Coming Q2 - OS3.3, New Controllers

[South Africa C4 user]

27 minutes ago, Control4Savant said:

No Iv been clear on what Im against.  If you want to support replacing all of your control hardware every 3-5 years (depending on where you land in the cycle) specifically because of brand design and choice…be my guest. 

I don’t think its a side note, I think you want to reach to relate the two just because they are both technology… 

 

I think 3-5 years is a bit unfair on C4.  My HC800s (I have a couple) are 9 years old. My EA5s must be 5 years old or more by now (I have 3 across 2 houses - I purchased my first one when they first came out).  My EA3s and EA1s are all 3-5 years old (I must have 7 or 8 of them) and I certainly don’t expect C4 to stop supporting the EA controllers in the next 3 or 4 years (maybe I am wrong?). I guess that my CA10s (I have 2) are almost 3 years old (they certainly predate COVID, so maybe they are only 2.5 years old). My IO extenders (I have 5 or 6) range from 4 years old to 9 years old.

All of the above still works and is fully supported (other than the OSD on my HC800s and I had already moved my OSDs to the EA controllers before I was forced to drop this from the HC800 anyway). My only gripe would be the 2 HC250s which I had to brick 3 years ago when OS3 came around.  That said, I am glad I did as OS3 was a massive step forward.

In terms of hardware failures, as far as I recall, I have not had anything fail barring a lightning strike taking out a controller in an outbuilding once and I lost one audio stream on an HC800.  I do also have one IO extender which needs a hard reboot every time there is a software update (not often these days).  I don’t think that is too bad given that my controllers (combined) must have seen 100 years of life so far…

 

[RAV]

15 minutes ago, therockhr said:

Again, I want to go on record as saying I do not think Control4 does a bad job with hardware obsolescence (outside of the HC-250). I think it would be even better if they separated out the audio from the controllers and got rid of the on screen display all together.   I would have 2 controllers:

• EA-1 minus the AV portion
• CA-10

Thats it (somebody might be asking why not an EA-3 in between. there is literally no difference between an EA-1 and EA-3 except audio). Lots of installs would be fine with just an EA-1. I would also create a smaller IO extender with 1 serial and 4 contacts and 4 relays that could go in a security panel. It would have ethernet along with Zigbee to talk to the controllers.

Audio would be a separate subsystem; either 3rd party or Triad.

OSD would be eliminated as its not worth the time.

Just my opinion. I think its fun to talk system design. Control4 i am sure has done its research and there is a reason they do it the way they do.

I hear you, and I understand both sides of this coin.

But the audio processor part, is 2/3rds of an EA. So that's a lot of redundancy in cost.
Still need a box, power supply, nic, and a processor and memory. The audio parts a couple of DACs and some jacks.
And the more outputs you put on the box, the more memory and processing power you need.
And as the streaming guys evolve, so must the audio components processor, and nic and memory. So they're not going to stay for long as a static part.

You're not going to save a whole lot.

Or look at the IO portion, probably less than 10% of the cost when it's built in. But take it out into it's own box, and wow, gets pricey.
Take the IO Expander. Sure it's got a bunch of output, but that's because the jack part is cheap, make the same box with half the outputs, it's not going to be half the cost, more like 80%.

 

[-defunct-]

28 minutes ago, Control4Savant said:

So no one should have any Control4 product older than 5 years? 

No one should have any IoT product beyond 5 years.

NAS, DVRs, NVRs, Cameras, remotes, matrix switches, smart devices, etc.

The exception to that would be commercial networking as those are usually designed and supported for a decade after creation.

[therockhr]

3 minutes ago, Dunamivora said:

No one should have any IoT product beyond 5 years.

NAS, DVRs, NVRs, Cameras, remotes, matrix switches, smart devices, etc.

The exception to that would be commercial networking as those are usually designed and supported for a decade after creation.

What's it like living in a fantasy world?

[therockhr]

9 minutes ago, RAV said:

I hear you, and I understand both sides of this coin.

