p.s. the above is not meant to suggest that touchscreens are always better than handheld remotes which is a silly argument that people sometimes get into because "I prefer hard buttons etc." They each have their place.

100" screen? please, we dont deal in inches.
I still deal in inches sometimes since it helps women to visualize things easier (if you start talking in feet a woman can get confused or scared). So when asked my size I normally say 2". The look of surprise on their face often increases when I explain "from the ground baby, from the ground".

I thought perhaps adding that bad joke might lighten things up a bit.

A good hand held remote can be great too, but nothing can make things easy to operate for people (especially if they have more than a few A/V components) than a touchscreen. However due to the cost and work required, I think very very few people have been exposed to using a touchscreen to operate their home and it will likely stay that way for a long time.

Exactly the reason some of my screens have 50 buttons yet Mark feels the need to be sarcastic about it..I'm happy with what I use to control my stuff and it works fine for me..Mark has shown his true colors in most of his posts already and it seems perhaps we are truly separated by some sort of money thing.

As for the remark "Graphics specialist" I'm not sure what your trying to say..I do it for a hobby and don't ever claim to be an expert or think I'm better than the next guy...I surely don't make fun of others graphics like you have especially while at the same time I'm asking for advice.

I really could care less if your screen size isn't in inchs....to me its about as big as your attitude, I made the comment in reply to your elitist attitude in your earlier post.

I don't think I've even seen your speakers and what the hell do they have to do with anything?

Just to clarify for anyone not consistently following this thread or only reading the last few posts, Ripper is only addressing me in the first paragraph. After that he is addressing Mark P.

Exactly the reason some of my screens have 50 buttons...
Speaking of which, I am confused by your current portfolio. A while back you posted some screen shots which I liked much better than what I currently see on your website. Much snazzier buttons (gloss effect) and lots of color etc. The stuff you have on your site now looks like it was first generation or something. Am I missing something? Certainly not intending to insult. I can upload the screenshot I really liked if you don't know what I am referring to.

Not customers, customer and myself. We went through all these screens months ago and well.......lets just say I asked if the graphics for this stuff had arouse from 1992 and was catching up with what has been available for close to a decade now on video game consoles and websites. Its OK guys, Cinemar can handle graphics from my understanding, Im sure it will work fine in our projects. Ive just spent several months hearing about the raw power of a product and I never would imagine you couldnt make a pleasing interface for the 4 people on the planet that want this. Well them and the dozens of others Ive demo this stuff to and brought up book marked pages of the Buttony TI calculator screens. I guess its because its the groups of people Im asking, normal ones and some with a couple bucks. My responses are farrrrr from what people are saying here.
Mark

If it is just you and your buddies that you are building this for, what does it realy matter what other people think of your design.

As far as a "pleasing interface" we go back to my quote in my other post. I have also showed many people many designs and I get different opinions from everyone but this is what makes everyone different from another.

I am very happy for you and your friend that you decided on a Interface that best works for you and if you feel that one product does a better job at providing you with the capability to reach that goal then then other then go with that product but don't put down its competitors just because it lacks a feature that you feel is required for complete capability. For me my goal is for a system that is strong in the backend. I sell products based on the engine in it rather then the color of it.

I am not suprised at all that the responses you get here are "farrrrr from" what you got elsewhere. This is what makes this forum what it is. It is a combination of different views and opinions.

*Legal Notice*
The following is not directed towards anyone directly nor indirectly, it is subject to clarification or withdrawal.

This whole thread reminds me of what I once heard as a young lad, "Opinions are like A@@holes, Everyone has one."

Am I the only one who thinks this thread has deteriorated into a blonde vs brunette argument? The best touchscreen graphics like other asthetics are very much in the eye of the beholder.

I've watched the graphics capability of CQC improve by orders of magnitude since I started with it. I suspect that animation will eventually hit Dean's radar screen again just like the prior improvements in interface design. Everyone needs a break sometimes, even Dean.

Speaking of which, I am confused by your current portfolio. A while back you posted some screen shots which I liked much better than what I currently see on your website. Much snazzier buttons (gloss effect) and lots of color etc. The stuff you have on your site now looks like it was first generation or something. Am I missing something? Certainly not intending to insult. I can upload the screenshot I really liked if you don't know what I am referring to.

I think what you seen was another set of templates I had did when I first started using CQC and then I changed to another type...alot of times I forget to post new stuff I am working on or I post it to the CQC forums when I remember.

Here is the direct link to a gallery with various things I made in my spare time, as I mentioned previously I have never claimed to be an expert and actually stopped doing any graphics related work around 2000 and only continued doing it as a hobby and even then I didn't do much for years..I do alot different work these days totally unrelated to graphics.

http://www.touchscreengraphics.com/gallery2/main.php

I truly understand how my personal style might not be what another finds attractive at all or what they want to control their system..thats fine we all have our own styles we like and this is stuff I do as a hobby not trying to make any sort of profit.

Ripper,

I've attached the image I'm talking about? Do you like:
http://www.touchscreengraphics.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=190
better?

:confused:

p.s. Everyone should make sure and maximize the image I attached or it will not look good.

Ripper,

I've attached the image I'm talking about? Do you like:
http://www.touchscreengraphics.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=190
better?

:confused:

p.s. Everyone should make sure and maximize the image I attached or it will not look good.
And here's another I just found in your "archives" that seem to randonmly pop up in the left when visiting your site. This looks great:
http://www.touchscreengraphics.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=122

The above looks 10 times better than this which you seem to say is your current???
http://www.touchscreengraphics.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=190

:confused:

Please note I am referring to the graphical elements only (look and feel of the buttons etc.), not what is or is not on the page.

Ahh yes that was some older stuff I did from this set of templates

http://www.touchscreengraphics.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=97

The thing is I change things all the time and see what I like in a variety of resolutions..the sets posted online is stuff I had completed and I posted as template packages for people to use.

Here is yet another look I started months ago but I got sidetracked with moving into our new home so I never quite finished doing everything..this time its in 800x600 and isn't finished either

Also..its fairly easy for me to make buttons glossy or whatever color but trust me no matter which way I do them *everybody* will have an opinion as to what they like/dislike so many times I don't even post the 100's of variations of stuff I make..probably save myself from alot of people telling me what I should and shouldnt be doing :-)

http://www.ncrypt.net/touchscreen/cqc/screenshots/V1.2.png


Perhaps this isn't a style for everybody but then again I didn't design for anybody but myself and my equipment..the one advantage I do have is I can rapidly design things for myself and don't have to rely on others to get the look I want to control my equipment..to each his own, I design for myself but also anytime I post anything I can expect criticism....thats what I don't always post everything I do otherwise I'd have to deal with sarcastic comments everyday.

I'm sure someone will say this has way too many button or the icons look like nintendo yet the same people would say that it should look like an Xbox of course...personally I could care less how some others accept things and if they don't like it fine..I make ti to control my system and not theirs, you don't see them posting much to write home about.


BTW QQQ don't think this post is anything against you in anyway...just basically pointing out that some have nothing to do other than criticize others yet they have nothing to show.

BTW QQQ don't think this post is anything against you in anyway...just basically pointing out that some have nothing to do other than criticize others yet they have nothing to show.
Not at all, it's just funny because I would never think the same guy designed both. I would think that the guy that designed the first stuff would find the buttons on the second stuff boring in comparison :) (referring to the comparison I posted a few posts back). You may want to see a doctor. I think you are devolving :D.

Not at all, it's just funny because I would never think the same guy designed both. I would think that the guy that designed the first stuff would find the buttons on the second stuff boring in comparison :).

Exactly...and I'm sure I could design in 1000 other variations and you would never know it was the same person, I came from a background of webpage design and people coded sites in notepad and in that business if you designed the same **** day after day you wouldn't make money and you surely won't have many customers...nobody wants the same old crap as the next guy.

The buttons on the second set were made very simple for a few reasons when I made them..I was testing different designs in dimmed room and the others lit up the room and that version was purposely made so it was washed out and cast less light on the darkened room.

I can do many styles in Photoshop and not just the 50 button remote stuff made for 10 year olds that I do for touchscreens.... thats why I should sometimes just sit back and not comment about graphics..I don't need to try to impress anybody especially if I'm not being paid by the hour.

I am not feeling that sheen effect. Also, didn't you upgrade to CQC's 2.0 Pleasure Dot Technology?

Just when I thought the thread was becoming useful again...

The PDT was delayed due to staffing issues. We keep having to fire the testers, for reasons probably best not gone into.

And when Dean says "staff" issues, he means that quite literally.

And here's another I just found in your "archives" that seem to randonmly pop up in the left when visiting your site. This looks great:
http://www.touchscreengraphics.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=122

The above looks 10 times better than this which you seem to say is your current???
http://www.touchscreengraphics.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=190

:confused:

Hmm not sure what to say..I made that the first day I started using CQC to test controlling my music archive..sorta got bored and made a few other things...I tend to change things weekly/monthly if I have spare time.

The stuff in my archives which says "current" is sort of deceiving because it graphics I made I think in July or something..I've done other stuff since then I just don't always post it because its .psd files I'm working on and when I do post it I'll get emails from people asking me for it and I usually don't have alot of spare time to chop it into buttons or templates for them.

I guess thats an example of how things look different to other people..what might look 10 times better to you looks old and boring to me a few hours after making it..I sorta just laid it out quickly to test playing my music and then I guess the next thing you know I had a few templates.

Here a user on the CQC forum takes some of those graphics and makes something totally different for a smaller touchscreen

http://www.charmedquark.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=2875

I am not feeling that sheen effect.

How about a cool breeze?

{picture deleted}

Merry Xmas David :-)

Nice, but you should see Pete of iAutomate dance!

No one 'put you in your place'. They just disagree with you. You seem to be having a hard time seeing that people have wildly different opinions about what makes a good user interface. You have your opinions, other people have theirs. I've spent the last 5'ish years having people whisper, talk, and scream at me what they need, so I know from whence I speak in terms of prioritization of feature implementation. I can promise you that what you are wanting to do, though very likely of great value in some of the scenarios you mentioned, are not nearly as high a priority for the 'meat and potatoes' needs that most customers have for core home automation, and that we still need to meet in order to get professional installers on board.

That doesn't in the slightest mean that we don't care about it. But we are a business and we have to address the issues first that will bring in the most business. I can promise you that it's not the things that you are talking about. Yes, some of the people you show some screen concept to might say I'd really like to have that. But, if we then don't support the hardware they have or the tools aren't refined enough to make it easy to implement what they need to have implemented, the pretty interface won't matter.No Dean, I think its you that has a hard time seeing that people have wildly different opinions, In your last 5 years who were these whispers coming from? Integrator/automators or have you personally spoke with the end user that hasnt been informed by the integrator how lucky they are to have the layout they have. Interfaces on just about everything but Home Depot Self checkouts, oops scratch that, those have motion and fade ins and photos, OK maybe Wal-Mart self.....eeerps I guess they are developed for 2007 as well. Point being, Im not sure who was involved in your study group but hopefully in envolved hundreds of every age starting at around 6 and all the way to 80 years old. If youre talking to youre talking and listening to your customers thats great, but in your case theres an end user thats using multiple other products and wondering why everything they own has nice interfaces but the thing that operates their entire home.

Theres a member of this forum that has a thread with 525,000 views on his thread with over 3000 replys, if he says "go buy this its great" people run like sheep as fast as they can without question because they watched his progress and know his dedication to excellence or atleast the most favorable route is. We have discussed this Cinenmar, CQC thing for h.....o...u.r.s and I think you may be suprised what he said about your product no matter how powerful and robust it is. Had it had one itty bitty thing different, he probably would have posted how great and exciting you product was and hundreds would have jumped. Its a simple concept and heres his theater

http://www.smxscreen.com/images/klipsch-smx-blue/IMG_5410.jpg

http://www.smxscreen.com/images/theater-web-shots/IMG_5213.jpg

Now from the research thats been done in 5 years do you have a suggestion (example ) of what interface screen works well here at the captains chair since its one of the first things that will grap your eyes. DIYers are interested and doing projects like this. Im not ripping on your product like others do on this thread consistantly towards Cinemar, Im just wondering who these people are that are telling you graphics come last.

No perhaps about it, that is easily the most insulting thing i've read on this forum in a long time.

I cannot believe you've come to this forum looking for assistance in setting up your project, and then blatantly continuing to insult us like this. Good luck getting help, let me know how that attitude works out for you.Your insulted, not sure how but then you make stuff up and insert your feelings frequently on what others are thinking or doing.

If it was the normal people and people with a couple bucks, I suppose I can spoon feed you along.

Normal People= people who can turn on a light switch, would never pay for any of this, and could give a rats arse about any screen or how good or robust this stuff is because they have a life. Ive asked many of these types since they are guests and will have to use this stuff

People with a couple bucks= Someone that might, and I stress MIGHT be interested in something like this because even the DIY route is going to be costly and time consuming, and if you spending wads of cash chances are you want your interface matching the price of the product.

You guys seem to think Im saying the actual graphics themselves are crap, nothings further from the truth, its the fact its soon 2010 and look at the interfaces, everybody else on the planet that has interfaces have something appealing going on usually containing some sort of movement.

Its funny all the Cinemar users here are for great graphics, and the couple CQC users and owner and a Crestron guy are brushing graphics to the side as "what people want" and no need to improve. Not suprising

Might have something to do with Cinemar's / CQCs roots.

Cinemar was born from AVSForum for media management. Folks that are interested in media tend to emphasize graphical media and approach (from what we at Cinemar see).

I believe CQC was born more from automation of hardware and has less emphasis on what things look like.

Cinemar's founder (Mario) has a strength in graphical development.

Dean's strength seems to be of code.

Since foundation roots, Cinemar has added a team of software development folks as well as graphical folks. ML3 is really the first product that exemplifies that team result that covers both automation nuts and bolts AND graphical content and manipulation. And, the ability to let end user's to add their own bits of graphics (or even plugin code) is supported.

Dean has not expanded his "staff", but does allow for graphical contributions from folks like Ripper99 and code aware end users.

Good to have options. Keeps us up late at night :)

I can't seem to grasp where all of this anger is coming from. There are 2 different approaches, from 2 different companies being discussed here. The fact is that they both have their own way of seeing things.

It doesn't have to be an ideological war. I don't think that IVB deserves the bashing he's getting. I have found him to be very helpful. Really above and beyond the call. I have seen him recommend products other than CQC if he felt that it was in the posters best interest.

MarkP wants a flashy (no pun intended) animated interface. Well that's just peachy and his right to do so. But not to demand or chastised those, includung Dean, who don't agree.

MarkP - if you're right and there are hundreds or thousands just chomping at the bit for what you describe, then Dean won't get that business. It's his decision which market he goes after. If he's wrong, he looses. If he's right he wins.

Just because someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't make them evil or even wrong. Just a differing view.

I dont happen to agree with MarkP's view of interface. I don't particularly like IVB's either. BUT I appreciate the approaches. I happen to be looking for something a little different.

