DAlter01

I'm guessing you would view a half a glass of water as half empty rather than viewing it as half full. But, in fact, Nokia isn't a failure nor is Rob. Those are facts. While this venture may fail, since it hasn't failed and its launch isn't until later this month, it might be a bit early to view the glass as half empty. It is, in fact, just a half a glass of water, neither positve or negative. But it has been designed and managed by people/companies that have a history of success so to view the venture negatively already is premature. Lets see what the product looks like, lets see how they intend to promote it, sell it, and if it functions well. After that we all can have justifiable opinions. But, at present, the only one who has seen and used the product is @lilyoyo1 and he gives it a favorable report. It takes more than looks and fuction to make it a success such as promotion and a good sales and distribution program, but we don't know what those are yet. So, its just a bit early to form a negative opinion (in my opinion).

Yep, Michel at UDI will immediatly get you resolved if you open a ticket, or at least that is my experience.

Your count was interupted by Insteon traffic. You have a minimum of 1166 links which is way over the limit and is causing you problems. The 1166 may still be under your actual count since the other four of your counts were clearly interupted there is a fair chance the 1166 count was also interupted. You will not know your true count untill you get a repeatable number. You have something in your system being triggered during your counts, a motion sensor, door sensor, something is stopping your counts.

Good point, this topic is in a new user forum so the poster might be new and we should make clear that from a function perspective he can mimic his current operation by having buttons or dimmers trigger the scenes just like his current setup. He would just be using the button or dimmer to start a program that controls the scene. And, he doesn't need to do this for all his scenes but enough to get his link count to less than the PLM limit. Based on his readings, he is definently over the limit with his one count showing 1166 links which might still be low if it was interupted with Insteon traffic. When I was having similar problems and finally got a good repeated count I was at around 1,700 links. Another fine tune is that for my base occupancy scene (day scene), I use a 2 second ramp rate and a 1/2 second ramp rate for my smaller scenes that manipulate the base occupancy scene. This way, as the base occupancy scene is ramping up over 2 seconds, when then smaller scene changes the lighting level at a faster rate (for instance my smaller evening scene), the transition is seemless between the two. You don't get a flash of the higher lighting level that might exist on the base occupancy scene with the lighting level then dropping down to a lower level.

@Michaelv I've experienced the EXACT issues you face and have a few more devices than your 150 number. With my system I had exceeded the link capacity of my PLM. As suggested by others, I resolved it by modifying how I used scenes to eliminate a lot of links. Previously I had a day scene, an evening scene, an all on, a goodnight scene, a party scene, etc. I found that I could use the day scene (occupancy scene) as my basic scene and manipulate that scene to create my other scenes. So, for goodnight, I use a program to turn off my day scene, evening scene, and party scene to make sure I catch all the lights. This eliminated my entire goodnight scene which contained nearly every device. For evening scene, I turn on the day scene in a program and then have an abridged evening scene that just changes those few switches that I want different than my base day scene. I use the same for my party scene where a program first turns on the day (occupancy) scene and then I use a small party scene to change those few switches that I want different than my day scene. I applied this same strategy to some of my other scenes and have cut my link count by nearly 1/2. Now, all of the issues I faced, which were identical to your issues, have been resolved. For an all on scene, you can use the same base day scene and use a Fast On command to turn the lights on at 100% versus your predefined level you have your lights set for in your day scene.

Michel, you would allow investment by that tarnished Nokia company even though they seem to be a failing company heading in the wrong direction, etc, etc., etc.? Kidding of course.

Based on what I have seen of the exterior of the devices, Smartlabs has kicked it up a notch. The attention to detail on the aesthetic design is to be applauded. And, yes, it would be foolish for Nokia to allow Smartlabs to put their good name on a piece of junk hardware. Being they are a $22B/year company, I suspect they have the sophistication in their practices to have enough control over the product in their partnerships to keep their name from being affiliated with switches that last 18 months. Others seem to disagree on the good name of Nokia but I suspect that when first reports start coming in we will find that the feel and function has improved from Insteon. As Teken has said, they better impove the insides, and I doubt the left that aspect of the redesign out of the mix. One has to understand where Insteon came from. This was a small operation trying to do things on the cheap and developed a pretty decent product 20 years ago. The new product will likely be a ground up redesign using the prior technology but not the prior circuit boards/parts/designs. Practices/techniques have changed a lot in the 20 years since the old Insteon devices were developed and it would be foolish for Smartlabs to do a relaunch of this new equipment by just putting a new pretty face on 20 year old designs that have a few shortcomings. Would Nokia even participate in an endevour like that? In my opinion, not a chance. I think we will find out in a month or two.

Except you.

It's not love for Nokia just a lack of hate. Nokia is a signficant global player and the partnership improves the prospects for the success of the new product line with the intent of creating a win-win outcome. That is opinion but I believe that opinion is supported by facts. To reach a different conclusion about Nokia and the partnership is, in my opinion, not supported by facts or an objective analysis. And, I think that is enought said by me on this topic for a while. Have fun.