But the audio processor part, is 2/3rds of an EA. So that's a lot of redundancy in cost.
Still need a box, power supply, nic, and a processor and memory. The audio parts a couple of DACs and some jacks.
And the more outputs you put on the box, the more memory and processing power you need.
And as the streaming guys evolve, so must the audio components processor, and nic and memory. So they're not going to stay for long as a static part.

You're not going to save a whole lot.

Or look at the IO portion, probably less than 10% of the cost when it's built in. But take it out into it's own box, and wow, gets pricey.
Take the IO Expander. Sure it's got a bunch of output, but that's because the jack part is cheap, make the same box with half the outputs, it's not going to be half the cost, more like 80%.

 

I'm not really trying to save anything. Just thinking about how it makes sense to divide things up. Having the AV components part of the home controller leads to more points of failure and also quicker obsolescence.  Also, with so many options out there for whole home audio just let those subsystems handle those tasks (HEOS, Russound, Sonos, Bluesound, VSSL, Triad, etc).

The reason for a smaller IO extender is for what I see as a common use case; connecting a home alarm and garage doors. This IO extender would take care of that in a single package. Have the person running the garage door wires bring them into the security panel.

[Control4Savant]

16 minutes ago, Dunamivora said:

No one should have any IoT product beyond 5 years.

NAS, DVRs, NVRs, Cameras, remotes, matrix switches, smart devices, etc.

The exception to that would be commercial networking as those are usually designed and supported for a decade after creation.

What does that have to do with Control4? What does this have to do with Savant that runs on updated and secure Apple OS and current Savant OS? Wifi lighting and networked low processing system controllers that are on isolated and managed VLANS? Savant can be ran completely local without cloud interaction and still utilize app service. It’s very secure. 

All of those devices should be isolated and secure through network practice and user habits just as much as needing software updates.

[therockhr]

if the EA controllers work on the current OS until 2025 or 2026, I think thats a good run. 10 years from launch to latest version should be the goal for a home controller.

[-defunct-]

9 minutes ago, therockhr said:

What's it like living in a fantasy world?

That shouldn't be a fantasy. And we wonder why IoT hits the news all the time with hacks and botnets...

Hanging on to old devices is risky.

[-defunct-]

2 minutes ago, Control4Savant said:

What does that have to do with Control4? What does this have to do with Savant that runs on updated and secure Apple OS and current Savant OS? Wifi lighting and networked low processing system controllers that are on isolated and managed VLANS? Savant can be ran completely local without cloud interaction and still utilize app service. It’s very secure. 

I think you're smart enough to understand that I switched it to indicate the entire market.

As 'secure' as Savant is, 5 years down the road is a VERY long time in technology.

[Control4Savant]

1 minute ago, Dunamivora said:

That shouldn't be a fantasy. And we wonder why IoT hits the news all the time with hacks and botnets...

Hanging on to old devices is risky.

Having a new IoT device is no less risky. Apply the same network securities accordingly. 

[eggzlot]

48 minutes ago, Control4Savant said:

So no one should have any Control4 product older than 5 years? 

I purchased an HC800 in the fall of 2013.  We are pushing 10 years.  It supports the latest OS as long as you don't need OSD.  Where is this magical 5 years and you are SOL?

[-defunct-]

3 minutes ago, Control4Savant said:

Having a new IoT device is no less risky. Apply the same network securities accordingly. 

Anything has risk, but generally new models a manufacturer sells don't go backwards in security.

[Control4Savant]

Just now, Dunamivora said:

I think you're smart enough to understand that I switched it to indicate the entire market.

As 'secure' as Savant is, 5 years down the road is a VERY long time in technology.

Sorry I did miss that..

its again, being 5 years old and still having current OS. which makes it secure as anything else.. and no, a 5 year old Mac isnt old. My M1 hosts now being installed will run like champs for a decade. 

[Control4Savant]

3 minutes ago, eggzlot said:

I purchased an HC800 in the fall of 2013.  We are pushing 10 years.  It supports the latest OS as long as you don't need OSD.  Where is this magical 5 years and you are SOL?