For instance, when my wife walks up to the touchscreen and wants to play music, shuoldshe have to know which "source" to pick if I have 3 different digital streams possible from the server? Or should she just be able to pick an album and click play?

To me those are the issues of importance. Usability.

And no-one will get my business if they take side jabs at the competition that have nothing to do with the product itself. In all of my years in sales, I have NEVER bashed my competition. I will discuss the differences in products and why I think my products approach is better.

OK, I'm done now.

Everyone try and chill and have a great Holiday Season.

Smoothtlk is correct in the foundation of things, substantially off in where CQC is, but at this point i'm not going to feed the various trolls anymore.

Looks to me like MarkP has come to his decision as to which product he's going to use to automate his theater, and I sincerely wish him the best of luck with it.

I don't know what the numbers would be, but I wouldn't dismiss the comment.

Mark has been pretty blunt, but there is a lot of truth in what he has said. I'm not here to defend what he said, or how he said it; the only difference between his comments and other comments from some people is that he doesn't go to great lengths to disguise them as anything else.

Personally, I am waiting to see what both Mark and 'the other gentleman' do. I do believe that they could significantly impact a product. From reading their threads, I also find that their tastes are similar to mine. Not to say that every person on this earth has the same taste, but I think a great deal of people identify with these guys.

I think they share the same passion for their choice of products that other people in this thread share for {CQC,ML}. I think what sets them apart is that when they can't find a product that meets their needs they go to great lengths to build/modify/create/improvise one.

Tim

I can't seem to grasp where all of this anger is coming from. There are 2 different approaches, from 2 different companies being discussed here. The fact is that they both have their own way of seeing things.

It doesn't have to be an ideological war. I don't think that IVB deserves the bashing he's getting. I have found him to be very helpful. Really above and beyond the call. I have seen him recommend products other than CQC if he felt that it was in the posters best interest.

MarkP wants a flashy (no pun intended) animated interface. Well that's just peachy and his right to do so. But not to demand or chastised those, includung Dean, who don't agree.

MarkP - if you're right and there are hundreds or thousands just chomping at the bit for what you describe, then Dean won't get that business. It's his decision which market he goes after. If he's wrong, he looses. If he's right he wins.

Just because someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't make them evil or even wrong. Just a differing view.

I dont happen to agree with MarkP's view of interface. I don't particularly like IVB's either. BUT I appreciate the approaches. I happen to be looking for something a little different.

For instance, when my wife walks up to the touchscreen and wants to play music, shuoldshe have to know which "source" to pick if I have 3 different digital streams possible from the server? Or should she just be able to pick an album and click play?

To me those are the issues of importance. Usability.

And no-one will get my business if they take side jabs at the competition that have nothing to do with the product itself. In all of my years in sales, I have NEVER bashed my competition. I will discuss the differences in products and why I think my products approach is better.

OK, I'm done now.

Everyone try and chill and have a great Holiday Season.
Great post Sam. And I believe you are on the mark that usability is key...I would say usability if KING. For me it is the first goal because without that nothing else matters. You can have state of the art performance, but if people can't use it, it doesn't matter.

Here is how we like to handle the issue of choosing between 3 streams. There are a lof of variables and ways to do it but in the end we usually do something like this.

Show three buttons for "Stream 1", "Stream 2" and "Stream 3". Each source button should have an indicator that shows if it is in-use or not. Now the user can choose whether they want to select a Stream that is in use or select their own dedicated Stream. The reason this works well is that in a "real" home, people often turn on the music in the kitchen, leave it on there and then walk to the family room and want to turn it on there too. They can see that "Stream 1" is in use, know that it is the one they already have playing in the kitchen and that it is the Stream they want to select. On the other hand, if they see Stream 1 is in use and they are in a room where they want to start up some music for themselves (independently), they know to select Stream 2 or 3.

There are other ways to handle this and I could write 2 pages about the pros and cons but I have found the above to work best.

p.s. of course I would not actually call them "Stream 1" on the touchscreen but rather "Music Library" or something like that.

Im not ripping on your product like others do on this thread consistantly towards Cinemar, Im just wondering who these people are that are telling you graphics come last.

No one said graphics come last. Basically, as the vendor of an automation product, I constantly get contacts of the sort "Can your product do X? If so I may buy it, else I can't, even if it's really good otherwise". Never has X been animation, honestly. It's been support for this device, or that device, or the ability to do scheduled events, or triggered events, or do media management, ect... So these are the things that we've spent the last year or so implementing.

So I'm having a little trouble understanding how you can question that we are doing what those people who are making the decision to buy/not buy are asking for. I'm sure that if you sat down a group of random people and showed them prettier and prettier screens, that a lot of them would pick the prettiest one (leaving aside that they wouldn't understand the usability aspects of it, and are just going by visual appeal.) But, those people don't seem to be the people driving the purchase of an automation product.

In the end, as a business, the people who count are the ones who buy or don't buy. I've talked to thousands by now, and animation has never, ever been a decision point. Device support, far and away, is the make/break issue.

That doesn't mean I don't care about making the interfaces nicer. I do. If you need evidence, here is a screen snap of the 1.0 user interface:

http://charmedquark.com/Web2/Downloads/MiscImages/Showoff.jpg

If yo compare that to what we are doing now, clearly a huge amount of work has gone into the user interface system. It's one of the biggest single chunks of code in the system actually. But other than the occasional request for something like a spinning fan type automation widget (which we do have, though it's not as good as it could be currently) and the slide out interfaces (which we have now), the requests have overwhelmingly been for other things.

So I'm not sure what to tell you. If the bulk of potential buyers had felt the way you do, you can rest assured that it would have been done by now, since that would have been the biggest break point for the buy decision. But it's not been. Given that our customer base has increased by 500% this year, I think that we've done a fairly good job in filling in the holes that people have felt were missing.

Theres a member of this forum that has a thread with 525,000 views on his thread with over 3000 replys, if he says "go buy this its great" people run like sheep as fast as they can without question because they watched his progress and know his dedication to excellence or atleast the most favorable route is. We have discussed this Cinenmar, CQC thing for h.....o...u.r.s and I think you may be suprised what he said about your product no matter how powerful and robust it is. Had it had one itty bitty thing different, he probably would have posted how great and exciting you product was and hundreds would have jumped. Its a simple concept and heres his theater


I guess your talking about Sandman? Well I've read his thread and while I admire anybody that can convert a garage into a theater the way he did I surely didn't run out like a sheep and buy anything he put into his theater because he claimed it was the most favorable route and I'm sure most common sense people wouldn't do the same..beautiful theater Ruben has but just because he likes something its got nothing to do with what everybody else likes nor will people run like sheep to buy products just because he use's them.

Personally I make my purchases based on what I like and how something works for me and not what someone else likes..I've mentioned more than once I used Cinemar for 6 months and it didn't do what I needed..obviously after spending $1000 on the product and a driver for it something had to be wrong otherwise I would be still using it and thats about all the details I need to give without someone implying I'm bashing.

While Mark seemed to have fun making pokes at a few of my 50 buttons screens with the ten year old comment..so be it, I have components that have 50 functions I would like access too quickly the way the wife and I like it, I could really care less about things sliding in and out or built with Flash or looking like an Xbox or how some other guy sees the world..its all personal choice and we are all entitled to use what we want and truthfully it comes down to usability and functionality.

I really have nothing to gain by knocking Cinemar and David and I have had our share of arguments and at times he has somewhat agreed my situation may have had something to do with the way Musiclobby ran for me, I did not at all buy Mainlobby for the way it looked as I can design my own graphics..at the time it was purchased I bought it as a front end to control my gear and my music and that was #1..had nothing to do at all with graphics..if anything I complained about not being able to change the color of things like the Musiclobby interface at that time.

I think both products have a few things users dislike but in no way is either product going to satisfy everybody...regardless of what anybody thinks I don't care who recommends a product if I purchase it and it doesn't work for my situation I'll be taking it back end of story.

If it works for them and they have a fan club of loyal users so be it but if it doesn't work for me or has a problem I'm not gonna sit back and say nothing and act like I think its the best thing since sliced bread just because some other guy likes it..I sure ain't no nutswinger and never will be.

I've been at AVS since around when it started and one thing I've learned is people here say what they want about products..nobody gives a crap that Johny Plasma thinks his set is the best and because he is the plasma god we should all bow down and purchase his plasma...screw that if they know a particular LCD is better and they have the facts you know what they will be buying regardless of what the flock of seagulls is having for lunch.

Personally Mark I think you need to keep doing some research..I've owned/used

Crestron
Pronto
Homeseer
Netremote
Meedio
Xlobby
Cinemar

I've now settled on CQC and I'm a DIY and could care less if any of the products above worked well for 1 or 1000 of those users..in my personal situation each product has something the other didn't but I assure you they all had negatives also..once again the graphics thing meant nothing on any of them for me it usually came down to the reliability and support and how when it controlled my equipment.

From what I've seen so far you seem to be hopping into all this pretty quickly and I hope you have enough time to properly test all your equipment, confirm you have drivers for everything or what the cost is to have them all made and also confirm some basic operational things..just because a software seems to work fine controlling 100 discs do not think it will work the same with over 1000 discs, you better test it yourself or have confirmation from real users and not just because someone tells you it will work and they don't even have 1000 discs.

There are so many independent issues related to using a product of this type, that I am quite amazed how people are formulating arguments to try to dictate what the "masses" would want in an interface. In my eyes, I think both products have done a great job given that they can accomodate the wide range of interface styles that I have seen on here.

As stated in a past post, first and foremost, usability is key. My background is in systems engineering with a specialty in human factors and human-computer interfacing, and that is the first point that is ever taught in an HCI course. To be useful, an interface must afford easy execution of tasks, and provide useful feedback as to that execution and the state of the system. Each of these elements, however, is guided by the application of the system - which I see as the first big difference between say MarkP and IVB. It appears that Mark is using his system in a very location centric manner where he wants his actions and interfaces to be governed by his location in the house. On the complete opposite of the spectrum is IVB who, as I see it, wants complete system control regardless of what room he is in. Given that defining difference, the designs of their interfaces inherently have to be different.

Having said that, there are several key elements common to interface design period. An interface can be either too busy that it becomes difficult to find a button, or too simple where there are no buttons and no intuitive controls. The balance is often extremely difficult to determine. The beauty about these systems, is that we are designing them for ourselves and we each know what works for us.

As I am developing my system, I have decided that I want the base to be full system control from any location. In order to accomplish this, there needs to be a common element to each screen. In my case, it will be a navigation bar on the left hand side where regardless of which control screen you are on, it is easy to navigate the system. Each overlay screen will then be specific to the room/device I am controlling. My second concern was usability for people other than me. As a result, there are no hidden buttons or fancy light indicators. Just clearly labeled controls that are easy to understand and provide appropriate feedback. I subscribe to the KISS method. Just my $0.02.

I just wanted to slip in here as post 533 to say that I chose CQC with out ever thinking about animation. I looked at templates like this (http://www.charmedquark.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=3083) and this (http://myhometheaterpc.com/screen_index.html) and felt that the user interface was plenty nice for me. Frankly I would much rather have my automation software work 100% and support the devices that I wish to use. If / when someone makes a cool animated interface I'll download it and use it for FREE in CQC.

Chris

I just wanted to slip in here as post 533 to say that I chose CQC with out ever thinking about animation. I looked at templates like this (http://www.charmedquark.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=3083) and this (http://myhometheaterpc.com/screen_index.html) and felt that the user interface was plenty nice for me. Frankly I would much rather have my automation software work 100% and support the devices that I wish to use. If / when someone makes a cool animated interface I'll download it and use it for FREE in CQC.

Chris

100% in agreement.

There are so many independent issues related to using a product of this type, that I am quite amazed how people are formulating arguments to try to dictate what the "masses" would want in an interface. In my eyes, I think both products have done a great job given that they can accomodate the wide range of interface styles that I have seen on here.

As stated in a past post, first and foremost, usability is key. My background is in systems engineering with a specialty in human factors and human-computer interfacing, and that is the first point that is ever taught in an HCI course. To be useful, an interface must afford easy execution of tasks, and provide useful feedback as to that execution and the state of the system. Each of these elements, however, is guided by the application of the system - which I see as the first big difference between say MarkP and IVB. It appears that Mark is using his system in a very location centric manner where he wants his actions and interfaces to be governed by his location in the house. On the complete opposite of the spectrum is IVB who, as I see it, wants complete system control regardless of what room he is in. Given that defining difference, the designs of their interfaces inherently have to be different.

Having said that, there are several key elements common to interface design period. An interface can be either too busy that it becomes difficult to find a button, or too simple where there are no buttons and no intuitive controls. The balance is often extremely difficult to determine. The beauty about these systems, is that we are designing them for ourselves and we each know what works for us.

As I am developing my system, I have decided that I want the base to be full system control from any location. In order to accomplish this, there needs to be a common element to each screen. In my case, it will be a navigation bar on the left hand side where regardless of which control screen you are on, it is easy to navigate the system. Each overlay screen will then be specific to the room/device I am controlling. My second concern was usability for people other than me. As a result, there are no hidden buttons or fancy light indicators. Just clearly labeled controls that are easy to understand and provide appropriate feedback. I subscribe to the KISS method. Just my $0.02.
Great post.

The interface that we use now is actually not as "flashy" as some of our earlier designs. However we found (with REAL usability testing with our customers) that it is easier to use. The important of every element has to be weighed and it is part science and part art and as you say it is extremely difficult to determine the proper balance. The most challenging thing about GUI design is getting your ego out of the way as the designer. It is VERY difficult not to gravitate towards what we as designers find attractive and/or usable, but that may have very little to do with what the end user finds usable.

Cavalier, that's a good breakdown of what I want, with one slight modification: I want full system control of any HA or HT function from any location with a highly usable interface. For my target audience, I have accomplished that fully.

For me, highly usable means a common nav element as a wrapper for my screens. This is because my audience understands that method of interaction. Varying screens by location would just confuse the heck out of my users because they'd have to look at the screen and then decide how to interact with it. If I keep it 100% the same, down to the color, I can minimize the learning curve.

In addition, In my 96yr old craftsman house, the touchscreen is NOT a piece of art, rather it needs to blend into the background of the house and be as invisible as possible. It's decorated in "period' style and the opposite of modern, meaning all these fancy graphics would be vastly out of place and visually halting. My 3400 is wallmounted in the kitchen, but it's way too obtrusive for me and i'm looking for a way to even minimize that. It's just that I don't feel like dumping $1K on a super-nice flushmount screen - wouldn't have the ROI for me.

Finally, I'm not just doing HomeTheaterAutomation - I'm doing complete HomeAutomation. It is inherently more complex to automate a full house than pieces of a house, and my UI needs to handle that. I don't want to put up touchscreens and then only be able to access pieces of it from any given location. From a "pieces under control" perspective that means lighting, HVAC, irrigation, CCTV, security, as well as all A/V. In addition, I'm doing tons of "cross-discipline" integration, meaning the security should be able to pause the A/V if the doorbell rings, UNLESS the user has put the house into DND mode through the UI.