So true on stock price. It often does not reflect the strength of a business in both directions (higher or lower). Over time there is corelation but it can take quite a while. And, some companies are worth 5X broken into pieces than they are as a single entity. I don't know about Nokia but stock price can be deceptive.

And yet they have $22B in sales, make about $800 Million in operating profit, and have a division called NGP Capital described below: NGP Capital[edit] NGP Capital (formerly Nokia Growth Partners) is a global venture capital firm, focusing on investments in the growth stage "Internet of things" (IoT) and mobile technology companies.[203] NGP holds investments throughout the U.S., Europe, China and India. Their portfolio consists of companies in mobile technology including the sectors Connected Enterprise, Digital Health, Consumer IoT, and Connected Car. Following a $350 million funding for IoT companies in 2016, NGP manages $1 billion worth of assets.[204] Nokia had previously promoted innovation through venture sponsorships dating back to 1998 with Nokia Venture Partners, which was renamed BlueRun Ventures and spun off in 2005.[205] Nokia Growth Partners (NGP) was founded in 2005 as a growth stage venture fund as a continuation of the early successes of Nokia Venture Partners. In 2017, the company was renamed to NGP Capital.[206] NGP's largest exits include GanJi, UCWeb, Whistle, Rocket Fuel, Swype, Summit Microelectronics and Netmagic. They MUST be desperate. Why would they invest in all of these technologies and ventures unless they were desperate for cash.... wait, I know, the potential for profit, growing their business. Crazy ideas I know.

It's called Richmond Capital PARTNERS for a reason. We don't know who the partners are but it wouldn't be suprising to find out that Nokia, or a subsidiary, is one.

There are thousands of such structures, it is very common. A couple of common reasons: 1) It allows a company to free up cash or time to pursue more promising revenue streams without the distraction by senior management of running a business line that isn't core to their direction. Or 2)A smaller company that has developed/refined a product but can acheive a better growth trajectory by bringing on a partner that can bring something of value to the table (distribution infrastructure, reputation, or name recognition) to create a win-win situation. Does reason #2 sound familiar? Lets face it, the refined Insteon technology being worked on by Smartlabs isn't going to be tremendously profitable if they just improve it a little bit and continue distributing it the old way. To make a true success out of the product they need to scale the business tremendously. Will a new product called "Insteon II" have a successful product launch? No. That is like beating your head against the wall. You may break through the wall, eventually, but why try it that way, its brutal. Think outside the box, go get a tool (jackhammer, dozer, whatever) and break through the wall with ease. Nokia is the dozer.

Looking back at my 30 years in business, probably my biggest mistakes were in taking too little risk. And, now that I can afford to make mistakes to reap the rewards the additional risks may generate, I'm too comfortable (and lazy I guess) to do it. A company that has a professional board of directors and professional evolving management can re-energize with new perspectives and drive to continue that growth. This is something exhibited by Nokia, etc. I never took my company to that level of having a Board of Directors and evolving managment because I didn't want to take the risk of that much growth, losing control, unknown risks, etc. Those entrepenuers that can take that step successfully have a skill set that I don't have. I admire them now that I look back having gained knowledge and perspective. These are things I had little of when I started but fortunately I did have plenty of energy and drive. Regrets, no, perspective to see how many paths can be a good path to success/happiness/etc., yes. I see no problem with the idea/risks taken with the Nokia/Smartlabs partnership. It is an evolution, a new path, a fresh perspective. Will it mean a change to Insteon, yes, it has.

Yes, I think just semantics. Ford isn't perfect, but the point is they are more financially successful than many, many companies and have had to evolve over time. And, just because someone gets sued and even loses in court doesn't mean they were in the wrong. I don't know anything about the cases you mention so I'm not defending them, but in court there is often a bending of reality.

No rediculous at all. Most of the products you buy are made by, developed by, and distributed by a company other than the name on the front of the package. That is how a large, large portion of the business world works my friend.

I'm thinking those at Nokia think they are a success and their competitors undoubtedly think they are a success. Did their day in the sun with cell phones pass, yes, so what. Do they hit grand slams on everything, of course not. Did they make money, their financial reports show they did, and lots of it. One could even say the same for Smartlabs. Have they made mistakes, yes, big ones. But, it seems it is a success. It has developed a working technology that has benefited (or frustrated) hundreds of thousands, provided employment to many, and a few years ago was sold for many millions. That is a success. With different steps could it have been a bigger success, of course. Could some of the ideas from people on this forum, if implmented, made Smartlabs a bigger success, yes. Then again, some of the ideas might have been helpful to the technology or the end user but would have been harmful (financially) to the company. Richmond Capital Partners and Nokia intends to make money with the new line of product and to milk the old line for cash flow without putting more invesment dollars in the old line. Their business plan will adapt and evolve but I suspect Richmond Capital's plan is not to own any of it 5-10 years from now. If they are successfull in developing a viable business model and prove to deeper pockets there is demand for their new product, I suspect they will package it up and sell it off to a company that will take the technology to its next stage of evolution which will be either enhancement or just cash flowing it till its dealth. That company may be Nokia, but will likely be another outside player that will continue the naming license with Nokia. Both avenues (develop the business or cash flow it) are commonly seen in the business world. And, both can be successful financially which is the metric that matters to the company/investors. We, on this forum, often point to success as having the tech be able to do everything we want it to do and that it will never sunset a product that we find useful/helpful. That doesn't meet the definition of success for a company/investor. Most of us are power users and what we want sometimes isn't in the best interest of the company financially, that's the harsh reality.

