Teken Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 The thermostat options are documented (see #10). In the big picture does it really matter what is listed in a (e-doc) that has been historically out of date, inaccurate, or simply missing information? No, it doesn't . . . People make it sound like the wheel is being invented here, its not. These features are present, available, working, and proven. It comes down to UDI obtaining the required information so they can implement it to the ISY. When I read people saying its not documented, unknown, should we guess??? No . . . People should use the resources and contacts they have internally / externally to get the information. This is exactly the same (circle talk) that happen when I asked about having the remote wake up of a battery device. I was told this could not, would not, will not happen. Its not that this feature didn't exist, or didn't work, or available on other competing products, it did! Fast forward more than four years later the ISY now support remote wake up and updating of the programming. Its obvious to me its not a technical limitation or having the ability to do it. It comes down to the willingness to simply do it, period. I am tired of reading the endless replies that we should guess, don't know, has it ever, doesn't matter, who cares, etc. Bottom line, this isn't rocket science, its a dumb device which has specific technical specifications which must be made known to develop and provide the said features. Whether or not UDI wants to invest the time to support the features is entirely up to them. But, in my mind only makes sense from a business stand point. Why would anyone sell a product that advertises it only supports 2 things, when the actual products supports 7?? If its not apparent to the forum members these topics really get under my skin . . .
stusviews Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Reverse engineering is unethical. Illegal, too. From a business standpoint, I can understand not divulging everything. Don't take that to mean I don't want it all
MustangChris04 Posted January 1, 2015 Author Posted January 1, 2015 I have to agree with Teken on this. I work for a development company and there are times when we are doing integrations with other companies that there is inadequate documentation and support from the company we are integrating with. That doesn't stop us from implementing a solution and at times we are able to include features that are not even mentioned in the documentation. Yes, it would be easier if everything was documented and I can’t see any business value reason why Insteon would not want document every capability of all their products. When I spoke with Insteon support several months ago, they did mention that there has been a lot of changes going on and some turnover with their employees. I don’t know if this is true or not, but maybe they don’t have any staff members still around that were familiar with the features so that may be why the documentation is lacking. Regardless, the features are available and can be seen within HouseLinc, so I’m sure UDI has the capabilities of adding these missing options.
Teken Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Reverse engineering is unethical. Illegal, too. From a business standpoint, I can understand not divulging everything. Don't take that to mean I don't want it all Stu, I don't follow what you mean by reverse engineering?? These features are NOT proprietary to the vendor they are made available so they can be used. Why would anyone sell a product to the masses and allow third party companies build a controller and in turn not allow them to develop the same feature set?? That makes no sense and that literally does not apply here at all. This is not like a Apple Lightning cable which is proprietary and requires a license to make, sell, and use said device. UDI already has NDA agreements and other cross license terms which they follow to support the Insteon product line. Lets not confuse the issue at hand shall we. Generalizing Here: These features are available, they work, and competing software / hardware devices make use of some or all of the features Smartlabs offers.
Teken Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 I have to agree with Teken on this. I work for a development company and there are times when we are doing integrations with other companies that there is inadequate documentation and support from the company we are integrating with. That doesn't stop us from implementing a solution and at times we are able to include features that are not even mentioned in the documentation. Yes, it would be easier if everything was documented and I can’t see any business value reason why Insteon would not want document every capability of all their products. When I spoke with Insteon support several months ago, they did mention that there has been a lot of changes going on and some turnover with their employees. I don’t know if this is true or not, but maybe they don’t have any staff members still around that were familiar with the features so that may be why the documentation is lacking. Regardless, the features are available and can be seen within HouseLinc, so I’m sure UDI has the capabilities of adding these missing options. Exactly! Look at the *Resume Dim* feature I have never seen or heard of this before in any device. Its not listed in HL2 (not surprising since its EOL) but can assure you if it was updated it would offer the same feature. Has anyone played with the Resume Dim and seen how that operates in real life? Again, this is another *FEATURE* not documented yet its listed in the *Options* list so lets get off the whole its not in the e-doc shall we.
