Jump to content
C4 Forums | Control4

MyQ DriverCentral driver now completely dead?


pfissure

Recommended Posts

While I would love to have everything integrated into C4 like I did before, it’s seems for how I use the garage doors (I have 4 openers) and 1 driveway gate I’m only really losing the ability to control them with voice commands. I personally didn’t have much programming outside of voice that the Liftmaster app doesn’t actually provide on its own.

Of course I know everyone is different though on that aspect. Still hope one day the two companies can get their stuff together. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


12 minutes ago, Topfox said:

While I would love to have everything integrated into C4 like I did before, it’s seems for how I use the garage doors (I have 4 openers) and 1 driveway gate I’m only really losing the ability to control them with voice commands. I personally didn’t have much programming outside of voice that the Liftmaster app doesn’t actually provide on its own.

Of course I know everyone is different though on that aspect. Still hope one day the two companies can get their stuff together. 

I too have four openers.  I use relays soldered to an opener to control the doors. 

https://www.amazon.com/LiftMaster-894LT-Control-Transmitter-Buttons/dp/B009L8QE98/ref=asc_df_B009L8QE98/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=167152358566&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=10625741008038516427&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9017275&hvtargid=pla-500385581672&psc=1

I have that wired to two of these (Each one has two relays)
https://www.control4.com/docs/product/wireless-contact-relay/data-sheet/english/latest//wireless-contact-relay-data-sheet-rev-a.pdf

I then sense if the door is open via my security system.  I use Honeywell tilt sensors. 

https://www.security.resideo.com/product-repository/5822t

-Dan

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2021 at 8:04 PM, eggzlot said:

yeah no idea how lutron works with MyQ and the pros/cons associated with it.  the good part about going with the Z2ios is there are no hubs, no hops, etc.  all zigbee/control4 so its snappy and just works.

Lutron works pretty much the same way but uses a different radio frequency (Clear Connect) and is not mesh.   Their garage door access controller is similar to a Z2io, but has 4 cc outputs,  and several inputs, and will then show each door on my system as open/closed just as a light will show as on/off.  Same process to solder the CC outputs to a remote control board. No API support either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Nothing we don't already know, but here is the official position - pretty sad they cannot get it together with MyQ:

 

Thank you for contacting Control4.  Firstly, I apologize for the inconvenience on not being able to integrate with the MyQ system.  We do not have any integration directly with MyQ API, and I cannot go into the reasons why.  Our teams are aware of the request to have the MyQ API integration as a native option, unfortunately there are factors that are not allowing this at this time.

We at Control4 strive to integrate with as many devices and brands as possible.  There are multiple factors that do play into that, and not all of them are within our control.

Regarding garage doors, we do integrate with garage motors that have the standard contact/relay triggers for local communication.  This does not rely on cloud communications, instead uses local contacts for the state, and relays to trigger the motor.  We also integrate with Genie/Aladdin door openers using their API on the cloud systems.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns.

Thanks,


95ZjZNAxf2ecrIPJ_WK1O1KGfAh9EICsdcMYhsmzFVc&oid=00D5000000078mu&dpt=null&viewId=
Derrick Cain
Sr. Manager of Customer Advocacy
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a Control4 user, however, if your clients have Lutron RA2, you can completely abandon the MyQ API. I currently automate my LiftMaster 8550WLB using the following. You can also apply this to gates.

  1. Interface Module. One end plugs into the LiftMaster 8550WLB and the other into Lutron Visor Control Receiver Output 1. To open or close my door via a GUI, I actuate the ID associated with the Visor Control Receiver Output 1. 
  2. Two Magnetic Contacts. One installed on the garage door for the fully closed position (when contact is closed door is fully closed, when contact is open door is opening) and the other installed for the fully opened position (when contact is closed door is fully opened, when contact is opened the door is closing). This gives exact open, opening, closed, closing status. The other ends of these contacts plug into the Visor Control Receiver Inputs. Input 1 would be for fully closed and Input 2 would be for fully opened. In RA2 Essentials you add two virtual switches. You then program the Visor Control Receiver Input 1 to turn Virtual Switch 1 on or off based on the status of the contact. You then program the Visor Control Receiver Input 2 to turn Virtual Switch 2 on or off based on the status of that contact 
  3. Lutron RA2 Appliance Module. I plug my LiftMaster 8550WLB into this module and then plug the module into the power receptacle. This allows me to completely turn off my LiftMaster 8550WLB in certain conditions (e.g., while on vacation, alarm armed Instant mode, etc.) and to control it via the automation system GUI