Is Ford's name not worth anything to you because they no longer make the Thunderbird? That car was a success for many years yet it's demand declined and was eventually discontinued. Going along the lines of thought in your posts, Ford is now a "failed" company or desperate? You move forward, you take calculated risks, you take a step in a new direction. Ford and Nokia have done well over the years. I too have a company, take risks, etc. It seems Ford and Nokia have done better than my company despite me thinking I've done well. Like Ford, like Nokia, like my company, we evolve to the environment, create new things with fresh ideas, or go after an existing business segment with a new approach. But, I guess I'm just a failure, my company has a bad reputation and I'm desperate because everything my company has ever done didn't work perfectly, we changed course, and my business has evolved to sometimes more lucrative and sometimes less lucrative avenues as it has grown? From my seat, it doesn't look like a failure, maybe to you it does. Nokia is a success. Will the partnership with Smartlabs be a success, we don't know. I'm thinking it will be a financial success which is the metric that matters to Smartlabs and Nokia. Will the technology take over the industry and be around for 30 years, No, but if that is your definition of success than your views are different than an investor's/companiy's definition.

Because in life you march forward, you take calculated risks, you work to improve. You do not go pout in a corner when one of your lines of business (of which there are many for Nokia) declines. Your comments make it sound like the only thing Nokia ever built was a cell phone. It was a big portion of their business years ago but is no longer. Yet, the company has grown back from its roots in 1865 and continues to grow and they are a signficant company with nearly 100,000 employees in over 100 countries. If the Smartlabs experiment succeeds or fails it will not be signficant to Nokia. But, they made the calculation it was worth the risk. It sounds like more of their calculated risks have paid off more than most companies. Desperate??? Yeah, No, don't think so.

Well, the lull didn't last long. And, here we go again. Though, I can't fault @upstatemike logic on this.

Might take more than a couple, maybe in 5 and in 10 for sure.

Nailed it, history can be very repetitve. Z-wave will linger on forever, much longer than Insteon. Device cost is so low and market pentration is wide enough there will be some demand for a couple more decades. Even if demand drops to just a trickle, a few manufacturers will kick out product to fill that low demand. The one difference, Z-wave continues to evolve and is improving with each iteration. If that incremental improvement continues, they may be just one or two iterations away from being a very good technology IF they can work out just a couple of shortcomings. Come to think of it, I guess the same can be said for Insteon with its incremental improvement. The brand got tarnished with their attempt at wide distribution a few years back. In my view the name had to be changed with their desire to go to a wide distrubtion model. They had to make a "break" from Insteon for a fresh launch to improve the odds of success with the updated technology and to keep the easy money coming in with the continued sales of the legacy Insteon line. But, with the new improved version being launced (if it is improved), it may end up being a great HA option at some point. I don't think version 1 of Nokia will be what this forum's users are looking for given Nokia's lack of desire to embrace power users, but version 2, if there is one, might be a winner. On the surface, it looks like the tech has the potential to be markedly better than insteon. So, are we just one or two iterations away from seeing the next great HA tech and the name is Nokia, a lineal descendand of Insteon? Probably not but it is entirely possible and I will not be suprised if it happens. I think both Z-wave and Insteon/Nokia both have the potential to be very good HA lines that can work for both low tech users and power users. But, by the time that happens, our standards may have changed and what we fantasize about being "good" today will likely seem crude 10 years from now.

@Michel Kohanim, That is an amazingly low failure rate on the ISY. Your firm is to be congratulated for that. Considering that low failure rate and since the Polisy will follow behind the ISY994 as its replacement in the near/middle future, I agree that having a spare ISY994 isn't necessary for my one install. Thank you for some clarity on the future. I do see why you suggest picking up a 2413U should be considered.

Considering your "inside" tknowledge I'll take your word for it. I had a 2413U in my Smarthome cart at 30% off when I got your post. Thanks for saving me $56++. I will, however, probably pick up another 2413S if/when they come back in stock.

Michel, I don't think it is a matter of if someone's serial PLM will die but when. I've only had one fail but others have had worse luck. I do have one 2413S in reserve and wish I could find another for less than the current $150 used price on ebay. Should I buy an ISY for my spare parts inventory? I think you have said previously UDI intends to continue making them for an extended period of time as a parallel control platform. Hopefully I remember that correctly and the company position hasn't changed. It is good advice for people with a signficant investment to pick up a fairly inexpensive 2413U to buy a little insurance for their investment. It might not be needed, serial PLM's may be back, but if one has invested with a bunch of time, devices and logic, it makes sense to put a USB modem on their shelf just in case Smartlabs leaves them in a tough spot.