And, in the end, given that my target audience feels that I do have a highly usable and intuitive interface, and given that they're the anti-geeks (again, actor, 2 teachers, architect, marketing communications person), I'm content with what I have and would rather see more nuts & bolts assembled to add more functionality.

Perhaps once I've gotten all the nuts & bolts I need to "complete" the HA setup, I'd be interested in revisiting the interface, but if I had to choose between making the screens even easier to use or having better control over what I own, it's an easy choice for me.

Of course, your opinion may be different, and that's why my path may not be right for you. That's cool too, I'm not going to get the Swedish Blonde either way, as long as you're happy that's what counts. All I can do is educate folks on what I did and why, and leave it to them to decide what that means to them.

Well, from MainLobby's perspective, you can use static images or you can use animations (yours or Cinemars).
Contemporary, Classic, Traditional, whatever.
Makes no difference. The tool supports all.

The default scenes are there as a way for users to get going quick with quick satisfaction and functionality. You can throw them away and build your own, or tweek the ones that are there and make them "dealerized" or "customerized" whatever is your need.
Most importantly they are there to serve as a model of ways the technology can be used to accomplish end goals.

For those that have not used ML3, this is different from what you may have used before.

Well, from MainLobby's perspective

Does Mainlobby still have the same perspective where all music is played using that black and yellow flash creation?

No bashing at all David but you may recall I had *many* complaints about not being able to make it customized at all..to display track names it gets displayed in that off black/yellow .swf that cannot be edited..has this been changed so users can make a music screen look anyway they want?

I know you have the basic transport buttons separate and had a few done before I left but my major concern was being forced to use that flash thing to view the track name and also those teeny grey buttons...yes yes I know they can be scaled and that is not the same as everything else is scaled..has this changed with all the improvements to ML3 or does it basically look the same as the last version...I can't seem to find any new screenshots on your website showing any different.

I also had a problem with my 1100+ album collection and displaying the cover art..has this problem been fixed yet? I recall at the time Cinemars recommended solution was "Don't use the coverart and use text view instead" ..I still have to giggle at that suggestion and could just imagine Escient trying to suggest that to their users :-)

Hopefully you don't mind me asking these sorts of questions each time this thread starts to move and then you start advertising...if the product truly is different and I am speaking of Musiclobby I cannot seem to find *any* screenshots posted on your sales page at all showing custom music control interfaces..it looks like that same thing from ML2 that I complained about?

If you can point out even one example of a user showing an albums coverart/tracks/ not having to be displayed in in the black and yellow thing or the black thing with silver buttons I'd like to see it...it seems everytime I see a music control screen in Mainlobby they all have that same black and yellow thing?

Can all the buttons to work that thing be separated yet or *just* the transport controls like it was last year?

**EDIT - David this is the black/yellow thing I'm talking about..can people change the color/shape of this or are they forced to use this to display all the track names or choose them? I am pretty sure the coverart can be displayed without that border but that was the least of my worries back then..its those god awful yellow headers/buttons and I have no problem whatsoever calling them that, to each his own and I could care less if 5000 think that yellow text and header color is cool..its not my style at all.

The thing the coverart is displayed in..can the coverart just be designed to float on a page or possibly slide in or fade in but without that black/yellow thing around it with that *yellow* text...I am sure many purchasers might like the option to change the color of the yellow text and when I used the product that wasnt possible at all...you may recall i requested and wonder if 18 months later people can indeed change this to something they like instead.

http://www.ncrypt.net/touchscreen/cqc/images/black-yellow.jpg

http://www.ncrypt.net/touchscreen/cqc/images/black-yellow2.jpg

http://www.cinemaronline.com/images/0019_iport_jumpletter.600.jpg

http://www.cinemaronline.com/images/0019_iport_02.600.jpg
Move anything where you want it, whatever font, coverart or none, etc.
This is for support of the iPort docking station. I just published a similar UI that displays stock portfolios and values. Very reusable. Make it look like you want.

BTW, MusicLobby was tintable for a LONG time. You could also show / hide controls or move many of them around.

Move anything where you want it, whatever font, coverart or none, etc.
This is for support of the iPort docking station. I just published a similar UI that displays stock portfolios and values. Very reusable. Make it look like you want.

Yes I see that is for the Iport..looks nice, can the same be done to access 1100 albums with jrmc..that was the question I was asking.

Can you point me to *any* example of a user doing something similar but controlling albums in jrmc using the Musiclobby product..I can't see to find any screenshots of anything..this is for the Iport..what about jrmc?

Where it is showing the Artist and song names in your iport example it is a grey background and I'm sure I'd be right in assuming this is a .swf, can a custom graphics be used instead of the color you have chosen?

All I am asking is to see *any* user examples of custom music control interfaces besides that black/yellow flash .swf ...I am not looking to see examples of the iport but perhaps I should have been more specific to avoid going in circles.

Perhaps because this is working right now I assume and is the new Mainlobby3 that I can go purchase and control my music collection you'll have no problem capturing a few images for us right now showing this same thing controlling your music collection in JRiver?

Why if the control of Musiclobby3 is actually like the images you posted are you using images that appear to be Musiclobby2 on your website?

Just to once again make sure you are understanding David..can Musiclobby3 and specifically Jriver be controlled the same way as the Iport screen captures you just posted..can a person purchase Musiclobby3 today and make it look anything like what you just posted to control JRMC...as mentioned if it is possible today* please post some screenshots as I'd love to see what you've done, thanks.

BTW, MusicLobby was tintable for a LONG time. You could also show / hide controls or move many of them around.

Tintable?..hmm I am speaking of the yellow text for the track names...you seem to be avoiding some very specific questions regarding the yellows..perhaps maybe a Mainlobby user would shed some truth on this if you can't give an honest answer to some *very basic* questions...you know as well as I do the black border around the coverart and around your track listing could not be changed by tint..if it cant please show everybody in this therad even one SINGLE example of the specific things I am mentioning being tintable or changeable..lets not avoid it either :-)

Specifically David this image right under this sentence and the black that appears in it, can you make it a light blue..if so please show an example..thank you

http://www.ncrypt.net/touchscreen/cqc/images/tintme.jpg

If the grey buttons that appear beside each track name can be changed..please show an example..no excuses, if the yellow text can be changed to red..PLEASE show an example..no B.S David you should be able to easily be able to show this right?

P.S I'll accept things if you admit I am correct and those specific things cannot have the color changed...I'll even leave you alone but have this feeling you will completely change subjects like you just did with the iport thing...nice try however ;-)

Calling all Mainlobby users...can even one of you show me Musiclobby in its most current version controlling Jriver using an interface like David posted above?..I read on those captures

Media Management:iPort

I really have no idea whatsoever why David would all of a sudden start advertising his Iport stuff when I was asking him about Musiclobby?

The way David talk most of the time he must have 100's of examples of what he just posted controlling Jriver..you would think all of his users would be using it and showing off their designs? Oddly...I see no examples anywhere from Musiclobby users...hmmm

I just did a quick search over at cinemar and it does appear that musiclobby can be customized per David's last post. I'm not an actual user so I'm sure if I am wrong somebody will shoot me.. err I mean correct me :)

When I was over "there" I also happened to notice a "Mega" package being marketed. hmmm

Tim

I just did a quick search over at cinemar and it does appear that musiclobby can be customized per David's last post. I'm not an actual user so I'm sure if I am wrong somebody will shoot me.. err I mean correct me :)

When I was over "there" I also happened to notice a "Mega" package being marketed. hmmm

Tim

Could you please post an example to the customization you see for Musiclobby..Davids posting of screenshots was for something entirely different and specifically the iPort plugin they market.

I'd love to see Lathans custom Musiclobby design he has made using the sort of features David is advertising about but in his thread with all the stuff he has made I don't see anything of the sort http://www.cinemaronlineforums.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8010

You will notice his DVD screen he made has the black frames I was mentioning and the silver buttons..not sure why he would keep that stuff if it was totally customizable? Also not sure why he wouldn't just tint that black and maybe make it look sorta silver to match everything else if its been available for a LONG time as David replied to me after I asked about changing the color?

http://project2501.tzo.com/opening-cinema-dvdlobby-movielist.jpg

**Lathan if you can please post a link to your Musiclobby template so this can all be cleared up and we can see how customizable it is, thanks.


Here is another user with Musiclobby and the interface I speak of for controlling music

http://www.cinemaronlineforums.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7842

Here is a direct link so David doesn't once again get confused about what I am saying

http://www.kw1816.plus.com/musiclobby.JPG

Ripper, You said MUSIC. iPort is one method for MUSIC. The iPort interface concept was developed to be reusable across all media. and not just MUSIC. The iPort heading is just some text that could easily say "Stock Portfolio".

http://www.cinemaronline.com/images/0019_stock_600.jpg

The MusicLobby back end was rewritten since you been around. The UI aspects of it are next. That started with the UI for the iPort. The original post was not about Music, but about user interfaces in general. I said "From a MainLobby perspective...."

Once again, you have turned this thread into a "rip this" debate.

David..lets not play semantics...MUSICLOBBY 100% customizable or not?

Lets not try and make me look like the bad guy...you knew exactly what I was askiing and instead of answering tried to advertise yet another product.

Weeks ago you tried to pull the very same move when questioned about Weather Channel data and whether or not you were legally allowed to do what you were doing...you tried to avoid it until multiple people called you on it and then from what I recall you were drafting a statement to provide an answer?

Just curious is that answer ready yet or will you turn this around again and say I'm the bad guy.

You can only BS so many people David but guaranteed many won't stand for it and will call you on it if you try to beat around the bush and play the semantics game..I posted pictures to the Musiclobby interface yet you replied with advertising for your iport plugin...nice try :-)


EDIT: This post was edited after David quickly edited his and admitted in a very few words and I quote


The MusicLobby back end was rewritten since you been around. The UI aspects of it are next.

The short and sweet of it...at this time it is not customizable like the Iport interface he posted..not at all and for him to even attempt to make you think that is wrong...perhaps when he has Musiclobby3 finished and working and interfacing like the iport graphics he shows then he can start tooting his trumpet...until then its all COMING SOON.

Again David I am not the bad guy..I have the facts and you beat around the bush, plain and simple...any time I catch you in a lie or simply call you out to show proof the very first thing you do is try to say I'm picking a fight etc, a bit of honesty goes a long way when your trying to be a salesman and want people to respect your word....your tactics remind me of salesmen I try to avoid.

I can't seem to grasp where all of this anger is coming from. There are 2 different approaches, from 2 different companies being discussed here. The fact is that they both have their own way of seeing things.

It doesn't have to be an ideological war. I don't think that IVB deserves the bashing he's getting. I have found him to be very helpful. Really above and beyond the call. I have seen him recommend products other than CQC if he felt that it was in the posters best interest.

MarkP wants a flashy (no pun intended) animated interface. Well that's just peachy and his right to do so. But not to demand or chastised those, includung Dean, who don't agree.

MarkP - if you're right and there are hundreds or thousands just chomping at the bit for what you describe, then Dean won't get that business. It's his decision which market he goes after. If he's wrong, he looses. If he's right he wins.

Just because someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't make them evil or even wrong. Just a differing view.

I dont happen to agree with MarkP's view of interface. I don't particularly like IVB's either. BUT I appreciate the approaches. I happen to be looking for something a little different.

For instance, when my wife walks up to the touchscreen and wants to play music, shuoldshe have to know which "source" to pick if I have 3 different digital streams possible from the server? Or should she just be able to pick an album and click play?

To me those are the issues of importance. Usability.

And no-one will get my business if they take side jabs at the competition that have nothing to do with the product itself. In all of my years in sales, I have NEVER bashed my competition. I will discuss the differences in products and why I think my products approach is better.

OK, I'm done now.

Everyone try and chill and have a great Holiday Season.
Not sure how you know what I want in an interface when I dont even know, I know I want it partially modern like a PS3, X360, Media Center,Tivo, basically everything that has an interface except automation software. If youre talking about my lighting scenerio, thats what Ive chose for the screen in my office, its for ME, I have lihting scenes setup with no buttons at all, no text, nothing. Its mine, I know where and what to touch to make things happen. This was purposeful since my wife or I can setup scenes. No one else from "my" screen. The projects Im working on will have screens for chefs, maids, owners Master Bed, Guest houses, Guest rooms, Pool Rooms, Game Rooms , Theaters, resturants.....................

One screen fits all doesnt, wont, will not work. The comments about all the screens need to be the same and yada ya is so far off base in my situation I have concluded I dont want to explain anymore because when I try posting what Im talking about 2 individuals jump in and start calling me a pompus rich arsehole that says this and that and means this and that. Then they say something about ownng my type of speakers and I say I have DIY speakers they say who cares about your speakers. Its unbelievable, I said I wanted modern or post 1900's interfaces and was instantly told by 4 individuals what was proper and what was right calling my ideas stupid and non functional but were quick to defend with personal attacks and stereotyping when I said no one I know wants that. No one does, since yesterday I have went through this with atleast 18 more people and those people were , Real Estate agent, Architect-design, City Council Members, 2 Winery Owners, Owner, Owners Sister, her son just back from Iraq and a Limo Driver while spending the entire day discussing the transformation of a Historical Building. I wish I had my presentation better prepared but ran out of time and used mine and demoed as many screens as I could dig up plus some OI had whipped up in ML. I was suprised 2 people actually did like the buttons pages ( Lathan your wood grain with Black Buttons I asked about last week, need the Brushed metal Brass or maybe Green or Burgandy Marble) Nice JOB, everyone felt those would work in places if I can change to differant fonts. This is awhile off so I may get with you if you dont mind via PM or something.

The rest agreed with exactly what I knew already, I knew this because Ive asked every walk of lifeI can think of to try and be appealing to everyone since everyone will use these in the 3 major projects Im on right now.

Im sorry Im working on 3 seperate resorts, if it offends people that theres alot of money involved so that automatically transfers to rich snobby stereotypes( what was it Ripper said, Bruce Wayne)

All I ever needed was a simple answer, can an animation be placed on an interface like everyother interface on the planet, we love the fact we have power to design them ourselves. Or pay Lathan, if he has free time.

First off..I never called you a pompus rich arsehole and don't recall anybody else saying anything of the sort?

As for your speakers I never said anything about them..I recall asking if I had to have a certain size screen, a certain type of speakers or whatever to be on par with your circle of freinds or whatever you called it...I'm sure if I mentioned my speakers I'd get some idiot reply from somebody so its best left unsaid and doesnt matter in the scope of this thread.

As for the Bruce Wayne comment..jesus Mark relax, you think your the only guy in the world with money? I made the Bruce Wayne comment simply as a joke and if you took it any differently oh well.