Are you having your own argument lol? He indicated that no device over 5 years old is a good idea. 

and for example.. the hc250 was released the same year as the HC800. One example doesn’t make the point. 

[-defunct-]

1 minute ago, Control4Savant said:

Sorry I did miss that..

its again, being 5 years old and still having current OS. which makes it secure as anything else.. and no, a 5 year old Mac isnt old. My M1 hosts now being installed will run like champs for a decade. 

False senses of security end up leading to breaches.

[Andrew luecke]

2 minutes ago, Control4Savant said:

What does that have to do with Control4? What does this have to do with Savant that runs on updated and secure Apple OS and current Savant OS? Wifi lighting and networked low processing system controllers that are on isolated and managed VLANS? Savant can be ran completely local without cloud interaction and still utilize app service. It’s very secure. 

All of those devices should be isolated and secure through network practice and user habits just as much as needing software updates.

The latest MacOS only supports computers from 5 years ago.. Ios doesn't support devices for huge periods either

Also it feels like you're on a bit of a witch hunt to be honest.

In another thread, you said you're using 100% mesh via Netgear orbi on high end ha jobs. Wifi 6 Orbis broke meshing with the previous generation. So why is it not ok for control4 to support a product for 8 years, but it's ok for orbi to break compatibility in only 4

[Control4Savant]

1 minute ago, Andrew luecke said:

The latest MacOS only supports computers from 5 years ago.. Ios doesn't support devices for huge periods either

Also it feels like you're on a bit of a witch hunt to be honest.

In another thread, you said you're using 100% mesh via Netgear orbi on high end ha jobs. Wifi 6 Orbis broke meshing with the previous generation. So why is it not ok for control4 to support a product for 8 years, but it's ok for orbi to break compatibility in only 4

Jesus.. a witch hunt. 

[Control4Savant]

4 minutes ago, Dunamivora said:

False senses of security end up leading to breaches.

What insecure about updates? 

 

3 minutes ago, Andrew luecke said:

The latest MacOS only supports computers from 5 years ago.. Ios doesn't support devices for huge periods either

Also it feels like you're on a bit of a witch hunt to be honest.

In another thread, you said you're using 100% mesh via Netgear orbi on high end ha jobs. Wifi 6 Orbis broke meshing with the previous generation. So why is it not ok for control4 to support a product for 8 years, but it's ok for orbi to break compatibility in only 4

My MBP from 2013 has current Mac OS..so..

[-defunct-]

2 minutes ago, Control4Savant said:

What insecure about updates?

Totally missed the meaning behind that comment as well...

/shrug

I guess that's why guys like me have jobs.

[Control4Savant]

Just now, Dunamivora said:

Totally missed the meaning behind that comment as well...

/shrug

I guess that's why guys like me have jobs.

Sweet. 

[Andrew luecke]

3 minutes ago, Control4Savant said:

What insecure about updates? 

 

My MBP from 2013 has current Mac OS..so..

Your MacBook Pro 2013 isn't on the compatibility list. People have mentioned you basically need to use a hack / patch to get it installed.

Is that correct?

 

[therockhr]

25 minutes ago, Dunamivora said:

That shouldn't be a fantasy. And we wonder why IoT hits the news all the time with hacks and botnets...

Hanging on to old devices is risky.

How old do you think the devices that control power plants and manufacturing plants are?

[Cyknight]

2 minutes ago, therockhr said:

How old do you think the devices that control power plants and manufacturing plants are?

That's not really IoT - and yet that's exactly why millions are pumped into keeping them safe

[therockhr]

3 minutes ago, Cyknight said:

That's not really IoT - and yet that's exactly why millions are pumped into keeping them safe

IoT is a marketing term.

[-defunct-]

8 minutes ago, therockhr said:

How old do you think the devices that control power plants and manufacturing plants are?

Very old. The government also still uses windows XP in some cases.

Doesn't make it smart or secure.

Power plants and manufacturing plants have security controls preventing access because those devices cannot survive in a hostile network. Consumer IoT has started shifting towards securing itself to be secure inside hostile environments.