I think adding a supported Hardware Interface list to your "HouseBot Features" web page would be nice. It would also be nice if you could add a list of hardware interfaces that you plan or hope to support in the future.
Since you are not selling the program I assume you choose what devices to support mainly by your own interests and needs. I am sure any plug-in you write would be much better than anything I could write so there is no sense in me writing a plug-in for something you are planning on writing.
Some plug-ins I would be interested in are:
1. DDE or OPC client
2. 1-wire/iButtons network, mainly for temperature sensors
3. Alarm system plug-in
Supported Hardware Interface List
Thanks for the suggestion for the "Features" page. I'll add the list of Interfaces.
At the moment, I don't have many plans for new Hardware Interfaces. Generally if someone makes a pitch for something that sounds like it would solve a big problem, or be useful by more than a few people, I will seriously consider the idea for a plugin/feature. However, I don't see myself purchasing special hardware just to write an interface. As much as I would like to have a house full of cool automation technology, it just doesn't fit the budget.
Please don't think that my plugins are any better than one you could create. Generally the person that uses the physical interface is the best to develop and test the specific interface. For example, if I developed an alarm system plugin for a system that I did not use, it would likely have problems due to the fact that I don't use (or have) the particular system.
What is an OPC client?
Scott
At the moment, I don't have many plans for new Hardware Interfaces. Generally if someone makes a pitch for something that sounds like it would solve a big problem, or be useful by more than a few people, I will seriously consider the idea for a plugin/feature. However, I don't see myself purchasing special hardware just to write an interface. As much as I would like to have a house full of cool automation technology, it just doesn't fit the budget.
Please don't think that my plugins are any better than one you could create. Generally the person that uses the physical interface is the best to develop and test the specific interface. For example, if I developed an alarm system plugin for a system that I did not use, it would likely have problems due to the fact that I don't use (or have) the particular system.
What is an OPC client?
Scott
-
Automate
OPC is a newer inter program communications standard. It was designed to replace DDE. It is used a lot in Industrial Automation systems. One company will develop an OPC I/O server for some sensors or I/O. Then OPC clients such as RSView32 http://www.rockwellsoftware.com/rsview32/ can send and receive data to/from the I/O using OPC. http://www.opcfoundation.org/01_about/01_whatis.asp
-
MediaStorm
- Member
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 1:58 pm
Automate,
Another approach might be to change your 1-Wire interface hardware. Take a look at 'The Link' http://www.ibuttonlink.com for a very good replacement for the 9097U that both supports the 9097U command set as well as serial control commands directly. I am currently using it with the Henriksen weather server and it works perfectly as a 9097U.
I've also done some basic playing around with the serial functions and they could easily be implemented via the generic serial interface.
The primary reason I switched to 'The Link' was repeated failures of the 9097U over time. I've had two 9097U's stop functioning over the past couple of years. I switched to 'The Link' about a year ago and haven't had a single problem since.
It also runs the 1-wire network much better than the 9097U and solved a problem I had with DS1822s that the 9097U would only recognize sometimes or not at all. The Link has special provisions for pre-charging the 1-wire net bus and then doing slow reads in order to extend the net.
There are several other advantages to The Link over the 9097U including repeater modes, network sniffing on the 1-wire net and a bunch more.
The price is $35 which is about twice that of a 9097U but I can attest that it is well worth the difference.
I do a lot of PIC development myself and started working on a PIC based interface when I found 'The Link' which also uses a PIC but the biggest advantage The Link interface has is that it was created by the original 9097U designers after leaving DalSemi as a direct solution for shortcomings in the 9097U and several client specific needs.
Also at $35 I felt it was pointless to continue trying to recreate a very well working solution and elected to focus my efforts elsewhere.
Take a look at it and I think you'll be quite happy and impressed with the hardware and also how very easy it is to use vs. the 9097U.
When used in serial mode 'The Link' does not require any 1-wire libs or drivers at all which is a very good thing considering the fact that TMEX and the java libs for the 9097U are buggy as hell.
Another approach might be to change your 1-Wire interface hardware. Take a look at 'The Link' http://www.ibuttonlink.com for a very good replacement for the 9097U that both supports the 9097U command set as well as serial control commands directly. I am currently using it with the Henriksen weather server and it works perfectly as a 9097U.
I've also done some basic playing around with the serial functions and they could easily be implemented via the generic serial interface.
The primary reason I switched to 'The Link' was repeated failures of the 9097U over time. I've had two 9097U's stop functioning over the past couple of years. I switched to 'The Link' about a year ago and haven't had a single problem since.
It also runs the 1-wire network much better than the 9097U and solved a problem I had with DS1822s that the 9097U would only recognize sometimes or not at all. The Link has special provisions for pre-charging the 1-wire net bus and then doing slow reads in order to extend the net.
There are several other advantages to The Link over the 9097U including repeater modes, network sniffing on the 1-wire net and a bunch more.
The price is $35 which is about twice that of a 9097U but I can attest that it is well worth the difference.
I do a lot of PIC development myself and started working on a PIC based interface when I found 'The Link' which also uses a PIC but the biggest advantage The Link interface has is that it was created by the original 9097U designers after leaving DalSemi as a direct solution for shortcomings in the 9097U and several client specific needs.
Also at $35 I felt it was pointless to continue trying to recreate a very well working solution and elected to focus my efforts elsewhere.
Take a look at it and I think you'll be quite happy and impressed with the hardware and also how very easy it is to use vs. the 9097U.
When used in serial mode 'The Link' does not require any 1-wire libs or drivers at all which is a very good thing considering the fact that TMEX and the java libs for the 9097U are buggy as hell.
-
Automate
-
Automate
Does anybody have any experience with the 1-wire USB adapter? http://www.maxim-ic.com/quick_view2.cfm?qv_pk=3834
Does it have any of the advanced features of "The Link"?
Does it have any of the advanced features of "The Link"?
-
MediaStorm
- Member
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 1:58 pm
Automate,
I've got a iButton USB adapter as well and it relies on the 1-Wire SDK along with a kludged together 1-Wire USB device driver. I had a lot of problems getting it to work at all let alone reliably. The driver (USB) has a terrible habit of giving Windows 2K BDODs.
The ibuttonlink is 10 times better IMO.
I've got a iButton USB adapter as well and it relies on the 1-Wire SDK along with a kludged together 1-Wire USB device driver. I had a lot of problems getting it to work at all let alone reliably. The driver (USB) has a terrible habit of giving Windows 2K BDODs.
The ibuttonlink is 10 times better IMO.
-
Automate