LeeG Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) From an older KPL User Guide Local On-Level The Local On-Level is the brightness that the light(s) physically wired to KeypadLinc will come on at when turned on locally. The default is 100%. Local On-Level can be set to any one of 33 settings 32 fixed brightness levels (3% to 100%) Or “Resume Bright” • Previous brightness level is stored when turned off and recalled to that level brightness when turned back on Page 9 of 24 Rev: 12/22/2011 2:21 PM Page 10 of 24 Rev: 12/22/2011 2:21 PM To set KeypadLinc’s Local-On-Level: 1. Press & hold On and/or Off (or Main in 8-button configuration) until the connected light is at the brightness desired when turned on locally (turn the light off if you wish to use the “Resume Bright” feature) 2. Tap KeypadLinc’s Set button KeypadLinc will (Beep) 3. Test the Local On-Level settings by tapping the On/Off or Main There have questions on the forum about Resume Bright From SwitchLinc User Guide. Local On-Level Default = 100% (fixed brightness) The local on-level is the brightness that SwitchLinc’s connected load will come on when turned on at SwitchLinc paddle. Local on-level can be set to any one of 32 fixed brightness levels (3% to 100%) or “resume bright” (brightness prior to last being turned off). To set local on level to a fixed brightness level 1) Adjust SwitchLinc to desired brightness when controlled locally 2) Tap Set button SwitchLinc will beep 3) Test by turning SwitchLinc off and then back on (via the paddle) SwitchLinc will turn on to new local on-level To set local on level to the brightness level prior to being turned off Page 11 of 16 Rev: 3/29/2013 10:32 AM 1) Turn SwitchLinc off 2) Tap Set button SwitchLinc will beep 3) Test: a. Brighten SwitchLinc to a random brightness level (e.g. 75%) b. Turn SwitchLinc off c. Turn SwitchLinc back on Light will turn on at the defined brightness level Edited January 1, 2015 by LeeG
Michel Kohanim Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 LeeG, as always thank you. Teken, please post a screenshot of options you used to have. As far as I know KPLs don't have the options button. Further it seems that you are under the impression that we have to implement everything including things that don't exist anymore. Of course you are entitled to your opinions and wishes but I do take issue with labeling those as bugs. With kind regards, Michel
Teken Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 LeeG, as always thank you. Teken, please post a screenshot of options you used to have. As far as I know KPLs don't have the options button. Further it seems that you are under the impression that we have to implement everything including things that don't exist anymore. Of course you are entitled to your opinions and wishes but I do take issue with labeling those as bugs. With kind regards, Michel Are you saying for example the current selling lamp linc module has no options? That even though a EOL product which hasn't been updated (HL2 Software) which does offer and supports basic settings are not going to be implemented in the ISY? Further more, your reply counters what you stated about supporting what ever the device is capable of (if known). So now your position is UDI will support only what ever it feels like. Opposed to what the Insteon device is (firmware) enabled to do?? Your reply today is very much like the MS sensor update, upon wake up. Which makes no sense to me or those who asked many years ago. As you shot it down indicating it could not, would not be done. Fast forward 2-3 years later magically this feature is available?? If this is the path you're going to follow make it known so we all can decide what to do in the future. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Michel Kohanim Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Teken, Please do not change the topic. All I said was that I take issue with calling a feature request a bug. Period. With kind regards, Michel
Teken Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Teken, Please do not change the topic. All I said was that I take issue with calling a feature request a bug. Period. With kind regards, Michel I have not changed the topic but have tried to address your replies with answers that are relevant and Germaine to the issue at hand. This is obviously a lot harder when replies are given hours, days later, and thus the conversation is not fluid. This is why I try to use the quote feature to ensure my replies are direct and specific to the question posed. In the same vain, I use factual examples to support my position to better express my thoughts, ideas, and over all view. It's obvious we both use different words or have opposing views on the topic at hand. At the end of the day I believe we have the same goal and that is to provide the best support and experience via the ISY Series Controller. My participation in this thread was to provide supporting details, screen shots, examples of features either not supported, broken, or impacted by a unknown bug. Is this not the purpose of these discussions and forums? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
MustangChris04 Posted January 4, 2015 Author Posted January 4, 2015 Hi Michel, In regards to all the missing options that have been posted on this thread by myself and other users, does UDI plan on implementing these options? Thanks!
Michel Kohanim Posted January 5, 2015 Posted January 5, 2015 Hi MustangChris04, This is a very hard question to answer. As I mentioned different levels of firmware for the same device support different options most of which are not documented. We have been burnt before by doing reverse engineering and thus causing mass confusion when certain things work for some people but not others. Examples are setting time and schedules on thermostats, heartbeat on TriggerLincs, KPL sub buttons controlling the on level for the main, etc. At the end of the day everything boils down to how much resources should we expend on supporting a feature request and how many users would it impact. Perhaps you might want start a poll for a SPECIFIC feature on a SPECIFIC device and let's see the demand. Teken, I do not follow. Again, my issue is with your usage of "bug" to refer to a feature request. That's it. With kind regards, Michel
Guest Digger Posted January 5, 2015 Posted January 5, 2015 Isn't the real issue here that Smarthome (or Smartlab depending on if it's an odd or even day) does not publish the information needed for any customer to use the devices to their full potential? If I am correct then the energy should be directed at that company to change their ways. While I appreciate a software or controller mfg making up for the shortcomings of the device mfg I think it's reasonable to say there is only so much effort that can be made on UDI part. The majority of the issues with Insteon (quality, firmware bugs, documentation etc) is really from poor management on SH part. While it seems insane that SH would not provide the full details of the device feature set to UDI isn't that fully believable given SH track record? I would guess if you were to poll UDI customers and ask who would you believe more SH or UDI at least 98% would say they believe UDI it's just that obvious who is on the up n up as they say. I agree it's frustrating but I doubt UDI can pressure SH to release the info to them. I honestly have always been amazed at how well UDI does with the whole mess that SH firmware is in. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
MustangChris04 Posted June 21, 2016 Author Posted June 21, 2016 Is there a reason why the 2487S Dual-Band Keypadlinc on/off doesn't have an OPTIONS button at the bottom of the page, but the 2334-2 Dual Band Keypadlink dimmer DOES have the options button at the bottom of the page? Here is the keypad dimmer with the options: http://screencast.com/t/Odu2pvp7 Here is the keypad relay with the options button missing: http://screencast.com/t/cSl6l6Sk
Recommended Posts