise, go hire someone to deal with your issue, 'cause a free forum (thanks to the nice folks at UDI), ain't for you.

Well, the worst thing that has happened to me personally is that one of the doors actually did close on a car once, the doors sensed the resistance, and reversed. Well, actually they tried about three times to close as I watched from a distance, but the car kept winning. No damage to anything. That said, while my conscience seems to be doing OK today, thank you for asking, I suppose I CAN just notify us that the garage doors are open, I actually do have a camera that looks at them, it actually does have a rolling date/time displayed to the second, and I can close them from any number of devices. So, tell ya what - I'll convert. I am officially at the altar, hereby repent, and shall amend my garage door routine.

Thank You!

Hi Teken. I am not trying to stir the pot, and do not have knowledge of the politics or competitive environment of energy management. I just maintain that currently available devices that will both talk to the ISY and manage one's HVAC are not as mainstream as some of the currently available "consumer" wifi thermostats, so the ISY portal seemed like a potential solution. Obviously, it is not. What I don't understand is why we see plugins for something like Homeseer functioning rather well in terms of communicating with the Nest, with the same being true for code that can be written for the Raspberry Pi. But when it comes to the ISY it seems to be taboo. It just makes no sense to me! What I gather from this discussion is that Google has "banned" communication between Nest and devices like the ISY, despite having an API that would seem to allow it from a technical perspective. The result is that users are forced to create various Rube Goldberg ways around this, including Raspberry Pis, the use of 3-4 devices when only two should be necessary, etc. I don't want to belabor the point more, hijack the thread further, etc... But we have this great little device, that now has a portal that expands its utility, but which has some weak points such as energy management. I really just want to connect two things that seem as natural as peanut butter and jelly. But we can't, and all we really have is a lot of finger pointing as to why that is. Frustrating, and I'm still not certain as to whom I should be mad at.

You make a very good point, and when planning for the automation of various things around the home (or anywhere) one must think about the consequences BEYOND a normal situation. I have, for example, automated a pellet stove by connecting it to a Nest thermostat, which "talks" to Homeseer, the Elk, and through those to the ISY (talk about some Rube Goldberg caused by lack of ISY - Nest compatibility!). But the safety devices on the stove (Hi Temp limit switch, Low Temp / Proof of Fire switch, etc) remain intact and capable of overriding any of the automated features. Thus, they operate the same as a regular thermostat, but with greater ability to control and monitor the appliance. The same is true of my garage doors: They can be closed if left open at night, without a human present. But the safety devices designed to stop them if a child or animal (or even a large toy) is in the way remain intact. And if they fail to close, I can be notified. Finally, anyone that proceeds with any change to their home or other environment should do so at their OWN risk. We are for the most part amateur hobbyists, and our sharing of experience and opinion should always be taken as such. And even for the professionals here, they are not seeing your situation live, in person. Our hobby involves electricity and the automation of our environment. It is NOT without risk! But those risks can be prudently and sensibly managed. And if you want no risk, I'm not sure of any hobby or activity that would suit you.

Can you (or anyone) elaborate on WHY Google is taking this stance?

I suggest a call to SH to see if they will give you some sort of deal on replacing those floodlight switches. Early Insteon hardware was just terrible in many cases, and I replaced many switches in our earlier home under warranty, and others at my own expense. I finally arrived at a reasonable place, but it took many months of fighting with SH to get there. I now find that except for Icon switches (which I no longer buy because they don't hold up compared to Switchlincs) the newer hardware is reliable. But you make a really good point about the early Insteon equipment. I always thought SH should have replaced all of it, as many of us had to endure so many problems with it. And creating an automated switch so that it automatically turns on at power up is just an idiotic design.

So, yesterday morning at 6 AM, for no reason at all that I can find and for the first time ever, our MBR fan (controlled by a fanlinc) just suddenly turned on, to the highest setting. I am eager to see if it happens again today. I can't think of any new programs that run at that time, and it's not close to sunrise. Given that some of these fanlinc issues are just being observed over the past few days, it makes me wonder what has changed in our systems (or is it just some bizarre coincidence)?

Well, of course... Sigh... I think those of us who don't want to run an Insteon or Zwave thermostat are just basically out of luck when it comes to ISY, correct?

Michel / UDI - Just noticing this thread as I scroll through on TapATalk, and it brings up a question: Can you update us on when UDI is going to move away from Java and get things over to HTML 5 (I assume)? I was just traveling, and wanted to leave my laptop at home, taking only an iPad. And then I thought, "No, what if I need to log in at home and make some updates"? And the ongoing problem of Apple products not quite working the same as Windows can't be helping you guys. The ISY is beginning to look "long in the tooth" (dated) despite being such a wonderful little product. This type of update might do wonders... Thank You.

So, any chance we might be able to connect ISY with Nest using the portal?

I continue to maintain that home automation companies are their own worst enemy. Thermostats like Nest do rely on the cloud, and that seems to be the direction of consumer electronics for the home. HA enthusiasts kick and scream about this (myself included, at times), but it's the tide, and we will not win that battle. Instead, we have all these little niche devices. Each has its own little following, many are as buggy as a summer picnic, and we never get the traction for things to go mass market. We thus remain comparatively tiny little cells of largely hobbyist tinkerers, while the larger market pats us on the head and moves on. I get that UDI also does commercial application work, and they have every right to make whatever decisions they want for their own company. But good night, it would be nice to interface with what is probably the world's most popular "smart" thermostat (and a darn good one overall, I might add). Temperature is kind of an important building variable... We can't make use of it or control it with our ISYs using the most popular consumer devices, and I continue to find that both odd and frustrating.

Lack of support for popular thermostats is, in my opinion, the Achilles heel of Universal Devices products (i.e., the ISY). Many requests over the years, but no love from UDI on the matter. They apparently do not see it as a commercial opportunity, and are unwilling to devote resources to it. Biggest disappointment I have in an otherwise great device.

What changed?

Michel, I really like you guys, appreciate your fantastic service, and wish you well. But I fear UDI will remain relatively small simply because you will not be able to scale as much as others, or fit in with many future devices. Best of luck to you, and I plan to continue using. But unless a 3rd party app / device keeps you connected to future developments, I fear your "anti cloud" attitude will not produce rewards as great as a different stance. But it's your company - you folks do as you wish. The future will play out as it will, without much regard for any of our personal tastes or desires.

Now hold on... Couldn't some interaction occur by using a common interface, even something as simple as variable-based logic via a 3rd application, such as software (Homeseer, CQC, etc)? A direct link may not work, but what about both as part of a larger "ecosystem"?