Many people tried to give you simple answers until you started saying crap like "50 buttons on a screen" "looks like a screen my ten year would use" as well as the comments against IVB..try to disguise it anyway you want but you showed you true colors ina few quick strokes of the keyboard.

No need to be sorry your working on 3 resorts..not sure why you even need to mention it?

I'm not sure why it would offend anybody about how much money you have...most people with money need not make mention of anything the same way the tough guy in the crowd is usually the the guy that says nothing.

Good luck with your project.

Mark, I thought Dean gave a good response on page 18, post 529 of this thread. I'm curious how you would respond to it. His response seems to be based on real feedback from real customers.

"I'm getting off this merry-go-round!" The Hudsucker Proxy (1994)

All the round and round, finger pointing, axe grinding, whining, attempts to one up, off track side roads (a few of those were mine :o ) and infighting on both sides has driving me to this. Have fun all. :)

To anyone reading this thread just pick a product and try it out. Both do essentially the same things. Each has their advantages and disadvantages and the only way to be sure is to buy one and get on with your life. If the choice doesn't fit your development style you try something different. That is the way life is.

Me too LathanM. Large waste of time.
Signing off.

And, Ripper, I answered your post above.

Ripper,

Here are some answers (I hope) to your questions.

Musiclobby has had a major change but the way you search the music is using the same UI with some modifications from user requests. These mods have made it easier to use, thought the colors are the same.

Musiclobby can handle large collections.. So far I have found the best way to search is using the thumbs view. It now has a search button that pops up a keyboard. Other search methods were added as well. Searches take place very fast as well as change quickly between pages of coverart.

The controls for just about anything jrivers can do can be programmed into your own buttons without needing to use the musiclobby UI. Any information about the song in jrivers is automatically placed into global variable in mlserver. You can even include lyrics with the free add on plugin. (lyrics update whenever a song changes)

So the sky is the limit on how you want track info and now playing information displayed.

Also with some work you can kinda (did I say kinda) make your own interface using the smart playlists and view schemes then calling them directly from any button that you want to program. This would include things like:
play playlist (smart) which is all music from XXX group rated 3 higher.

First off..I never called you a pompus rich arsehole and don't recall anybody else saying anything of the sort?

As for your speakers I never said anything about them..I recall asking if I had to have a certain size screen, a certain type of speakers or whatever to be on par with your circle of freinds or whatever you called it...I'm sure if I mentioned my speakers I'd get some idiot reply from somebody so its best left unsaid and doesnt matter in the scope of this thread.Whatever I called it? I said Ive asked normal people to people with a little cash and you and someone else got so offended you started throwing out BS non related to this thread or any discussion we've been having. I think anyone with a brain can figure this out

Perhaps your of some elite group huh?

Do I have to maybe have a set of speakers like yours and cool audio equipment to to be part of your group? Or maybe a 100" screen gets me into your club?

Perhaps you think your group is better than mere mortals like us...


As for the Bruce Wayne comment..jesus Mark relax, you think your the only guy in the world with money? I made the Bruce Wayne comment simply as a joke and if you took it any differently oh well.So Im supposed to relax but let you get uptight about something looking Nintendo ( because it is) and working in a 10 year olds room, Hipocrasy runs so deep in this crowd we need an excavator to remove half of it. People get all giddy and excited about ripping on Flash or Fade ins but seem to tighten up when someone doesnt like Nintendo icons on 30 million dollar resorts and Luxury Suites.

Many people tried to give you simple answers until you started saying crap like "50 buttons on a screen" "looks like a screen my ten year would use" as well as the comments against IVB..try to disguise it anyway you want but you showed you true colors ina few quick strokes of the keyboard.Pot .... kettle, kettle........ pot. We saw your colors many pages before this little tiff started, I could drag in multiple quotes through out this thread but weve all read along and noticed the multiple tirades. And it wasnt many, it was 4. The same amount that said they understood exactly what I am saying.

Umm just to point out something *VERY* obvious you are not seeing nothing incredible especially considering your weather data is being scraped from weather.com every X minutes so let me ask...do you all just sit around for lets say 15 minutes till new data is scraped with your freinds and go "Look! Look! did you see the arrow move from N to NW...WOW! thats so sweeeeeet" ...come on guys..please don't tell me this impresses the wife or your freinds You're pretty good, you can insult companies, and my wife and friends all in one meaningless to this thread sentence, do we see a pattern here? Yours and 3 others opinion on multiple touchscreened Resorts and Luxury Suites.


No need to be sorry your working on 3 resorts..not sure why you even need to mention it?

I'm not sure why it would offend anybody about how much money you have...most people with money need not make mention of anything the same way the tough guy in the crowd is usually the the guy that says nothing.

Good luck with your project.I guess I see no difference between a home with one touchscreen ( I was informed quickly that all touchscreens in a building should be the same, different colors.

I was explaining whats going on you see, we do this in business, We make a phone call and say " Yes Mr. Ripper, glad to meet you! My names Mark and Ive been reading about your product and its described as the most powerful automation software in the Universe on page after page on a forum called AVS. What we are doing is building 3 theme resorts, not really theme but resorts in Fiji, A Canadian Wildlife refuge and an 1850s Historical Building thats been ruined through the years and we are restoring it and leaving the storefronts on street level and adding a 12K sq. ft. restaurant below and 4 Luxury Suites above with a centered Ballroom and roof top gardens. We are looking into automation and like the idea of customizable screens with a reliable backend. We are hoping the interfaces will match their surroundings and be of current technology. The reason we need this is because being in this business we have quite exhaustive research into what and how people are stimulated into spending their monies on "our" product. We know the majority of favorite color, smell, building substrates, decor, and visual impacts and the effects these have on bringing customers back as well as word of mouth expansion of customers.

I do apologize to anyone I offended in this thread, when I research the things I research is usually much more aggressive than demonstrated in this thread. We have may things to accomplish in a short amount of time and this takes aggressive, quick and honest answers. We are good at sniffing out BS on the phone and in person but are learning to navigate the "way of the future" internet. In real life If I ask a simple question, and someone representing a product says Im wrong and dont know what Im looking for and I just dont understand that what I want is not whats important........ I say "Thank you for your time"

I never planned on explaining our intent and figured it would be a pleasant suprise to those whos products became involved, Its not everyday products become involved with 30 million dollar projects and honestly this can be intimidating to some small businesses because these are our main target because of their willingness to give their all in moving to the next step. Sometimes these companies need a little help moving to the next step but their attitude and work ethic is more exciting and fun than a company thats lost that touch through the years. Its been awhile since I have had to take their pitch to the final level, Im paid to make these decisions and run with them. We usually dont approach them full bore and all barrels blazing instantly, not because we dont trust them but dont want them becoming exhausted and confused to the point of nervous break down. We like to enjoy everyone and everyone enjoy us, we have zero stress between the trades, Thats left to the interior designer and myself and thats because we unload our stress on eachother. Its quite hilarious to others to watch us in action Ive been informed, usually makes some peole days if not weeks. He in his pink scarf, myself in my faded jeans with all ten of his fingers flailing saying " Mawkus, Mawkus ma love, I dunt wuan to hear thus gubbuly goof abute newt possible, see my visions precious, and make it happen, ok love? ( Im guessing it ends in a question mark and afte all these years cant accept the word 'codes'. All this coming from 5'2" 120lbs speaking to 6'2" 250lbs hick ( since Ive been called this too many times to count it must be a fair representation).

If I would take static screens with buttons to this encounter, trust me when I say I would be laughed at, not just in the room but all the way down the street hanging out the window and its quite embarrasing and I usually look at others and ask " Is he talking to you?" its not the kind of laugh I want to deal with anymore than I already do. In all fairness he knows his chit and we make a good team as long as we give eachother whats expected from the get go. We have learned through the years what that is.

Sorry I asked in the first place, I should have responded the way I usually do and move on. I dont beg anyone because someone else out there is willing and time is precious, Back to pocket PC questions, Ill bow along with Lathan and David.

I'm sorry you found our product lacking. But, I'd have begged off of such a project anyway, even if you had not. It would be too big a step for us to get involved in at this time. It would require us to put all our eggs into one basket at the expense of the more general automation market, which is really our target, and more general product develoment, which is much more important right now for our long term success. I.e. it would have just required us to narrow our focus too much at this time. Perhaps Cinemar would be a better choice for you.

I'm sorry you found our product lacking. But, I'd have begged off of such a project anyway, even if you had not. It would be too big a step for us to get involved in at this time. It would require us to put all our eggs into one basket at the expense of the more general automation market, which is really our target, and more general product develoment, which is much more important right now for our long term success. I.e. it would have just required us to narrow our focus too much at this time. Perhaps Cinemar would be a better choice for you.Your product isnt lacking, thats why we purchased it and honestly will still probably be incorporated due to cell phone activation, this I have not researched and try squeezing this into my free time because from my understanding Cinemar doesnt have this capability. This in itself was worth $500. I need to figure out just how to make Cinemar and CQC work in unison somehow. I have already figured out how to make your products do things through experimentation that Im not sure anyones considered yet involving you products activating a daisychain effect. I think your both right in that anything is possible through different means. If a driver isnt available, this is usually not the end of the world I have found. Theres more than one way to skin a cat.

If you get around to adding the capabilty of dropping animations into an interface, its done on my side. No one asked anyone to drop everything and come install or write drivers to control any of our unique situations, The Elk can handle 90%. Ive already accomplished everything I need to implement in the projects stateside, With the coup in Fiji, that gives me a little time to figure that out

The reason Im taking a cram course on this is I know/knew it would take Crestron/AMX so I had them come bid a theater with the hopes that maybe letting them come in and relieve some load since this is what they do. My son is picking this stuff up pretty fast so he can probably deal with the automation aspects when not in school and playing and needing some spending money. I wasnt going to bring any of this up anyway but some couldnt grasp why one ultimate screen wasnt controlling a house, more like multiple screens, contolling multiple houses inside of a big house. So to speak. We may just pull hair and hire these young kids out there doing this these days with Control4 type products. Back to the interface again though. Maybe my Daughter has the right Idea with " cant we just flip a switch?" That may be the ultimate answer other than music , thermostat and lighting. Hopefully you do understand that this

http://www.myhometheaterpc.com/screenshots/VS20/overlay_xantech.jpg

would be fine in the mechanical rooms, not so much in other areas

Again we like using sole proprietors mainly because they have the most incentive to impress. Whether they are on the job or not, we just feel you usually get 110% from them which ultimately leads to their success

Hopefully you do understand that this would be fine in the mechanical rooms, not so much in other areas
That's not a fair statement. That screen is NEVER accessed directly. Heck, I believe I've only accessed it myself perhaps twice in 9 months. If that's what you think I've been making my relatives access, no wonder you think my stuff is confusing - hell, i think that screen is confusing.

It's only there as a master reset/what-the-heck-is-going-on type screen in case the activity-based coding behind the below screens doesn't work cuz I screwed something up while tinkering with the rest of the system.

This screen comes up if you press the source button on the left-nav (ie, want to change the source in a room)
http://www.myhometheaterpc.com/screenshots/VS20/popup_choosesource.jpg




this screen comes up if you press CD/DVD/XM/etc

http://www.myhometheaterpc.com/screenshots/VS20/popup_roomchoice.jpg

Mark..sometimes whats said in forums isn't always whats meant and when you can't see the other person face to face sometimes its not easy to exactly understand them or sometimes comments made will seem like something they are not and that leads to mud slinging.

Either way at this point I'll just switch to low gear and idle instead of quoting everything you just posted above and dragging this out further..It's very doubtful I'd be able to reply much through the Xmas holidays anyways and I think I'd be better off spending time with the family.

Some of the things you are trying to achieve are probably alot different than what I'm trying to achieve and what alot of others are trying to accomplish for our personal systems...I've been there done that and got the t-shirt so to say and I'm finally realizing what works for the other guy doesn't always work for me.

One thing I have learned over the years through all of this is no matter how good something sounds you will never really know how well it works for you until you have it controlling your media with your hardware in your home...you can take everybody's word for it but words don't necessarily guarantee reliability.

I wish you the best with whatever you choose to do and hope you will do alot of research, I jumped into many of these home automation hardwares and software since about 1999 and started with Crestron and then decided to DIY shortly after purchasing and returned everything..here were are 7 years later and I can say I've tried just about everything :-)

It will be interesting to see where your at 1 year from now and what product you actually settle with.

I guess I see no difference between a home with one touchscreen ( I was informed quickly that all touchscreens in a building should be the same, different colors.
You have quite a way of twisting things Mark. I was responding to someone else and hadn't even read your post. I don't read all of your long rants as you've said the same thing again and again and again. And you seem to try to turn everything into some lack of respect for your ideas if someone disagrees with you. People have stated several times why they do not believe that Flash effects should be a priority on the road map. Nothing more. No one that I can recall mocked what you wanted and as people understood how much you wanted them they listened and even adjusted their opinions somewhat.

One of the problems is it's a bit hard to give someones opinion the respect it might deserve when they constantly indulge in hyperbole and insults such as how they'd be "laughed out of the room" of they showed someone that. You aren't the only one that's involved in large projects - these static screens you would be laughed out of the room over seem to work fine in plenty of large projects some in the billions of dollars.

And I was expression my *opinion* about good GUI design. That's what people do here, it wasn't someone dismissing you. If you want people listening intently and pretending to give great respect to all of your opinions whether they really agree with them or not call in some sales people.

You have quite a way of twisting things Mark. I was responding to someone else and hadn't even read your post. I don't read all of your long rants as you've said the same thing again and again and again. And you seem to try to turn everything into some lack of respect for your ideas if someone disagrees with you. People have stated several times why they do not believe that Flash effects should be a priority on the road map. Nothing more. No one that I can recall mocked what you wanted and as people understood how much you wanted them they listened and even adjusted their opinions somewhat.

One of the problems is it's a bit hard to give someones opinion the respect it might deserve when they constantly indulge in hyperbole and insults such as how they'd be "laughed out of the room" of they showed someone that. You aren't the only one that's involved in large projects - these static screens you would be laughed out of the room over seem to work fine in plenty of large projects some in the billions of dollars.

And I was expression my *opinion* about good GUI design. That's what people do here, it wasn't someone dismissing you. If you want people listening intently and pretending to give great respect to all of your opinions whether they really agree with them or not call in some sales people.You must have skipped an entire page or two then, I never asked for Crestrons opinion on modern interfaces, I knew they were null and void to begin with so when they comeout even harder against Flash and well done graphical interfaces and make a mockery of what a massive list of Global Giants want in design. You 4 can laugh and joke and pass along your ideas of whats important all day long and nobodies hurt but when someones truthful about their disappointment in developements in the interfaces, its a tag team of attemping to put that person in his place since he doesnt understand the priorities of automation. I brought up gaming because these companies will work for years on a single game ( backend) as well as the frontend (dashboards)

I know Crestron and AMX do billion dollar projects, this is why they were called in non chalantly on a theater project that was designed to cover most everything needed in future expansion, When 'The quote' and advice as to how to approach the final result came in I was really quite suprised and I wont delve deeper into this because it doesnt belong here.