Honestly, dump MyQ. It's cloud based and you are subject to them making changes on a whim thereby breaking your clients' installs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, anon2828 said:

Nothing we don't already know, but here is the official position - pretty sad they cannot get it together with MyQ:


 

Yep.  There are things to fault SnapOne for, but this ain't one of them.  Chamberlain has gone out of its way to make its customers miserable/has no discernible plan other than chaos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DanITman said:

I wish Control4 could find a middle ground on this.  At least provide an integration that the customer can purchase.  I get why Liftmaster wants money as it cost money to run their API.

Once again, it isn't C4 not wanting to find that middle ground. The only thing they MIGHT be able to do is have a pre-made set of button to z2io or something, but now you're looking into being a chamberlain/whatever dealer to do so, and likely would still get them in trouble/would be shot down by chamberlain. Garagedget is able to fly under the radar so far, but I doubt C4 (or Elan, Crestron etc) would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, DanITman said:

I wish Control4 could find a middle ground on this.  At least provide an integration that the customer can purchase.  I get why Liftmaster wants money as it cost money to run their API.

Does Control4 have a device similar to the Lutron Visor Control Receiver? If so, you implement what I detailed for any garage door or gate and have something that is not cloud based or beholden to a manufacturer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, automationNation said:

Does Control4 have a device similar to the Lutron Visor Control Receiver? If so, you implement what I detailed for any garage door or gate and have something that is not cloud based or beholden to a manufacturer.

Same thing.

That interface module is just a MyQ product in a different package.
Lutron Visor control is like Control4 ZIO,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Cyknight said:

Once again, it isn't C4 not wanting to find that middle ground. The only thing they MIGHT be able to do is have a pre-made set of button to z2io or something, but now you're looking into being a chamberlain/whatever dealer to do so, and likely would still get them in trouble/would be shot down by chamberlain. Garagedget is able to fly under the radar so far, but I doubt C4 (or Elan, Crestron etc) would.

So Control4 does want to find a middle ground on this?  It sounds like they have abandoned talks on it.  I'm assuming it comes down to money.   Its either Control4 is not willing to pay the price that myQ has requested or MyQ has no interest in integrating with Control4. I doubt the latter is the case.   If offered the choice, I think some customers would pay annual fee to integrate.  MyQ used to have a model for premium integrations (IFTT, Google) and they abandoned it.  Not sure why. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DanITman said:

So Control4 does want to find a middle ground on this?  It sounds like they have abandoned talks on it.  I'm assuming it comes down to money.   Its either Control4 is not willing to pay the price that myQ has requested or MyQ has no interest in integrating with Control4. I doubt the latter is the case.   If offered the choice, I think some customers would pay annual fee to integrate.  MyQ used to have a model for premium integrations (IFTT, Google) and they abandoned it.  Not sure why. 

What makes you doubt MyQ has no interest in integrating?  They already have an absolute stranglehold on their market and I'm sure they prefer people use their app for all of that precious data. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, automationNation said:

Does Control4 have a device similar to the Lutron Visor Control Receiver? If so, you implement what I detailed for any garage door or gate and have something that is not cloud based or beholden to a manufacturer.

If you read through this thread you'll see many of us have implemented alternative solutions.  However, it would streamline things if there was an integration and allow customers to embrace Control4 easier.  LM has the majority of the markeshare in the US. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mstafford388 said:

What makes you doubt MyQ has no interest in integrating?  They already have an absolute stranglehold on their market and I'm sure they prefer people use their app for all of that precious data. 

Because they have a partner website where they tout their integrations.  They partner with much smaller players like Clare Controls (Now owned by Snap). Everything points to C4 and MyQ not agreeing on terms. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't understand it.  If they integrated with no one it would make more sense.  But given the fact they do integrate with brands like Alarm.com and ClaireControls (rightly pointed out that is sold/owned by SnapOne/SnapAV), I just don't get the push back around Control4.  Makes zero sense.

