I agree 100%. That is one reason I would not ever move away from Homeworks. If anyone has ever read Lutron's RF White Paper, they explain the concept of group commands. If a keypad press dictates 5 lights come one, the processor does not send out 5 commands, but instead send one command and any switch that has this command in its database, responds. So all each switch has to know is which commands it is to respond to.
The PERFECT lighting technology
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
I agree 100%. That is one reason I would not ever move away from Homeworks. If anyone has ever read Lutron's RF White Paper, they explain the concept of group commands. If a keypad press dictates 5 lights come one, the processor does not send out 5 commands, but instead send one command and any switch that has this command in its database, responds. So all each switch has to know is which commands it is to respond to.
Neurorad
Senior Member
Sounds like you should bring your idea to a VC, they will give you funding for your idea, get the factories running round-the-clock to meet demand, then you can retire in Hawaii. Not to put you down, because I'm still attempting to understand the concept, but don't we have this already. It's called ALC. Who really cares what goes over the wires if it works? Is it the "reasonable price" that sets your idea apart from ALC? We'll the high prices of ALC is the reality that volumes are small, and small volumes translate into high prices. If you owned the company that makes ALC switches, would you sell them for less than your cost to keep the prices "reasonable?" You wouldn't be in business long if you did that. It's those lousy business rules that keep preventing me from being a billionaire.
Less than cost? There are $3 worth of parts in the ALC switches.
Steve is saying that ALC is behind the curve with the control, and that UPB has it right.
JayH, in another current lighting thread, has hit the nail on the head with his list of needs for ALC - better control software, smaller switches, and quick-connect wiring. It's so simple that if OnQ would recognize the problems, they'd instantly dominate sales, in terms of volume.
As an aside, has anyone used the SceneTech ALC software?
there are certain contradictions that keep appearing, here are some of them
- A small start up creates a better lighting system and people avoid it because they are a small company and what happens if they go under?
- A large company makes a better lighting system and people avoid it because they have higher overhead to cover and the product costs more
- A company makes a simpler switch and people want more features
- You make it hardwired, LV to the switches and people complain about running wires and making the house wiring non-standard
- There are only so many functions you can run on a hard wired, dumb switch when you use the lowest cost cable out there, Cat-5, so a company adds a multiplexed signaling system to add more features. This adds electronics to the switch, raises costs and people complain about the cost and then ask, if they added electronics, why didn't they just add a micro-controller instead?
- Company adds a micro-controller and feature count goes up but so does the cost, as does the development costs
Also, keep in mind that taking a switch apart and looking at the cost of the components says nothing about development costs, meeting minimum manufacturing numbers over-seas to get the costs down, UL, CE, FCC approval, marketing, distribution, distribution markups etc etc. If you have never brought an electronic device to market I dare say you might be surprised at what it really takes.
The bottom line is that there is a reason that things cost what they do. Sometimes there is a single company that can gouge because they are the only choice and people have to have their product, but that is not the case here. There are many companies selling lighting systems and the prices have come down but they are where they are at for a reason. I seriously doubt any are making any "gross" margins.
- A small start up creates a better lighting system and people avoid it because they are a small company and what happens if they go under?
- A large company makes a better lighting system and people avoid it because they have higher overhead to cover and the product costs more
- A company makes a simpler switch and people want more features
- You make it hardwired, LV to the switches and people complain about running wires and making the house wiring non-standard
- There are only so many functions you can run on a hard wired, dumb switch when you use the lowest cost cable out there, Cat-5, so a company adds a multiplexed signaling system to add more features. This adds electronics to the switch, raises costs and people complain about the cost and then ask, if they added electronics, why didn't they just add a micro-controller instead?
- Company adds a micro-controller and feature count goes up but so does the cost, as does the development costs
Also, keep in mind that taking a switch apart and looking at the cost of the components says nothing about development costs, meeting minimum manufacturing numbers over-seas to get the costs down, UL, CE, FCC approval, marketing, distribution, distribution markups etc etc. If you have never brought an electronic device to market I dare say you might be surprised at what it really takes.
The bottom line is that there is a reason that things cost what they do. Sometimes there is a single company that can gouge because they are the only choice and people have to have their product, but that is not the case here. There are many companies selling lighting systems and the prices have come down but they are where they are at for a reason. I seriously doubt any are making any "gross" margins.
I think you agreed 100% and then completely contradicted what he said.
He wants the switches to be dumb but you're saying they know how to respond individually to commands which means smart. I happen to also think they should be smart.There are 3 things standing in the way of very low cost switches
1. Lack of open standards
2. Manufacturing volumes
3. Patents
I think you agreed 100% and then completely contradicted what he said.
I took what he was saying as they are building "too much smart" into the switches and that the controller should handle most of the logic and the switches should respond only to simple commands and not have to worry about repeating commands or routing signals.
Steve
Senior Member
This thread was not supposed to degrade into a war about cost. I made one comment about 'pricing it reasonable', meaning don't have > $100 switches, etc. I would never expect a $3 automated switch.
@jmark: What I mean by 'unfortunate' is simply that there is only one choice in the markeplace, yes ALC and imho, as Neurorad said, I think there are too many negatives with ALC holding it back from being even more popular. Yes, I am absolutely spoiled by UPB, I don't think there is another technology right now (and I admit I don't know the high end wireless stuff) that competes with the flexibility and programmabilty of UPB. If ALC would invest in 'refreshing' their system, it would help them alot. I want inline modules, a lighted scene switch, not to have a dedicated single gang box for an aux switch, LED control and more. Either add all the UPB functionality to ALC or the LV side of ALC to UPB to reach my 'goal'. ALC is a good start, but its a bit tired and needs new life. But if it does everything you want then great. But you know what they say "You don't realize what you had till you lost it". Coming from UPB I know I will lose alot to go ALC.
@ano: I really hate when people say stuff like "not to put you down, but...." I really have no idea what prompted thyat reply, but anyway, I'm not offended. Stating your opinion is fine. It's obvious you like ALC and thats fine, so do I, but I think it could, and should be so much more.
@jmark: What I mean by 'unfortunate' is simply that there is only one choice in the markeplace, yes ALC and imho, as Neurorad said, I think there are too many negatives with ALC holding it back from being even more popular. Yes, I am absolutely spoiled by UPB, I don't think there is another technology right now (and I admit I don't know the high end wireless stuff) that competes with the flexibility and programmabilty of UPB. If ALC would invest in 'refreshing' their system, it would help them alot. I want inline modules, a lighted scene switch, not to have a dedicated single gang box for an aux switch, LED control and more. Either add all the UPB functionality to ALC or the LV side of ALC to UPB to reach my 'goal'. ALC is a good start, but its a bit tired and needs new life. But if it does everything you want then great. But you know what they say "You don't realize what you had till you lost it". Coming from UPB I know I will lose alot to go ALC.
@ano: I really hate when people say stuff like "not to put you down, but...."
I really have no idea what prompted thyat reply, but anyway, I'm not offended. Stating your opinion is fine. It's obvious you like ALC and thats fine, so do I, but I think it could, and should be so much more.dougmeredith
Member
Parts aren't the only cost. There is also R&D, assembly, shipping, marketing, payroll, accounting, legal, support, documentation, etc. These all need to be covered.
Doug
Similar threads