After 16 pages of Hyperbole and flatout pandering, solicitation, and vengence insues, I figured this was the way this group communicated. Youre quite correct about the path I took but the hypocracy that flows in and out of this thread is rather overwhelming. I think Ripper and I have concluded theres no need to cut & paste everything said because it would take days to accomplish Im all for just deleting everything I said and let the salesmanship and slander continue.

I revived this thread from death several times asking legit questions which turned into informative pleasant posting until the same ole result that was bound to happen occured. I actually got the 2 companies to list their weaknesses, took awhile but........

Im sorry my involvement in this thread is so distastfull to you, back to the worthwhile sales speak. Ill clean up my mess later today when I have time, it wont take to long

Mark..sometimes whats said in forums isn't always whats meant and when you can't see the other person face to face sometimes its not easy to exactly understand them or sometimes comments made will seem like something they are not and that leads to mud slinging.


Agreed 100%, thats why phone calls are valuable to me if not face to face. I dont like this interwebnet do-hicky much, takes alot of valuable time. Scouring forums looking for answers is almost at its end thankfully. Peace be with all you in the next week and the rest of your lives.....See Ya all, been interesting

For something no one cares about and never asks about. This was pointed out to me in a PM, supposedly theres more but I dont have time. http://www.charmedquark.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=3256

OK guys instead of flooding my PMs, state your cases here, I think it will only help the owners of these products understand what you want and need ( mainly you integrators)

I understand several of your reasons to go PM and respect the reason, Fantastic work to those if I missed replying and telling you so! not a bad bunch in the group. Continue to PM the interfaces , thats fine and I completely understand but voice your opinions here, you wont offend anyone, you will only help them understand.

Thanks, YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE. J/K

Your product isnt lacking, thats why we purchased it and honestly will still probably be incorporated due to cell phone activation, this I have not researched and try squeezing this into my free time because from my understanding Cinemar doesnt have this capability. This in itself was worth $500.

Just so you know... It wouldn't be $500. The current DIY cost is $895, and you wouldn't be installing the DIY version anyway, you'd be installing the pro version, which would be in the $1700 to $2100 range. Probably the former since I don't think you'd be doing media management in these necessarily.

Not sure if that would make any difference, but just making sure you know. The DIY versions is best effort support via the support forum. Commercial installs require much more support and the pro price includes that support.

On using CQC and ML together, I'd have to be honest and wave you away from that. I don't think it would be something you would want to do. These systems need to be highly robust and stable. It would be in your best interests to take an extremely conservative approach and have the fewest 'moving parts' as possible. I think you should pick one or the other, even if it's not ours.

Just so you know... It wouldn't be $500. The current DIY cost is $895, and you wouldn't be installing the DIY version anyway, you'd be installing the pro version, which would be in the $1700 to $2100 range. Probably the former since I don't think you'd be doing media management in these necessarily.

Not sure if that would make any difference, but just making sure you know. The DIY versions is best effort support via the support forum. Commercial installs require much more support and the pro price includes that support.

On using CQC and ML together, I'd have to be honest and wave you away from that. I don't think it would be something you would want to do. These systems need to be highly robust and stable. It would be in your best interests to take an extremely conservative approach and have the fewest 'moving parts' as possible. I think you should pick one or the other, even if it's not ours.I already have the CQC 2.0 and its bought and paid for so I was talking tinkering for exploration. I agree about mixing the two would be slightly troublesome because Im doing it now, I have found conflicts in USB-UIRT and Insteon only when power is lost and the servers restart. other than that your two products get along rather well, much better than the customers ;)

Seems theres some things happening that will get me covered regardless. I think Im good!

I think you should pick one or the other, even if it's not ours.

I think it's important to repeat this.

Not many company owners say things like this.

I applaud you.

samgreco, there are hundreds of users using MainLobby and Homeseer in a very nice, reliable, powerful combination. It is the most popular plugin that Homeseer sells - which in this small niche business is a lot of sales.

If this positive experience wasn't the case, then I too would say similar as Dean has. But, experience has proved otherwise, so his statement is not agreed to by me and probably the great majority of those HS / ML users, therefore not needed for me to concur with Dean's direction.

It's really no different than modular AV components. Each one has it's purpose and it's strengths. Is there more probability that one or another component will fail at any given day? Yes, that is the case just due to odds. But, that still hasn't eliminated the need for modular design to take advantage of strengths (in the right integrator's hands - whether that is a DIY'r or Pro). There are built in checks and balances to ensure that the complete system is operational (when used).

Again, different strategies for different folks. Just our experience has not reinforced that direction. These points of view have been discussed to no "end" before (no suprise there :) ) so I won't be chiming in any more, just wanted to introduce that there is another perspective to the issue.

Oh, to attempt to minimize the noise that these posts tend to make, I am sure Dean's system is very good. It's great to have good competition. It does make us better and the end user's will benefit. I fully expect Dean to spend more time emphasis on graphical display when he can. You can be sure Cinemar will not be sleeping much either. I applaud the progress Dean has made with his limited time. I know what it takes, and there is no doubt in my mind Dean "has no life" outside of CQC. Heck just getting rid of spammers on our mutual forums takes a hour or so a day.

David,

I believe the issue is whether CQC and ML make a good combination, not whether ML and Home Seer make a good combination. There is no plugin and no communication between CQC and ML as far as I see...nor any reason I can imagine one would want to use both (I am sure Mark will get really upset at that statement but what the hey). AT LEAST if one wants and expects seamless integration. i.e. with the user never having to switch from one application to the other. To use an analogy, there are quite a few Crestron and AMX dealers out there, but to this day I've only seen one situation where someone purposely integrated the two. There is very little reason why one would want to attempt such a nightmare.

I may be looking at this from too much of a Crestron/AMX perspective so perhaps there is some good reason why one would want to run CQC and ML, but from having read through this thread I sure can't see one.

There is a difference between a DIY user and a commercial customer. The commercial customer must be many orders of magnitude more concerned with stability and minimizing the number of variables and the number of vendors that must be dealt with. If the DIY user's system has troubles they are the only one bothered by that. If it happens in a commercial venue, it's a serious problem and costs them money and 'face'.

In the case of CQC and ML, it's not a matter of modular components. It's like having two engines in the car, which don't work the same way.

Agreed, competition is a good thing. I don't mean this post as noise, but to offer my opinion on eliminating unnecessary risk.

If he can get ML to do everything he wants, (or work with you/Mario/LathanM to help him achieve that), the minimalist in me says "remove unneeded complexity", even if it means not using the product that i'm a fan of.

Just because one can get ML and CQC to work together doesn't mean you should. Unless there's a clear value add, I'm a big fan of KISS. For ML/HS, the incremental value-add is clear. For CQC vs ML (at least for what MarkP would use it for), it's much less clear. If CQC's value add for him is "just" cellphone activation, which I'm *guessing* means SMS or PDA integration, there might be an ML workaround that could bridge the gap.

As an enduser, unless I absolutely positively needed both systems up, I just wouldn't want to be in a position where suddenly things stopped working at exactly the wrong time, and both ML/CQC said "Our code seems to be fine. Must be the other guy."

Of course, MarkP or others are probably not as risk-phobic as I am, even contemplating automating 152 switches proves that :)

Dean, MANY of those sales were to integrators who are installing the combined product in commerical and high end residential installations.

And, I have no doubt that there could be a robust connection if you and Cinemar put our minds to it. As you might remember, we had some discussion of that a couple of years ago (has it been that long?). Now, don't take that to mean that I am soliciting for that to occur.

QQQ, most of the HS users wanted to use ML initially as a "front end" for the graphical experience that ML brings. Pretty much what Mark has been discussing. Homeseer has the most driver coverage of any system, which sometimes made the ML / HS integration appealing to ML customers (more so at that time). CQC has a more advanced UI than Homeseer's so that diminishes that need for a ML / CQC integration. ML and CQC has currently a lot of overlap of hardware coverage, so not much need there either.

EDIT: IVB, I agree with what you are saying, it's sometimes just not all that easy to have full coverage in any one product. It is getting easier as CQC / ML / HS knock off user needs one by one as all of us are doing.


But, I did say I wouldn't chime in any more on this....

David,

This type of issue comes up quite a bit with the systems I work with. For instance, it's common to integrate a Crestron system with a Lutron lighting system. In such cases there may be overlap - for instance "do I hook up my motion sensors to activate the lights to Crestron and then have Crestron tell Lutron when to activate certain lights or do I connect them directly through Lutron and let Crestron know what is happening in case there are other events I want triggers" etc. Such issues can be worked out and the integration of the two makes sense. That seems more analogous to integrating ML and HomeSeer as Home Seer last I looked was, shall we say a bit "poor" on the UI side :D.

With ML and CQC the case as you seem to acknowledge is much less convincing and more akin to my Crestron and AMX analogy or for that matter Lutron and Vantage.

David,

I was not in ANY way aiming those my comments at you. Please understand that I was just commending someone for doing something I thought was a standup thing to do.

I was not suggesting you wouldn't. Nor that you couldn't. In fact, I think it is indeed possible that you are BOTH standup guys :)

And I think it's time to say that I think both of your products are quite good. When it comes time to pick one, it'll be because it fits me. Nothing more, nothing less.

Like buying a pair of shoes. I not buying a pair 2 sizes to small because they look cool. That would be painful.

Maybe I can put Doc Martin laces on my Rockports....

David,

I am confused. I am re-reading Deans post...
On using CQC and ML together, I'd have to be honest and wave you away from that. I don't think it would be something you would want to do. These systems need to be highly robust and stable. It would be in your best interests to take an extremely conservative approach and have the fewest 'moving parts' as possible. I think you should pick one or the other, even if it's not ours.

And not once did he say using MainLobby with HomeSeer or MainLobby with other products was a good idea and could not be done. All he said was using CQC and MainLobby was not something he would not suggest.

And based on your statement yours
If this positive experience wasn't the case, then I too would say similar as Dean has. But, experience has proved otherwise, so his statement is not agreed to by me and probably the great majority of those HS / ML users, therefore not needed for me to concur with Dean's direction.

You are suggesting that MainLobby and CQC would make a great combination???

I believe Dean's point was centered around using one product for all needs and not to mix two software products together to accomplish the need citing system reliability as the reason. He I believe was talking both generally and specifically.

Cinemar (and Homeseer) know from experience that this is not always the case. The assumption here is that the integration would be a quality one and bidirectional and designed so that one system doesn't "take the other out". Is both powerful AND reliable.

Actually it would probably be a good combination to get best of both products (like the ML / HS integration is). The ML/ HS integration is better than either company individual products. But, it adds more cost (trivial in the HA world), adds more expertise needed (not a huge thing), adds more complexity (manageable) and the possibility for reliability issues due to more "moving pieces" (manageable).

"Good" is a matter of perspective...each of these systems does more than the average (or even above average) user is going to need. If the needs are simple and met with one brand, then no need to add another. If the needs are signficiant (like in many high end installs), then there is no choice but to add the product that meets the need for the job and to integrate it. Just like adding another black box for another set of zones, another switching network, another bank of lights, another pool to control, whatever.

Do what ya gotta do to get the job done for the customer (even if that is yourself). All I am saying is don't dismiss the possibility to meet (exceed) customer needs by limiting the solution set.

CQC too uses this concept...still using TheaterTek and Zoom Player for renderers. This will continue until Dean writes his own. Lot of work to recreate the wheel each time. But, that is a choice each company makes with their limited resources.

That's fine Dave, no one disagrees EXCEPT again, what would be the advantage of using both CQC AND ML as you see it??? It seems the first 15 pages were you saying "there both good, see which one works best for you". I don't seem to recall you saying "gee, why don't you by both, you'll have even more power that way".

I believe Dean's point was centered around using one product for all needs and not to mix two software products together to accomplish the need citing system reliability as the reason. He I believe was talking both generally and specifically.
I read no indication of that whatsoever.

I read no indication of that whatsoever.
Neither do I, This is why I am confused. Was David reading between the lines where the rest of us can not see??

David
I agree with you that ML and HS make a good combination and it has for many years. At one time ML did not due alot of what HS did and vise-a-versa. But as time goes by and with the release of ML 3.0 there is less and less need for the combination. I would even go as far to say that by ML 4.0 there maybe no need for the ML and HS combination and I am sure that is a direction that ML is geared towards in the back of their heads.

Well, maybe Dean can clarify as we are apparantly reading his words differently.....but I REALLY can't spend time on this issue as we got work to do. 12:30 and much to do.
Sorry Dean, I know you are busy too.

I think you'all are reading a little deap into what he said.

I think he was agreeing that you wouldnt want to run cqc and ml togeather, but in some cases there is an exception to running two software packages to get the job done. Like running ml with homeseer. Since homeseer can do so much automation wise, many people (when the homeseer ml plugin came out) chose to combine ml with homeseer for a better front. Now that ml has gotten much stronger the need for homeseer is almost gone except for some devices that are not yet controllable with ml. hence why david said what he did.

I agree with dean and think that running minimal software packages is a major key for reliablility.

I've made it clear that I believe that one of CQC's great strengths is that it offers so much under a single umbrella, tightly coupled and tested together as a system. But that wasn't what I was talking about above. I was just making it clear to Mark that trying to mix CQC and ML wouldn't be a good idea.

Well, maybe Dean can clarify as we are apparantly reading his words differently.....but I REALLY can't spend time on this issue as we got work to do. 12:30 and much to do.
Sorry Dean, I know you are busy too.
I haven't jumped in much here, just watching from the sidelines but I just have to say I really don't like the way that you shamelessly pitch your product ALL THE TIME regardless of the situation. Dean simply stated that using CQC & ML together would probably give you bad results. Everyone else so far read Dean's comment that way too yet you tried to make some statement on how well ML works with Homeseer which was not even close to the point. When it is brought up that you COMPLETELY missed the point (intentionally or not) you no longer have time to respond?

You are leaving an increasingly bad taste in my mouth on every successive page...

CTay, the intention was not to "pitch the product", only to advise that there is a difference of opinion that the one product pitch isn't the only viable direction. I think you are reading too much into my comments now.


If you will notice, I am "pitching" Homeseer too, and CQC as well for that matter. But, one will read into exactly what they want to get out of the discussion.

And, just for conversation sake, when I posted my response to Dean's latest comment on the "one stop shopping is the only way" method, I got an email from a Homeseer dealer who had a large job that required touchscreens and wanted to integrate the two together. I asked him if he had read AVSForum, and he had not. Just more votes that the single solution is not the only solution and that the integrator will be flexible until one or more of these solutions "do everything". The openeness of the product design and mindset will be what makes that impossible or easy. Since Dean seems to be squarly in the camp that he doesn't need or want or recommend any componentized solutions, then his customers will just have to wait to add VR, or other features for when Dean has the time to implement it. A MainLobby customer can wait for Cinemar to add VR, or integrate Homeseer or HAL for excellent VR capability with each (as one example of many).

