Another PLM Failure rev 2.3

[mwester]

Yes, this thread exists -- but in and of itself, that's not really that bad a thing (because all companies make design and manufacturing errors).  IMO, the real crime here is that this thread has existed for so long, and remains so active.  And that despite folks on this very same thread outlining the very simple component changes necessary to correct this issue, to date the folks at Smarthome/Smartlabs haven't done so (they've substituted component values, but the new parts are the same non-ESR-rated types -- and while the jury remains in deliberation on this, so-to-speak, the early evidence is suggesting that the new values may not have fixed the problem).

Further, the fact that Smarthome/Smartlabs was unable to come to terms (whatever they may have been) with UDI to permit UDI to manufacture and sell a PLM of their own using the Insteon firmware chipset is another indication that sticking with Insteon is a risky proposition.

I'm not actively pulling out my Insteon gear, and I still have a functional PLM spare in a drawer, waiting (and a small stock of capactors for repairs).  But as the devices fail, I'm expanding my Z-Wave devices, and consolidating the remaining Insteon devices.  Because UDI's support for Z-Wave is yet incomplete, it works best if you don't have the two technologies interacting, even if they're handled by the same ISY -- UDI has been working to fix this, but that project has been underway for years now, and there's no end in sight.  So I'm building out my automation with the assumption that we'll never see the release of 5.x, and we'll never see a reliable PLM...  Sad, but reality has made me an HA cynic!

[Andrew]

"IMO, the real crime here is that this thread has existed for so long, and remains so active."

Yes, this.

[Brian H]

Page #17 of the long PLM repair thread.

Shows what looks like a different brand capacitor. For C7 and C13 in a V2.4. I can't see the label too clearly but maybe they actually chose a better brand.

Well I can dream anyway.

[Michel Kohanim]

20 hours ago, mwester said:

 So I'm building out my automation with the assumption that we'll never see the release of 5.x, and we'll never see a reliable PLM...  Sad, but reality has made me an HA cynic!

What firmware version are you on?

With kind regards,

Michel

[Teken]

On 2/10/2018 at 11:50 PM, stusviews said:

Teken,

 

I never disagreed with your contention that the PLM needs/requires improvement, particularly with its lifespan. My disagreement is only with speculations that you state as fact.

 

Case in point (ignoring the others): It's entirely possible the the new owner is exclusively an investor. As such, the product has little meaning, only the financial aspect. So, one wouldn't expect that person to be familiar the nuts and bolts, so to speak. How involved is Warren Buffet with the nitty-gritty of all the companies he's invested in?

 

Consider that paddles are no longer engraved, but buttons are, that the SynchfoLinc has been dropped along with other devices. If the "books" are not favorable, then drop it, even if it's a high profit item. The profit margin is meaningless if sales don't meet expectations.

 

This is, of course, a conjecture. I really don't know the new owners role

Taking your example of the new owner as simply an investor. Well, anyone who has been involved with *Investing* knows besides the P&L reports its brand recognition, issues which impact the company (PR) and in this case.

Its a eight ~ nine year (2413S PLM) plus hardware issue that anyone could have fixed . . . We literally have a thread created by a DIY hobbyist which has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt what the root cause is. Yet many years later the people who have all the resources and engineering at their disposal still can't fix this problem?!?!

Impossible . . .

As an investor the new guy has simply recycled the same brain dead ideas that other companies have done. Because they are not interested in the company, product, or customer. They are only interested in getting the company to a positive balance sheet in hopes of selling it off to someone at a later time. Everything this new guy has done is the carbon copy of aszz hats which I managed over years ago in another life. The first thing this guy did was outsource all resources from sales to technical support.

Who does this??

A person who is laying down the frame work to sell off or to reduce costs in the efforts to strengthen the balance sheet. Next, closing down the retail store, once again this was done to reduce over head, costs, and increase the balance sheet for liabilities. Next, moving to Redmond yet another move to centralize all resources to reduce staff, resources, and costs, again to strengthen the balance sheet.

Everyday there is a CEO who is hired on and given a Golden parachute regardless of how the company does. 

Think Yahoo and that miserable fail of a CEO and countless others who brought great companies to fail and destruction.

As an aside there is a on going thread about making your own custom KPL's. I want you and everyone else to sit and think about something extremely petty and what it means in the larger picture. Supposedly, the blank KPL buttons have been eliminated?!? Keeping in mind this product never moved in large quantities yet I am highly confident with the DIY crowd having a solution to make their very own instead of being gauged for the very same. This exact same product has sold in the order of ten times more in the last 16 months than it has ever.

Yet, all of the sudden this obscure Insteon accessory is now being discontinued!?!?    

From a business stand point in the past you sell maybe 2 ~ 5 a month? Now, you're selling 10~30 a month. This is income, sales, revenue, you never had!! Yet, some bean counter / new guy may have seen this as a direct assault on the *Custom KPL* sales!?!?

Obviously, I don't know the above to be fact merely a keen eye toward what I have seen and managed others . . .

   

 

 

[mwester]

1 hour ago, Michel Kohanim said:

What firmware version are you on?

With kind regards,

Michel

 

Two different alpha versions, actually.  The main "production" ISY is on an early 5.0.x alpha, which works reasonably well, even for many of the common z-wave devices.  I've another unit used for testing new releases and new features -- that one is always on whatever is the latest 5.0.x alpha version (with the exception of the latest firmware version -- the node server bug on that firmware was the a regression that made it simply a show-stopper for me even on a test ISY).

