randyf

Like others, I would suggest hardwire if that a reasonable option. Even without VM's getting in the way, there are lots of things that can interfere with wifi networks (number of clients, walls, AC wiring, etc.), and while there isn't likely a lot of data going through the LAN/WAN to justify bandwidth, streaming apps on other devices can cause starvation for low-bandwidth devices. If, however, wifi is the best connection option, I also suggest ensuring that the EISY connect to the 2.4GHz link; it will be slightly more reliable, and streaming apps prefer the 5g links, so there is lower chance of interference. Since my hubs are static devices (they don't move around), they live close to a switch or router so they are not only easy to connect (or re-connect), they can share a small UPS to keep infrastructure up in power outages.

I have a situation where I need to add a remote control for a ceiling light, and given where and how to control, Insteon (vs. z-wave) is the most practical choice. However, given the availability of components, the I3 outlet is the best current option (could use an embedded device, but they aren't available; I could also use a plugin, but that is only a last resort). So, as I only need to control this device (and not get status or other things that I3 offers), what is the likelihood that an I3 outlet can be turned on or off via an ISY994 (I should be able to pair it with an Insteon switch for control, but would be useful to add it to scenes or programs in the ISY)? I will eventually move to eisy, and this may be something that triggers the beginning of that transition, but for now I'm in the mode if "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". There is also the ebay route to get something that will work with the current setup, but having an I3 device for its future features is also a reasonable option.

FWIW, there doesn't *have* to be a neutral at the fixture (though common, I've certainly seen it where it's not), but there will be one hot and one neutral in some combination or both of the fixture and switch box (gotta make a path from hot to neutral somehow for the thing to work). In one of the boxes, though, there could only be a 2 wire line that completes the hot/neutral connection. However, if the intent here is to put a fanlinc and/or micro module at the fixture AND a switch remotely to control it, the spot with the 2 wires could be re-connected such that one wire is hot, the other neutral (may already be a taped off white/black wire) which can power the device at that location. and the device at the other end will be powered by what is already there. Pair the switch to the fanlinc/micro module, and it will work properly. Further, the actual controlling switch doesn't need to be in the same place where it was, or even add another so it's multi-controlled (i.e. "three way"). If the 2-wire to one box is romex, it is likely already a white/black wire (as aforementioned, it could be taped off with black or red electrical tape). If it is in a conduit, it could be two (or combination of) black/red wires, but it may also be possible to pull a white wire through the conduit. Otherwise, make sure to tape off the wire that is neutral with white wire to indicate it is actually neutral.

Sorry if this has been covered, but there would be lots of reading to try and catch up; but I have deferred moving to the 5.x branch to see how things will settle, but desire to make this update in the next week or so. I don't have a lot of z-wave devices, and only one is in a program; so I was planning excluding them before the update and re-adding them after. I also intend to delete those programs that I either don't use or are old/raw enough that they could probably use reworking anyway (take some screenshots so I at least have a reference). This *should* minimize interactions with the update. So my question is: does this seem like a decent plan, or am I being overly cautious?

Count me among the (apparently long list of) folks with a failing PLM after 2-1/2 years. I'm more than capable of replacing the capacitors, but am also aware of the possibility of damage to other components. Has anyone investigated the newer PLM's to see if they are using more reliable components, or had any interaction with Smarthome/Insteon to believe that they have actually fixed the reliability in the modems? I would much prefer to replace my modem with a newer and more reliable one than to try and repair a poor quality one (note, I have a v1.B modem).