If there is a fee, pass it on to the customer and see if we will pay it or not.  But at least provide a choice.

Any ClarieControls users out there that can comment on if they are paying extra for this integration?  I'm sure after we hear that answer all of this will make even less sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, msgreenf said:

all these posts are just repeating the same arguments...nothing new has been added in days to this thread...

Like most of the topics on this forum. This topic is back in the spotlight with the myQ upgrade to the v6 of their API.  This broke a lot of the open source integrations as they deprecated their v5. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, msgreenf said:

all these posts are just repeating the same arguments...nothing new has been added in days to this thread...

Lol... thanks for "adding" something. 

 

26 minutes ago, anon2828 said:

I just don't understand it.  If they integrated with no one it would make more sense.  But given the fact they do integrate with brands like Alarm.com and ClaireControls (rightly pointed out that is sold/owned by SnapOne/SnapAV), I just don't get the push back around Control4.  Makes zero sense.

If there is a fee, pass it on to the customer and see if we will pay it or not.  But at least provide a choice.

Any ClarieControls users out there that can comment on if they are paying extra for this integration?  I'm sure after we hear that answer all of this will make even less sense.

Control4 isn't the only one in this boat, so I do believe it's more complicated than just not wanting to. Maybe with Snaps $$$ things will change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Control4 pays them, then the next guy and the one after that will all put their hand out.
I support Control4 in telling them no.

I'm sure many of those they do allow, are based on the need to say "We work with XYZ" buy our stuff, no one tells Amazon no.

There's a reasonable solution: a remote, some soldering, and a wire or wireless interface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DanITman said:

If you read through this thread you'll see many of us have implemented alternative solutions.  However, it would streamline things if there was an integration and allow customers to embrace Control4 easier.  LM has the majority of the markeshare in the US. 

LM and other companies are not incentivized and I honestly prefer not to use anything that is cloud based. Hayward is another example. They have a cloud based API and a local API for controlling their OmniLogic MSP. I signed an NDA with them to get the local API document but it's extremely poorly written and I've had to go back and forth many times to get them to update it. I finally have a local integration but it was a pain in the rear end only because of their poor documentation.

The solution I implemented for my LM works with any garage door or gate, and is not cloud based.

I wouldn't call it a "hack" either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, automationNation said:

I wouldn't call it a "hack" either.

I think if I was to show my implementation to the general public they would call it a hack.  Wires that I soldered to a remote :)  It works great, I have no complaints.  The point I'm trying to make is that Control4 does a really good job of integrating with the biggest brands in the home and there is a gap when it comes to LM.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DanITman said:

  If offered the choice, I think some customers would pay annual fee to integrate. 

I think they very much wouldn't, but the issue if anything is this:

1 hour ago, RAV said:

If Control4 pays them, then the next guy and the one after that will all put their hand out

...or the requirement to get data if not 'real' money.

The fact that Clare and Alarm.com have it is simple to explain - that's security integration, and they're fine with that as it's a pat on their back to be concerned with the 'safety' of their customers.

Amazon/Google? They pay because it's more data for them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to start a flame war here, so here is the kindest way I can put this:  Each of us (customer, dealer, 3rd party integration expert, customers who are dealers, etc.) each looks at this issue (and others on here) through our own lens.  All of the opinions expressed here are valid and agreement as to one opinion should not be taken as an invalidation of the other opinions posted.  Also, this is a forum - by definition a place to express opinions and share information and points of view - also very simple to just ignore a thread you don't like.

Bottom line is that Control4 is a system to integrate home automations and disparate smart home devices and IoTs.  The market leader in garage doors should be included in that mission. Should not matter who is at fault, it should be addressed and fixed by both companies.   Any noise generated here, or Control4 employees reading the forums perhaps gets us closer to a driver based solution (which at least some of us prefer to a soldering solution).  Imagine if all of a sudden you could no longer control Sony TVs (versus Samsung for example) unless Control4 paid for access (or whatever is really going on within the issue between Control4 and MyQ which really none of us know for certain) - it would be an issue...same as here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.