This may seem like a silly question at this point, but I have a houseful of X-10 and use an Ocelot with it. Since ADI has promised a new version of the Ocelot that will work with all of the communications schemes (UPB, Insteon, Z-Wave etc.), I am beginning to think ahead to which technology I should migrate to.

After reading as many forums as I can, it still isn't very clear to me. It seems to me it might be between UPB and Z-Wave, but I'm not sure which one.

I still need to leave a small amount of X-10 on the line to operate my screen masking system, and will want to change over slowly, so there will always be X-10 on line as well as the new protocol.

Any comments anyone has are welcome.

PS: My question is prompted by having used X-10 for a few years and getting fed up tracking down noise, interference and buying expensive filters. I'd like something that just plain worked every time.

Deane,

Signal strength vs. noise is the key to powerline control, (X10, UPB, Insteon) Your X10 signal is usually 4 volts and the noise you have experienced can be much higher then 4 volts and over power the x10. Also the way x10 is created, some noise can look like a valid signal and actually control x10 devices. Couplers, repeaters, and filters are needed to allow the signal to get to all devices.

UPB and Insteon attack these problems with different solutions.

Insteon still sends a 4 volt signal and uses a mesh network (all devices are repeaters) to overpower noise. UPB sends out a 40 volt signal that is very strong. The range is up to 2 miles on the powrline.

Insteon also identifies each device with it's unique ID so links between devices are secure. If you have read theads on Cocoontech and Homeseer you have seen the issues Insteon users have experienced. Cocoontech and Homeseer are also good forums to study issues with UPB and Zwave.

UPB uses a very short signal that is so specific, noise cannot be misread as a command. Ghost on and off don't exist with UPB. The few times that I have seen reports of ghost on and offs with UPB can be traced back to oversites in user programming and are easier to correct.

As a UPB user hear is the way I see things. Insteon requires arranged (devices located within range) devices to be successful, still requires filters to overcome the 4 volt signals. From the Insteon forums I read that 20+ devices are needed for a stable system. It looks like Installation of Insteon can be very cumbersom if you need lots of links; Repeated visits to each switch for each link. There is software available for purchase to improve this process. A key concern that I see for you is the reports that as Insteon is added to a home, the x10 signal gets weaker and weaker...

Zwave seems stable now and not affected by powerline issues. RF can have it's own issues. It also is a mesh network with "location" issues. Might be worth trying/testing in your home.

UPB does not affect x10 signal, UPB couplers actually couple x10. Installation is very simple with UPB devices and the "free" programming software UPStart is very powerful. There are many options available with each device using UPStart. You can test your home for compatibility with only 2 devices and UPStart. 1.PIM computer interface unit. 2.Lamp module. You can download and look at UPStart in 5 minutes. Without any devices you can play with UPStart and look at devices options. With the 2 devices I suggest you can check your whole home for signal strength and noise. UPStart has testing features, signal strength, and noise displays.

There have been a few serious noise issues with UPB that have been addressed at Cocoontech, however it is VERY successful in most homes and can be a lot of fun to work with.

You can get UPB, Insteon, and Zwave products from Martin at Automated Outlet (a contributer to this forum) . They are fine people to work with and would probably buy back the items you use for testing when you decide on a protocal. I would also be glad to help you with any questions concening UPStart. Here is a link to one source for UPStart. [Link: simply-automated.com]

Dave

Dave, thanks for taking the time to provide such a thorough explanation of where things stand. I'm sort of stopped in my tracks until ADI/Ocelot gets the new version controller on the market that will interface with all of these protocols. ADI is terribly slow, but usually worth the wait. I not only have lighting control, but 8 security cameras that I switch to keep track of my special needs son, and run our home theater with it. I communicate with the Ocelot with a Pronto.

I've sort of pushed Insteon to the background, thinking more towards either Z-Wave or UPB. I've had a number of PCS X-10 dimmers for some time now and they never fail. I started out with some Smarthome X-10 dimmers and they have all ended up in the land fill. Every time we got a power drop out or surge, they lost their programming, if not worse. There is always a price to pay for saving too much money.

I think I should gather from your post that UPB is the safest protocol to mix with X-10? I'm thinking of not disturbing the X-10 with the new system. I have one branch that has X-10 issues I can't find, so I'd start out changing those over to UPB when ADI finally gets the new Ocelot on the market (code named Firecracker). While Z-Waves seems pretty good, it seems it might be risky if one is going to tip-toe into it.

Again, thanks for the excellent reply.

EDIT: I have discovered cocoontech, have registered and posted my first question regarding where we might be going under the new Energy Bill requiring certain goals to be met with light bulbs starting in 2010 and how they might affect our dimmers.

Saw your post on Cocoontech. Good info there. You say you have some PCS x10 switches. You are right, they just do not fail!!! Unfortunatly, PCS no longer produces those switches. That is one of the reasons I went with UPB and PCS switches.

Dave