Other quick examples that come to mind is Homeseer has scripts that support capturing of local movies that are playing. MainLobby doesn't have that feature. Does CQC? I haven't looked. Homeseer supports iAutomate RF natively. MainLobby doesn't, and neither does CQC today. ML and CQC customers will have to pay for a hardware box for the iAutomate solution that is not needed in Homeseer. So, that $ difference almost pays for Homeseer software and the iAutomate RF plugin. Adds another software component to the mix, but the alternative adds another hardware component. Choose your poison.

Homeseer supports the Stargate automation panel. ML or CQC don't. So, does the user throw out his several thousand dollar automation controller? Or does he wait until Dean writes the plugin for it (if ever)? Or does he just tie HS and ML together (or another flash front end, Maestro). that is the point.

And in some people's opinion, including a couple of Dean's Dealers, they believe MainLobby's UI is better than CQC's from an end presentation perspective. So, if you want to read into this conversation that the focus should be on ML / CQC integration, that would be a benefit that a couple of CQC's dealers have suggested. AGAIN, I am not suggesting that CQC and ML should do that. If Dean wanted to, Cinemar would consider it, but I am not seeing the return on investement to do that when looking at the likely CQC total population and the subset of that that might be interested in a blended solution and that the CQC principal is opposed (biggest reason).

Now, since MarkP was the one to introduce the subject of CQC / ML integration, I have asked Mark what capability he is missing in ML natively. He mentioned one or two things that happen to be on Cinemar's current development effort (coincidentally). Now, as a matter of example, those functions are supported today by Homeseer. Maybe Mark shouldn't have purchased CQC and ML, but should have purchased HS and ML. I wouldn't recommend that to him today, because what he seems to be looking for is close to be supported in ML natively. But, if he has a client that needs it today....buy Homeseer and meet the need. Don't worry too much about reliability with the combination because there are now a few years of experience that say "don't worry".
There may be things on Mark's list of customer needs that come up. Good odds it will be supported by either Homeseer, HAL or Mainlobby (or CQC). He has options when the products integrate together. His only option if sticking with CQC is to wait until Dean codes it.

No, you are still missing the point. Simply put, a system that attempts to incorporate ML and CQC together will probably have a bad result. That is it. Nothing more. When you try to make it into "well ML can incorporate all sorts of different software and CQC can't so you CQC guys are screwed until Dean wants to write it in" it really leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It is as if you can not simply engage in a discussion with out plugging the superior quality of your product over another product.

For the record, I started out reading this thread not in any camp. If anything I was leaning toward ML because I worried that CQC was a little too complex for me. However, due in some part to the information in this thread I became a CQC customer.

I do not mean to offend you, I am simply stating that IMO you need to tone your rhetoric down a couple notches. It turned me off if no one else.

CTay, Again, I am not soliciting for a ML / CQC integration. But, how can you say on a technical level that "Simply put, a system that attempts to incorporate ML and CQC together will probably have a bad result."?

Just reading MarkP's very small amount of comments on how he is integrating the two products, he is not persuing it in the way for good result. No fault of his own because the software engineers and architects on both ML and CQCs side have not spent more than 5 minutes on the subject. Now, because HS and ML DID, and HAL and ML DID, user's don't have that hit and miss method. I have no doubt that it would be technically feasible and good result. But that is only the technical side which you seem to be concentrating on and I believe that would be the less challenging of the issues.

I haven't jumped in much here, just watching from the sidelines but I just have to say I really don't like the way that you shamelessly pitch your product ALL THE TIME regardless of the situation.
Agreed. And the difference between that and this:
I think you should pick one or the other, even if it's not ours.
was certainly a major factor in my decision.

We are doing much less automation than say IVB, What we are doing are things most people would never do or need to do. I dont know how to explain why (at this point)we would need both without explaining the circumstances and I never wanted to bring up intentions in the first place and had kept it under wraps for months but turn your head and skip this next part if mentioning what wealthy people ( customers/endusers) are going to need.

In the Canada project the main mode of transportation is Dog Sleds and thats part of the experience. GPS tracking of the sleds is essential for the business but we thought having the capability to do so for the customer on their screen was just as important. The wife and one child stay back at the lodge but want to peek in and see the others progress stands while heading to and from town as well as around the wildlife refuge. I saw this demonstrated on CQC webex last month. As far as I know this isnt a capability of Cinemar and if it was , Im not sure anyone is doing it. A CQC user is doing it now.

I have had no trouble running Cinemar and CQC to this point except initial restart or power outtage when driver conflicts are obvious with say Insteon and its SDM which is understandable, Insteon will not be used on this scale since absolute reliability is a must and hardwiring is possible.

There are CQC users using both products together right now with good results, I would be concerned it they couldnt act independently.

Agreed. And the difference between that and this:

was certainly a major factor in my decision.Thats the funny thing about peoples perceptions, I have witnessed something quite different happening but understand completely, theres a fine line between salesmenship and shilling. I feel fortunate to get info from either the owner or users and would rather the majority come from the owners since they should know every aspect of their product.DIY wise I see Cinemar as a product for people that want to install it and be done and go hiking or something, it may be capable to do anything and everything but most want this and that and done.

I see CQC as something for people that like networking and automation geeking ( I know its developed for integrators but........)

I think they are nuts and bolts type of development catering more towards the person that wants to automate grocery lists.

I also think we need both in the market to drive the other and make better products of each.

If smoothtalk wasnt explaining the features of Cinemar, who would? Their users are out Hiking and biking not reading automation forums.

Since Dean seems to be squarly in the camp that he doesn't need or want or recommend any componentized solutions, then his customers will just have to wait to add VR, or other features for when Dean has the time to implement it.

I think you are reading outside the lines in an effort to support your platform. Dean's point is that as long as the major software components fall under the CQC umbrella then quality control and interoperability are assured, vs the ML paradigm of providing 3rd party pluggins of which may or may not be properly vetted or adhere to some developer standard. It's the whole 3rd party pluggin reliance that has turned me off of many products in the past. So many become unusable or unsupported over time simply because the original developer loses interest or some small tweak in the core software renders their product unusable. With CQC, Dean enforces any user provided driver (through the use of CQCs own develpment languages of CML and PDL) to adhere to a set standard and Dean can be reasonably assured that as the product moves forward, noone loses support of existing add-on drivers, macros, etc.

For you to suggest that everyone must wait on Dean for functionality is absurd. There is an IAutomate driver in progress, not by Dean. A slimserver driver in Beta, not by Dean. The Horoscope driver, not by Dean. The Insteon driver, not by Dean. The Caddx Security panel, not by Dean. A multitude of AV component drivers not by Dean.

You have a unique market niche in that many Homeseer users that have been around a long time, continue to use their Homeseer installations and by purchasing ML they can have an attractive front end finally. However, CQC is and has always been an integrator centric product that is DIY friendly. I doubt that there are many custom integrators out there installing JDS stargate panels or Homeseer for that matter, so why should CQC be interested in pursuing that customer base? If I'm wrong and Homeseer is the custom integrator's software of choice as a back end, then it's a competitor to CQC and not likely to be an integration partner. It's just a different business model and neither CQC or ML is right or wrong for pursuing it either way.

I doubt that there are many custom integrators out there installing JDS stargate panels or Homeseer for that matter, so why should CQC be interested in pursuing that customer base?
You doubt correct. While I am familiar with both products I don't think I've EVER seen or heard either product mentioned by or spoken of by a systems integrator. That is not to say of course that there are note 1 or 2 out there using them :).

You doubt correct. While I am familiar with both products I don't think I've EVER seen or heard either product mentioned by or spoken of by a systems integrator. That is not to say of course that there are note 1 or 2 out there using them :).
If I remember correctly when HomeSeer released their Integrator Program they had this NDA that Integrators had to sign that pretty much did not allow them to talk. I could be wrong.

If smoothtalk wasnt explaining the features of Cinemar, who would?
This is a valid point. I just wish that in some posts there would be less salesmanship and more support. I have seen several legitimate questions be posted that were either flat out ignored or answered in some roundabout fluff filled way that was on a complete tangent to the issue at hand, but did manage to have a sales spin.

This is a valid point. I just wish that in some posts there would be less salesmanship and more support. I have seen several legitimate questions be posted that were either flat out ignored or answered in some roundabout fluff filled way that was on a complete tangent to the issue at hand, but did manage to have a sales spin.

Oddly enough, I agree too ( I really do want to understand ML, this is the only way I know), but the answers need to be simple yes/no/fact-based instead of the bizarro stream of conciousness or constant sales pitches or 18 different posts each answering a different small bit of the question after which LathanM or Tharthigh get sick of the roundabout and step in to answer the question.

For example, I'm really not smarter than MarkP, unless someone spells out stuff to me I won't get it. I still don't undertstand what Smoothtlk thinks is a list of strengths & weaknesses to his product. I saw a bullet list from Dean about weaknesses, and another one about strengths. That I understand. I saw LathanM's post about weaknesses, with a SmoothTlk response to "yes, all being fixed soon". But I haven't seen a simple bullet list, so i've been trying to glean that information from the 100 posts in this thread.


If smoothtalk wasnt explaining the features of Cinemar, who would? Their users are out Hiking and biking not reading automation forums.

I like having Vendor Reps here to explain their product, but it needs to be a simple non-salesy fact-based explanation of what it really is and what it can really do by the reasonable person.

Btw, does anyone either than me think there's massive danger to not seeing what a real customer says? After all, anything that Dean or SmoothTlk say should be taken with a grain of salt unless they can back it up with "And here's customer XXX, who's doing it now, and would be more than happy to talk to you about his path".

I used to do pre-sales roadshows for my prior employer, and it was amazing how good I could make a product look by only pushing on those sections of the program I knew worked. Having an end-user who's done it himself, or the professional CI who's done it 100x (a la ToyMaster) is the best way to keep companies honest.

If I remember correctly when HomeSeer released their Integrator Program they had this NDA that Integrators had to sign that pretty much did not allow them to talk. I could be wrong.
Oh come on now :)! Perhaps integrators had to sign an NDA about something (who knows what), which is not terribly uncommon, but I doubt it was "you can't tell anyone if you are using our product". Does Bill Gates also have a HomeSeer system in his house but no one knows about it because they banned him from revealing it :D. Anyhow, products like HomeSeer are primarily DIY. They just aren't used much by integrators. I'm sure HomeSeer will say otherwise, but it would be bunk.

I think Dean will tell you quite honestly it has been very difficult for him to get integrators on board and that most of his business so far has been from DIY.

Oh come on now :)! Perhaps integrators had to sign an NDA about something (who knows what), which is not terribly uncommon, but I doubt it was "you can't tell anyone if you are using our product". Does Bill Gates also have a HomeSeer system in his house but no one knows about it because they banned him from revealing it :D.

Actually I think it's a StarGate :D

...using X-10.

...using X-10.

Nope, it's all sprint logic. And if anyone here is old enough or been around enough to know what that is, you get an apple.

cavalier240, if you have a link to a post that was "ignored" by Cinemar and was of a legitimate question that involved Cinemar and not really an attempt to sell CQC, please point that out as I must have missed that one to answer. And I mean that in good intention.


Robertmee,
There is no difference that I can see on 3rd party plugin support on how CQC does things and how MainLobby does things with the possible exception that the majority of plugins that are developed are developed by Cinemar developers and NOT 3rd parties. Most all of the core applications and plugins are owned and distributed and supported by Cinemar.

I find it interesting that CQC believes that integration of plugins with the core product using 3rd parties (that may or may not be software developers by trade) is a good thing, but not believe that integration with professionally built robust products with proven track records is "unreliable". Which is it?


That's my last post on the subject. I think I have said my fill.

I'm not sure if things have changed but if a person wanted to write a plugin for Cinemar when I used it they needed to sign an NDA...this was mentioned to me when I was going to have my friend develop a driver to control my equipment.

Long story short..my friend laughed at the suggestion that he might have to sign the NDA to write a driver to interface with their product even though I had all the commands..my friend politely declined having anything to do with a NDA to make a "silly control driver" as he called it and in the end I paid Cinemar way more than I should have to support the gear and write a driver.

I notice now that Cinemar *sells* or offers for sale the plugin I paid to have developed...while this is their right I find it sorta sleezy after I provided them the protocol docs and all the testing to make sure it worked and now they turn around and try to sell it.

After moving over to CQC the very same driver was written in half the time for $250 cheaper and also two free one way drivers were also thrown in by MarkS from CQC..it should be noted also this driver is now provided free and packaged with the CQC product.

**I agree Cinemar is entitled to resell drivers people pay them to create however I mentioned while it was being created that if I was paying to have it created I wanted anybody afterward to have it for free...I noticed shortly after I left the Cinemar product they began offering it for sale however its doubtful they will sell more than a few copies because the equipment is not used by many.

As for Davids advertising..this has been going on forever and its unlikely he will change until someone from AVS bans him for essentially doing what other dealers here tried doing and got the same warning and had to purchase advertising...its one thing to answer questions about your product but quite another to turn it into a sale pitch like he does by basically hijacking a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with his product and blabbing on and on trying to make a sale.

Davids annoying advertising reminds me of the guys that run up to you at BestBuy trying to make the sale or try to charm you into buying a extended warranty you'll never need.

Not a personal attack in anyway against David because I'm sure others have mentioned how annoying you are with your sales tactics...you remind me of when I visit a few countries overseas and some guy screaming "5 dolla 5 dolla 5 dolla 5 dolla" while hes trying to sell me photocopied postcards...you say politely "No thanks" and 20 minutes later the same guy comes outta nowhere while your trying to use the washroom at the same tourist attraction "5 dolla 5 dolla 5 dolla 5 dolla" and hes holding toilet paper in his hand just in case you need to dry your hands :-)

The primary difference between something like Homeseer and CQC, wrt device support is as mentioned above. CQC provides it's own development languages, and therefore enforces a particular paradigm on device drivers. This has made it possible to bring forward basically ever driver ever written from day one to the now 2.0 version. There were a couple times where a small change was required in a couple drivers to correct a non-optimal earlier decision on our part, so as to straighten it out for future drivers, but that's it.

Homeseer, OTOH, allowed basically open ended extension of the product. This of course allow third parties to add a lot of features to the product, but look at what it cost them to move to 2.0. It was a multi-year long death march for them, and cost them a lot of user discontent and probably shaved a few years off their lives.

Also, CQC doesn't have the concept of a user written 'plugin' as I would define it. It has 'device drivers'. Sometimes a device driver might blur the line between strict device support and an extension of the system's functionality. But the stuff that would unambiguously fall into the 'plugin' category, events, web server, media system, etc... we write all those, because allowing third parties that level of control would put us into the same situation that HS got itself into.