The lack of any visibility to a target release date, along with the erratic dates for the alpha versions makes planning impossible.  (E.G. I could upgrade the production unit today -- but a new version might be out next weekend... or this may be the "latest" firmware for another several months... and it's a *huge* undertaking to test and fix all the coding on that devices, so I can't do it very often... so what does one do???).   Very recently I've chosen to switch from the optimistic ("I'll just wait, 'cause the real 5.x release is just around the corner!) to the more cynical approach:  assume there may never be a release, so cease waiting and figure out how to get done what one needs to get done.  I'll upgrade the production unit in the next few weeks, I expect -- and I'll stop chasing the latest alpha version on the test unit (it'll run the same version of firmware as the production unit).  I'll get what I can working with that, and find other solutions for whatever can't work with that.  It feels good to be able to plan once again!

[apostolakisl]

On 2/13/2018 at 3:03 PM, Brian H said:

Can't say about others.

I know all my failed 2413S PLM's and hardware 2 2443  Access Points.  Have BAD power supply capacitors.

Same questionable brand in all of them.

I can't say anything about the V2.4 as I don't have much information on it. Other than a photo I saw has a different serial port daughter board in it.

 

Ditto here.  When the green led light goes out and ISY can't communicate, it is a pretty obvious situation.  The can't be turned off by the user.  Plus, I re-capped them and . . . how abou that, they work.  And now I have discovered that several of my 2476D's also came back to life after re-capping.

[Michel Kohanim]

mwester,

Thank you for the details and I understand. 

With kind regards,

Michel

[pyrorobert]

So, I am struggling here. Since I have installed the new PLM, I am unable to make any of my RF devices even respond to anything. They show they are linked and seem to communicate but they have no response to any program or scene. I have tried to restore the devices but it still doesn't respond. Has anyone else seen this? My ISY is at revision 5.0.11C

[stusviews]

I'm not sure what you mean by, "they have no response to any program or scene," as battery powered devices are controllers only. I'm guessing a small error on you part when typing.

In any case, do they show 1011 or ! ? If any battery powered devices are program triggers, does the program run if you manually press the set button? Does a scene show the device as on if you manually press the set button?

[pyrorobert]

They show neither of those or as they normal as any other device that communicates. But even the MS would show "On" when active before in the Admin console. I meant that the program or scene will not turn on since the MS are not active. All these devices worked before just fine. Now this is a nightmare. 

[pyrorobert]

Ok, so I figured out that I had to delete anything RF and reinstall them as a restoral alone would not repair the issue.

So frustrating!

[Andrew]

Based on pyrorobert's post above.... Going to try deleting and reinstalling my dining room wall switch (hard wired).

If this doesn't work, I'm done with trying to get my PLM to work, and unless I find another solution, done with Insteon as well.

 

[edit] It worked! Pain in the butt, but it worked. Hopefully, it will maintain a solid connection, but based on what seems to be a track record of failures for the PLM, maybe it's time to look elsewhere.

[pyrorobert]

Andrew,

     Just the same as I was finding that certain devices, even hardwired ones, seem to communicate. But then when you try to turn on or off a switch, it would fail to communicate. I would then delete it and reinstall it and then it would work just fine. No idea why. 

[sorka]

I've had my 6th PLM fail. When I say fail, I mean it lost all the links so I can still control devices from programs but the ISY won't receive status changes for anything. The failure mode has been the same each and every time. Lose all links. Restore links. Fine for a while. Lose all links again. Rinse and repeat each time shorter and shorter before links lost again.

I've purchased every other PLM and had the ones in-between warranty replacements. 

 

Why hasn't UD implemented an automatic link audit and restoral to basically do what I do by hand? Schedule a link count say at a user defined schedule and if the links are empty, do an automatic link restoral like I had to do tonight when I got home.

 

I'm just about ready to give up on Insteon. Is there ANY other solution? Can someone else make a PLM? Can UD get around using itany way? Can they use the hub instead? If there's no clear solution to this continuing madness, this will be my PLM and then I'll spend the next year before it fails again evaluating what HA lighting system to replace it with.

[Brian H]

A few years back. 2014 comes to mind. UDI had developed their own PLM. With the promise from Smartlabs/Smarthome to get the Insteon Firmware chips or licensing to program their own Insteon Firmware chips. Smartlabs/Smarthome changed their minds and the UDI PLM  was never produced.

I hear your displeasure with the Smarthome/Smartlabs  being unable to get a stable PLM design.

IMHO Bean Counter management was  to cheap to add a cents to the BOM cost. To use quality capacitors and other components.

This is going to drive Insteon users to go to a different protocol.

As for the HUB. I have seen many failures of them also reported. Some have changed the capacitors in them to also fix them. At least they seem to be addressing the HUB. With a rebuild service or a list of needed data to put back into a replacement HUB. So far no indication the PLM will be addressed. Other than we found a part issue and corrected in in 2.3. Well we all know 2.3 is still failing and have seen 2.4 mentioned here. Maybe even higher now.

I don't think Richmond Capital Partners. Their new owners are going to be much better. They seem to be focused on Internet Things in the Press Release. When they purchased them.