But anyway, by having all drivers be done via our own languages, we keep strict control over them, they have to try really hard to do anything that could affect the system adversely. And, very importantly, since the drivers aren't done in the same langauge as the product itself, we don't have to expose any of our product interfaces to driver developers. This is a benefit that cannot be measured because we can change our internal code base any way we need, without affecting any third party code, since that's all done in PDL or CML. So we avoid the biggest source of accumulation of dangerous evolutionary baggage, and we don't require any type NDA because there's no aspect of the internals of the product that is exposed to a driver writer.

Clearly device support must be done by way of 'pluggable' bits of code, often written by third parties. But, beyond that, integration of as much functionality under a single umbrella will tend to create the most stable system in the end, because it's all created by the same company and tested as a whole in every new release. Going further, using as little third party code, as we do, pushes that same idea down another layer and provides for maximum control over product quality.

That doesn't mean it's impossible to do a good system with multiple products. But I think that most people who have gone that route would say that it's more work and requires the user to do more multi-party diplomacy to deal with problems that aren't clearly due to one side or another.

Ripper, And now tell us that when you agreed for Cinemar to do the professional services development of a plugin that you are unaware of the ultimate ownership, resale rights, and cost. That was all disclosed to you and agreed upon before any work was commenced. What you paid does not cover the cost of development (ie: you didn't Pay for the Development). There has been one other person that has requested the Krell plugin and the develoment pricing was based on this prediction - which was also disclosed to you. It was also disclosed to you that it was more difficult to write a plugin if the hardware was not in the hands of the developer. You provided the docs...wow...how many do you want? That is about the most minor part of the work and Krell would gladly have provided it with an email like most every other hardware manufacturer that wants support of it's products in the field. We make no apologies that we are in this as a business to make profit. Based on our sales rate, there have been a few good decisions like this one.

CQC was something like $200 in 2004, $500 in 2005 / 2006 and now something like $1000 with annual support fees. See a trend? And if you are a dealer, signficantly more than that (from what we understand). Now, I am not knocking Dean for increasing the price. He deserves it. Just don't make the mistake to say that "it's all free".

Not a personal attack? yeah, right. Nice elf costume, Ripper. Oh, that one was deleted by the Mods as a personal attack...

cavalier240, if you have a link to a post that was "ignored" by Cinemar and was of a legitimate question that involved Cinemar and not really an attempt to sell CQC, please point that out as I must have missed that one to answer. And I mean that in good intention.

I appreciate your good intentions. I hate to open this can of worms again, but IMO, I felt this was one of the most legitimate issues raised in this post.

On November 20, 2006, I made the following post:

I would like to preface this next post by reminding people that I am just trying to gather information on the various products in an effort to keep this thread on topic.

As I was searching other forums, I came across the following post. I found it troubling that the developers of MainLobby never directly responded to the allegations of copyright infringement. In terms of future product support, I think a copyright lawsuit would certainly make it difficult for the company to stay in business, and then where would that leave me?

Just a thought. Once again, we've done a good job thus far of preventing this from becoming a bashing thread and purely sharing product/company information.

http://www.cocoontech.com/index.php...mainlobby&st=30

The answer was:

As Mario mentioned, we do not speak about legal issues on public forums.

I viewed that answer as side-stepping the issue because there should be nothing proprietary about this answer. When the topic was brought up again, this answer was posted on December 2, 2006.

Regarding Data - we are preparing a response that is a little more detailed than our existing response which was posted several times to the same point that was brought up (by the same person) a couple of weeks ago. that response was essentially - we don't discuss potential legal issues on public forums.

Before I purchased a product, I waited as long as I could for your response. When it never came, it sealed the deal for me to go with a different system.

That is still in process. Sorry you couldn't wait.

I really don't care what the answer is, and won't respond.
That is why we (I) am not answering IVBs attempt to bash questions.
Me too LathanM. Large waste of time. Signing off.
...I wouldn't chime in any more on this....
....but I REALLY can't spend time on this issue as we got work to do.
That's my last post on the subject. I think I have said my fill.
Are you sure??? Because I think I just noticed some more posts ;).

QQQ, once again, you are spot on. Back to work I go, ho ho.

That was all disclosed to you and agreed upon before any work was commenced.

Sure David :-)

we are in this as a business to make profit.

Yes and advertising costs on AVS forums..consider purchasing some if you continue to hijack threads and make your sales pitch.

Not a personal attack? yeah, right. Nice elf costume, Ripper. Oh, that one was deleted by the Mods as a personal attack...

Yawn..bow out of this thread like you mentioned you would twice now, I sincerely believe the *only* reason an AVS mod may have deleted the Elf photo(which I hadn't noticed) was because you sent a whiney private message complaining your makeup didn't look right in the photo or something stupid like that..gee it was a Christmas cheer sort of thing and I thought you might of get a laugh instead of crying about it and your comments right after I posted it didn't seem to indicate it bothered you in the least?...now your whining about it and trying to make an issue about it?

You make all sorts of subtle attacks against people and products with your comments everyday... yet when you get the same thing right back at you pull a hissy fit..I'm sure if any AVS mod has any sort of problem with my postings he will contact me and warn me which I might add hasn't been done and I do not consider posting a xmas photo a personal attack.

As mentioned I think you private messaged an AVS mod and complained your makeup wasn't flattering in the photo and you wanted it removed and he obliged, its all over now except for the whining from the cute little xmas elf...sheesh.

hopefully they get rid of the whole mess and try again, theres about 1 page of useful info here, if that

But I will sneak another question in and hopefully is doesnt get to complicated and answered with a simple on sentance fix.

When I install CQC, I lose remote desktop via Hamachi which I use to connect to my network when in different states ( anywhere in the world ) Lucky enough I had noticed by uninstalling CQC fixes the problem but when I was giving a demonstartion the other day I was using Mainlobby and was getting lighting status as well as pool/ spa status back as if I were on the local network, just as fast and very effective. I can even remote to the server and do anything I want to the sever as well.

If I install CQC, I can not perform these tasks and its beyond me as to why. I mean I lose remote access completely except on the local network. Im guessing setting need to be made somehow but Im not excited about programs grabbing ahold of my standby and remote access settings and changing something without informing me this is happing or happened and a quick explaination of how to fix it fast, I messed around for a couple hours and gave up. Most of my work is done while away

hopefully they get rid of the whole mess and try again, theres about 1 page of useful info here, if that

Ahh come on now thats not a fair assessment..plenty of info in this thread reveals alot to those considering purchasing products, no reason to sugarcoat anything imho...if your a snake in the grass or a shill you will be revealed like it or not, if a product really does stink it'll be known and if something is a great buy it will be said...nobody likes to read a forum that is edited to come across like an infomercial and if *anybody* dares come into the mix and pitch a product they can expect both positive/negative comments regardless.

You'll find on the AVS forums over the years plenty of threads that go on forever such as the Plasma vs LCD, high end cable vs lampcord, Blurray vs HD-DVD, Xbox vs PS3 or C4 vs Crestron and without these never ending threads where *everybody* can speak I think AVS wouldn't be the forum that it is.

People come here for info and its not always gonna be sugercoated to make *any* company appear to be what they are not..like it or lump it this is AVSforum and this is a public forum not a dealer forum to pitch products and expect everybody to agree in a positive light.

When I install CQC, I lose remote desktop via Hamachi which I use to connect to my network when in different states ( anywhere in the world ) Lucky enough I had noticed by uninstalling CQC fixes the problem but when I was giving a demonstartion the other day I was using Mainlobby and was getting lighting status as well as pool/ spa status back as if I were on the local network, just as fast and very effective. I can even remote to the server and do anything I want to the sever as well.

CQC doesn't absolutely nothing that would interfere with that, unless by some wierd chance that package happened to use a port that CQC uses. This is always a possibility because of the fairly lax way that ports are managed in TCP/IP.

Other than that, there's just no way that CQC could interfere with something like that. It does not change any system settings at all, or install any files into any system directories, install any system drivers, etc...

Man, I've been trying to take the high road, but this is yet another uncalled for swipe. If there's really an issue here, let the users mention the price increase. You focus on your products, and where your products are better than the competition on a feature perspective using facts. That's where you can add value and no one can attack you for it.

CQC was something like $200 in 2004, $500 in 2005 / 2006 and now something like $1000 with annual support fees. See a trend?
Yep. He's furiously raising the price in order to get close to what your system would be for a real automation system, not some cute 1-server system that can control 1-2 plugins in a home theater. Heck, even little Johnny down the block will be able to single-server stuff with vista, CQC does a little more than that and is priced to suit.

He's still off by 50% though - as repeatedly proven, your price for a full system is $1500 at least, but hey, at least you get Flash support for that.

CQC doesn't absolutely nothing that would interfere with that, unless by some wierd chance that package happened to use a port that CQC uses. This is always a possibility because of the fairly lax way that ports are managed in TCP/IP.

Other than that, there's just no way that CQC could interfere with something like that. It does not change any system settings at all, or install any files into any system directories, install any system drivers, etc...I know, I found it strange as well but...........I spent an afternoon trying to deal with it. Clients going into standby is not altering system files?

I know, I found it strange as well but...........I spent an afternoon trying to deal with it.

Do you know what ports that product uses?

Clients going into standby is not altering system files?

The system asks each service whether the machine should be able to go to sleep or not. If you stop the CQC Service (you don't have to uninstall it, just stop the service) then it won't be running, and the system won't therefore ask it anything. So on a laptop, the best thing to do is to set the service not to auto-start, i.e. it'll only start up when you ask it to. Then put simple start/stop commands into the start menu that let you easily start and stop the CQC service when you want to use it.

So it's not changing any system settings. It's just that, when CQC actually running, it's telling the system not to allow a sleep, becasue there are active components running on the machine that might cause problems in other nodes. If you shut down the service, then you cleanly remove that client form the CQC network, so it doesn't cause problems in CQC, and it allows the laptop to shut down.

BTW, one pretty good glue that they are both using a common port is to stop them both. Then start up CQC and then start up Himachi. Then do the opposite, i.e. stop them both and then start up Himachi and then CQC.

If the one that works is the one that starts first, and the one that doesn't work is always the one that is started up afterwards, then that's a pretty good clue that they are fighting for some resource and the first one up gets it and the other loses. About the only resource they could be fighting for that would interfere with network operations is an IP port.

I would have given you this advice before, but from what you'd posted on the CQC forum, I thought that it was that CQC wouldn't work when you were running the Himachi thing, and the most obvious thing to suspect was name resolution issues over the VPN type connection. But if they both interfere with each other, then it's more likely contention over a port.

Dean the Hamachi IPs are 5.85.72.XX , Its strange because Hamachi and CQC should have zero to do with eachother. If I install CQC, Hamachi loads and whatnot, my clients just can not communicate anymore. Hamachi sees the other PCs on the network everything appears normal but when I use the servers Hamachi address from any other machine, I cant access if CQC is installed on the server. This is something I dont even care about Dean so dont even look into it or stress about it, if no one else is having troubles then its obviously something Im overlooking, I just find it strange its dependent on whether CQC is installed or not, I thought their ports were way up in the oddball range where nothing could touch them. Someday I may give it another shot but at the moment its not important at all. I wanted it for a couple days ago but thats done and gone so its moot, get back on UPB or whatever it is your working on.

CQC's ports are also up in the oddball range, as are most programs (any that aren't widely used enough to have an assigned port or port range of its own.) So it's quite possible that they are clashing. The IP address doesn't really matter. There's only a single set of ports for the whole machine. There are 64K of them, but there's not really any management of these ports, so each app just has to pick some set and hope that no one else uses them, and provide alternatives ports for selection if so. This is a major disadvantage of TCP/IP that was fine for it's original purposes, but a liability in today's world.

If one app grabs a port that the other is also set up to use, then the other will not be able to use it, and the one that cannot will have problems. CQC is normally set up to auto-start when the machine starts, so it would likely normally be the one who gets it. The fact that the apps are completey unrelated wouldn't really matter, since they are both trying to use the same resource to do those unrelated things.

... but when I use the servers Hamachi address from any other machine, I cant access if CQC is installed on the server. While I don't doubt your symptoms it may be useful for you to know that I have Hamachi running on my CQC master server at home (5.102.47.xxx) in NYC and on my laptop here in London right now with CQC (5.102.48.xxx) and it is working perfectly. I simply placed my home machine hostname in my HOSTS file with the hamachi IP (5.102.47.xxx mediapc).

CQC Network Info Test
Copyright (c) Charmed Quark Systems

System Information
--------------------------------
OS Version: 5.1.2, Build: 2600
Node Name: DEV
TCP Version: 2.2


Network Adaptor Information
--------------------------------
{9BE1EF83-1634-4F0B-B14C-6F5A7553DE54}
Hamachi Network Interface
DHCP Enabled: True
Gateway/Mask: 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0
Hardware Addr: 7A 79 05 66 30 64
Address/Mask #0: 5.102.48.XXX/255.0.0.0

{70BBEAD2-6C56-4D08-B7AC-DCA3671B94EF}
AMD PCNET Family PCI Ethernet Adapter - Packet Scheduler Miniport
DHCP Enabled: True
Gateway/Mask: 192.168.1.1/0.0.0.0
Hardware Addr: 00 0C 29 5B 9F 0A
Address/Mask #0: 192.168.1.110/255.255.255.0


Environment Information
--------------------------------
CID_NSADDR: mediapc:13502
CQC_DATADIR: C:\Program Files\CQC\CQCData


Name Resolution
--------------------------------
Trying to resolve name: DEV...
Resolved to: 5.102.48.XXX

Resolving back the other way...
Host Name: DEV


CQC Connection Tests
--------------------------------
Trying to connect to CQC name server...
Connected to name server successfully

Trying to connect to log server...
Connected to log server successfully

Trying to connect to local config server...
Connected to config server successfully

Trying to connect to installation server...
Connected installation server successfully

Trying to connect to security server...
Connected security server successfully

Trying to connect to macro server...
Connected macro server successfully

Jonathan,

Does Hamachi work well for you? Have to ever attempted to use Hamachi to access something such as a MSDE database that one would normally use something such as Windows terminal services to access?

Thanks

Does Hamachi work well for you? Have to ever attempted to use Hamachi to access something such as a MSDE database that one would normally use something such as Windows terminal services to access?Seems to work as well as our corporate VPN does. More bandwidth, better performance :) I generally do not like VPNs just because of what they do to your network configuration and anyway my cable modem uplink speed is fairly horrible so remote desktop and remotely anywhere are my tools of choice for most things such as moving files or running applications.

That said, I use the free version of Hamachi for quickly accessing files on the server (e.g. configuration files, or CQC Manifest files) which are small anyway. It is also much faster to edit CML code or use the interface designer when the application is local and just the data is being moved as it removes that "lag" feeling when typing and moving images around. I think CQC caches stuff because once I've got the interface viewer running and gone through the first screens it seems quite fast :)

I find the Hamachi premium very fast for what it is, pretty cheap too. Theres no difficult setup either. Install and your done.

Great thanks both of you, that sounds like it will work perfect for something I want to play with and will save me some time and money.

Re: Hamachi

Do you still have to run a DNS applet of some sort to resolve to your router (like No-IP) or is this built into Hamachi? I've used PCAnywhere and NetMeeting for years for remote access, and have tried the various free VNC programs with not very good results. I'm on the road quite often and looking for something robust to tie back into my office PC.

What is it primarily that you need to access Robert? Aps that you need to run that reside on your home PC or files?

Not sure how it works, its free to try http://hamachi.cc/ Its zero configuration, name your computers, it assigns an IP like 5.85.76.83 assign a password, start it on any machine you want to use and youre done. It great for networking dummys like me.

I bought a year of the premium since I use it to use programs and work on the same things I would while home, when demonstrating Mainlobby in a different state I had my security cameras on and the people could see me operating lighting on the same screen I was using Mainlobby in ( I had pasted the cameras in the lighting scenes). I showed them turning on music and all sorts of things because my security cameras have sound. It was quite impressive to them but I had to explain the graphics werent quite done yet. Other than that it worked as good as being there, just as fast. I start Hamachi on the server, in Mainlobby I put Hamachis IP for the server in my 'connect to address' in Mainlobby and it works everytime. If I want to switch to the server I remote to the same IP and as long as I have remote access settings to have graphics minimal its very fast working in programs

The bad thing is power outtage and having to have a password to remote access a PC, Hamachi loads with Windows ( or not) and being stuck at the password screen. supposedly theres software that allows remote access without signing in, a friend sent me the link but I lost it.

Dont forget Hamachi assigns a seperate MAC address if you use MAC filtering on your router like I do.

I love the stuff and use it it frequently

What is it primarily that you need to access Robert? Aps that you need to run that reside on your home PC or files?

Both....Often I need to grab a file or reference some docs that I have stored on my office PC/server. Other times, I need to run some software remotely (PLC and HMI development packages) or open up my outlook to find a saved e-mail.

"Quote:
Originally Posted by IVB
I saw that, wasn't debating that bit. What I wanted to understand was whether you could create your own PPC interfaces. You didn't actually answer that question directly, so I take it the answer is "no, you cannot".

does that mean that you cannot control any hardware other than a russound on a PPC? I.E., a denon receiver, elk, etc?

Still waiting on an answer for this bit. "

Cinemar just released to public beta full HTML / Java access to MainLobby server to allow for full bidirectional capability between a lightweight device (like a PocketPC / CE devices) and the MainLobby server plugins and automation capability.
This allows you to build HTML scenes that you can access the MainLobby Russound Cav66 plugin, the Denon plugin, the ELK M1 plugin, etc. Very easy to build a page, if you ever built a webpage in Dreamweaver, etc.
A couple of starter templates were put together as example:
A display to show what TheaterTek is playing and transport controls for a browser. A mini PocketPC sized web page that allows viewing of weather data.

I believe this is the answer you were looking for, IVB. We weren't in a position to talk about it until it was ready for public consumption.

There still exists specific flash applications for accessing music, movies, Cav66, XM satellite radio stations. Now, when used in conjunction with the HTML capability, one can tremendously expand on what you can do from a thin device like a PocketPC or ELK touchscreen (CE OS), or older wireless tablets that aren't strong enough to run the full rich MainLobby 3 client application.

As the new web server built into MainLobby Server also supports HTTPS encryption, one can also access their MainLobby system from work PC (plain web browser) as well.

A user forum was created to allow for sharing of HTML / Java code to quickly expand upon the initial demos that Cinemar has developed. Other Cinemar HTML scenes will also be contributed.

This new powerful feature is provided free of charge to Mainlobby 3 customers.

Yep, thanks for the reply. Reading and re-reading now to make sure I actually understand what it is.

David,

How does this new HTML interface affect client licenses? If I were to buy ML Server only, could I connect with as many clients as I like?

Thanks,
Sam

Sam,
Currently you can have same number of web sessions as you have MainLobby client licenses. So, if you have the default 5 client licenses, you will have an additional up to 5 web sessions open at same time.

In essense, doubling the number of connections.

Web browser connections are stateless. They connect, get data, and disconnect. So I don't see how you could enforce the number of connections unless you are not really using a real HTTP interface. I.e. if what you've actually got is some sort of control that just runs within a browser, but actually maintains a full time connection back to the server, then you could enforce that, but that's not really a web browser interface per se, and wouldn't necessarily have some of the advantages of an HTTP interface (such as being able to get out via corporate firewalls, work over low bandwidth connections, and so forth.)

I'm not a web guru, so I may be missing something of course.

In english please, can I turn on lighting from a web browsing phone?

Do these 2 programs work in Windows Vista? If no, is this tested or just a guess covering rears incase it doesnt.

MarkP, if your phone supports display of html pages (web browsing), then Yes you can turn on a MLServer supported lighting system (X10, Insteon, UPB, Vantage (Q Series and Infusion), Litetouch (System 5000), RadioRA, GrafikEye, HAI and ELK security system supported lighting (like ALC), soon CBUS, etc.).
The web page has to be coded (no drag and drop interface to build HTML like you can MainLobby flash scenes), but easily doable by anyone that is HTML (website) literate. Tons of folks fit this catagory.

If you mean "2 programs" to mean MainLobby and CQC, MainLobby has not gone thru testing for Vista yet. But, rest assured it will work with Vista when we can get to it. I wouldn't recommend Vista to be the OS today for MLServer. I suspect that the MainLobby client would work on it now, but untested.

This is no different that how most websites work. My TeleVantage web clinet works exactly this way. The web server is just a front end interface and the back end is handled by a seperate server. The web server works as a proxy for the user connection. I run alot of sites like this out of our datacenter. The web servers just maintain the UI so it is easier to cluster the servers. This leaves all the important traffic on port 80 but still gives you full control. The user tracking is handled by the back end and is based on time.

CQC has not been tested on Vista yet either. Well, it's been proven not to work on Vista currently, but that was expected given the fairly radical changes in security. I just got a copy of Vista that I'm going to install on a crash test dummy machine and probably work on this over the Xmas holidays to see what the deal is. I assume it will be a number of fairly straightforward things that need to be dealt with. If so, we'll do a small patch release just to cover that so as to get it out of the way. If not, then it'll have to wait until the 2.1 release.

l

ll

Web browser connections are stateless. They connect, get data, and disconnect. So I don't see how you could enforce the number of connections unless you are not really using a real HTTP interface. I.e. if what you've actually got is some sort of control that just runs within a browser, but actually maintains a full time connection back to the server, then you could enforce that, but that's not really a web browser interface per se, and wouldn't necessarily have some of the advantages of an HTTP interface (such as being able to get out via corporate firewalls, work over low bandwidth connections, and so forth.)

I'm not a web guru, so I may be missing something of course.
I'm not a web guru either but as Lathan mentions it's pretty common and there is no reason it cannot be a "real HTTP interface". Go to any website where these is a list of large files to download. Start downloading one after another and you'll find that most websites limit you to no more than two concurrent downloads. You cannot start another until one of the downloads have finished. In fact, you often cannot load another page on the website if the two downloads are in progress. Without this type of capability it would be infinitely easier for a hacker to destroy a websites bandwidth by simultaneously calling up thousands of downloads.

That's not the same thing. That's multiple simultaneous connections from one IP address. That wouldn't apply when you are talking about limiting the number of clients that can be out there. It only limits the number of clients that could simultaneously (or close to it) access the system at once. But, generally speaking, the access pattern wouldn't be of the sort that would cause that limit to kick in. You could have 10 or 15 clients and probably not exceed a '5 simultaneous access' limit when the connection is stateless, under normal access patterns.

Not that I really care per se. I'm just being an anal retentive engineer type and debating the technicalities.

That's not the same thing.
Good point :). OK, then I will change the example to a hosted solution which is 100% thin client browser based and the license is based on xx number of simultaneous users :).

This gets back to my original point that 'browser based' can mean multiple things. It might mean a control of some sort that loads into the browser that maintains a constant, non-HTTP connection back to the server. But that's not the same as a browser interface as most folks would consider it, which is HTTP based, and stateless, which means it can work via a corporate firewall and can work on very low bandwidth connections since it only talks when you load a new page.

I don't know if that's the case, but it sounded somewhat like that when he described it, which is why my original comment.

I think you are reaching a little here with your definition. The HTTP connection is stateless but that doesn't have any effect on the login or tracking of users by the web server. This is what allows or disallows connections. This can be handled via a cookie in the browser, session timers or by time/password checking code running on the web server. In all cases the connection to the user is handled by standard http request. When you think about it it is just the standard web password/security model being applied to track connections.

MarkP, if your phone supports display of html pages (web browsing), then Yes you can turn on a MLServer supported lighting system (X10, Insteon, UPB, Vantage (Q Series and Infusion), Litetouch (System 5000), RadioRA, GrafikEye, HAI and ELK security system supported lighting (like ALC), soon CBUS, etc.).
The web page has to be coded (no drag and drop interface to build HTML like you can MainLobby flash scenes), but easily doable by anyone that is HTML (website) literate. Tons of folks fit this category.



If you mean "2 programs" to mean MainLobby and CQC, MainLobby has not gone thru testing for Vista yet. But, rest assured it will work with Vista when we can get to it. I wouldn't recommend Vista to be the OS today for MLServer. I suspect that the MainLobby client would work on it now, but untested.Sounds good, so find a HTML guy that can make a web page for lighting and security cameras ( scratch security cams, already available) Is there documentation, forum reading for this somewhere.

Vista support will be nice since Im a graphics whore and from the sounds of it they have straightened out all the clunky networking and such. I dont see much need in running Vista on the HTPC/server but will run it on clients as I expect most others (friends and family) will as well. I like up-to-date software so hopefully Mailobby runs well on Vista, Im getting good feedback on Vista from my PC guru friend

Hopefully you developers wont pick and choose whats important to customers when it comes to OS's ( supposed to be smiley wink placed here but Im in edit mode)

In a kiosk style touch screen, the look of the OS will not come into play. The screen will be covered by the automation interface and they usually will not use any of the standard OS windows. So it wouldn't matter in those cases whether you were using XP or Vista in visual terms. Also, in any commercial application, I'd argue that it's not optimal to use the latest OS until it's been out for some time, unless there is some feature that is an absolute requirement for the application, which is not the case here. You can't even buy Vista right now except as part of an OEM system, right?

I agree with Dean. Reason why Cinemar will be supporting Vista is because people will have PCs running Vista. Similar of MCE2005 OS. The MCE app isn't needed for Mainlobby suite, but the OS works just fine.
There may be some Vista services that end up getting used, but that's down the road.

You can't even buy Vista right now except as part of an OEM system, right?
Vista ships to consumers January 30. It cannot be purchased right now except by corporations.

If i already have a Celler Cinemas HTPC, can i add cinemar software to it?

BocaPimp,
Yes, if the CellerCinemas HTPC uses standard PC technology and a Windows operating system (newer than Win98) then Cinemar software should run on it fine.
Are you interested in Theater automation as first priority? What hardware will you be wanting to control? (Receiver, projector, screen, lights, matrix switching, etc)? Are your movies stored on a changer (what model) or burned to hard drive?

The movies are stores on almost 2 TB of HDs inside the Cellar System (www.cellarcinemas.com)
and i would like to control everything, and keep a sweet looking statbase of the HD movies, not the normal windows looking thing, plus i would love to have a mini screen to carry around the theater to select from there and not always the projector. i wanna be able to control my pre amp(outlaw990,dvdo vp50,radient switcher,htpc,buttkicker am p,bdp-s1,hd xa2, and maby a couple of HD plug ins, also my lights which are IR right now, and then my BTX curtain motor)

In a kiosk style touch screen, the look of the OS will not come into play. The screen will be covered by the automation interface and they usually will not use any of the standard OS windows. So it wouldn't matter in those cases whether you were using XP or Vista in visual terms. Also, in any commercial application, I'd argue that it's not optimal to use the latest OS until it's been out for some time, unless there is some feature that is an absolute requirement for the application, which is not the case here. You can't even buy Vista right now except as part of an OEM system, right?Dean, I think theres alot of things about Vista you may find you love as a developer as well as a security fan. Personally Im after the massive graphics upgrades with Vista that finally make Windows a Mac/Apple clone where Macs were years ahead of Windows in ease, graphics, multitasking and other areas. I had a Vista demonstration yesterday and Ill tell you that I would be overwhelmed with joy if my automation screens were within a mile of the way Vista and Macs deal with interfaces and such. Actually Vista almost looks like CQC in many respects like menues, its almost scary how close the two are but..........the way thumbnails turn into programs and the way programs open and close into others are very "flashish" and quite beautiful. I know hardly anyone here takes graphics and animations seriously but when they see Vista in action this best describes how I want an interface. Vista has weather widgets, clock widgets, movie widgets and all sorts of new features and they all come and go fluidly and gracefully the way things should in 2007. Wait until you see the Mac style roladex type multitasking screen. Its very impressive, then again most here arent into interfaces changing and moving in and out the way I am. Kudos to Microsoft for the way Vista looks and works, I guess thats the finished results of 10,000 employees and it shows.

The point we are making above is that none of that would benefit either product, since the touch screen interfaces of both don't use the standard Windows GUI. It's fine to point it out as an example of what you think is nice, and it may give us some ideas, but running either product on Vista won't make any difference in how the end touch screens look or behave. ML uses Flash and we have our own graphical interface system, so neither use the standard Windows windows.

I got my crash test dummy machine set up yesterday so that I can install Vista on it and start seeing at least what the deal is with CQC running on it.

I just got Vista installed on my old development machine. I was a little worried that it woldn't be compatible but it seems to be happy. It does look quite snazzy.

Nice huh,I actually think alot of things are developer friendly as well. youll see as you dig deeper about what I mean on file searching, naming and other developer features. All my clients are used as PCs as much as automation touchscreens, guests in their rooms use little automation and alot of computer. My main touchscreen the last 3 months is a Panasonic toughbook, another one has been a Toshiba laptop. Some people dont have the want or desire to get touchscreens or kiosks. I completely understand the integrator stance but I think end users want or do more than installers give them credit for. Vista will be on every client I have, I also know of several others doing automation that will have Vista as well because they are Mac users that despise anything PC and its clumsy OS, Ive always been PC and never went Mac because of software support but always admired how much better the Mac platform was.

To get the full effect of what Vista graphics are capable of , you need newer hardware

Actually, I was wrong. CQC does run just fine under Vista, as far as I can tell so far. The problems that people had reported, which I'd not studied too closely, were just getting the installer to run. You have to a little tweak for now to the command file that starts the installer but it looks like that is all that's required. Everything else so far seems to be happy.

Cinemar's MainLobby Server 3.0.210 was recently tested with Vista and so far runs fine as well.