DSC wireless problems

[RH.Campbell]

I agree with you Reg, except that I do make more exceptions than you do. I
dislike wireless generally for all the reasons you state, but sometimes
there is just NO way to do a certain point on the hardwired alarm system
without wireless or (as you say) using moulding....

For example, I'm installing a system on Saturday where the woman says a
couple of her doors are above a totally finished basment ceiling (drywall).
Perhaps with a little imaginative design, I can hide wire far enough to be
able to go through the floor into an unfinished portion of the basement. And
then, perhaps not ! Enter a wireless point, with more cost to the customer,
and all it's resultant higher service costs !!

But I can tell you, if I HAVE to do it, from now on, it won't be with DSC
wireless....

R.H.Campbell
Home Security Metal Products
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
www.homemetal.com

 

[spike]

Look, I apologize for this BUT... once bitten, twice shy.
Why the hell would you buy MORE wireless from a company that ABANDONED their
first attempt???
They don't DO wireless. Inovonics does wireless. ITI is a close second.

 

[spike]

ha ha, I hear ya but it has it's place if a wire is difficult, as in
airplanes, people and the space shuttle

 

[Mark Leuck]

Look, I apologize for this BUT... once bitten, twice shy.
Why the hell would you buy MORE wireless from a company that ABANDONED their
first attempt???

Using that logic he'll never mess with Ademco, Napco or ITI

 

[spike]

That leaves Inovonics. He'd be on the right track.

 

[Mark Leuck]

That leaves Inovonics. He'd be on the right track.

Not really since its addon stuff, I'd rather have the manufacturers stuff

 

[Rick Lalonde]

The Paradox boards you mean ? No, made in Montreal

RHC

I do like that part...Montreal is still part of Canada right?

I'm seriously looking at fasing in Paradox so I would like to hear of future
experiences with their wireless equipment. Pricing and programming on
their equipment is quite inviting.
DSC lost me with wireless back in the spread spectrum shuffle...

 

[RH.Campbell]

Good point Mike ! I have seen the error of my ways and "converted".....)

RHC

Look, I apologize for this BUT... once bitten, twice shy.
Why the hell would you buy MORE wireless from a company that ABANDONED their
first attempt???
They don't DO wireless. Inovonics does wireless. ITI is a close second.

................snip balance for brevity................

 

[spike]

Great! Now what do we do about these damn computers?

 

[RH.Campbell]

Yes, Montreal is in Quebec province and Quebec is still part of Canada last
time I looked.....))...(a bit or wry Canadian humour there in case you
didn't get it....)

Too soon to tell about Paradox's wireless, but you're right, the pricing is
amazing !! I've only done bench testing but it sure is easy to program and
set up. My first installation goes in tomorrow.

So far, Paradox hasn't ever come out with a "loser" assuming you forgive
them for their disastrous first run at making an alarm panel, long since
gone from the marketplace....(Esprit versions under 2.0). I've pretty much
converted to the Spectra panel with the LCD keypad and it makes for a
beautiful installation at about the same pricing as the older Esprit (BTW, I
have over 500 of them in service and they are truly bulletproof.....). Plus
it's partitionable, and handles wireless for very little extra cost.

One thing to note. Before you first put a Spectra panel in service, always
default it to factory beforehand. It seems during QA testing, they have to
take the dialers out of service and they don't always remember to turn them
back on. Defaulting does. Otherwise, you can get a panel that fails to
communicate with the station even though your programming is correct. Small
point, but it can make you think you have a defective panel when you don't.
I pre-program most of the panel using the memory key beforehand, so once
installed there are only a half dozen things to program on site relative to
that particular customer. Slick ! Plus the LCD keypad programs with a memory
key saving you a lot or programming assuming most of your installations are
similiar...

RHC

 

[RH.Campbell]

Aw crap...now you got me.....

RHC

 

[Sharmon]

hi Bob ,

I even discontinued using the 433 remotes on a couple of Maxsys
systems , DSC has really blown any credibility (how ever small) they
might have had in the market. Maybe Paul had a DSC originally
Ademco as you know is much better except the occasionally flaky
5808/LST

 

[s]

I work in sales at a large security company in the US and RF DSC has been
total crap since intro unable to connect to a DSL line, constant false or
weak signals etc. yet they won't let us sell ademco which is what we used to
sell before and never exhibited any of these problems. I am so pissed but
there is nothing I can do about it. Anyone else have anything they can
share?

 

[Mark Leuck]

Ademco has the same problems with DSL, lots of brands do

 

[s]

I don't know about any ademco and dsl problems.I have it in my house and
have dsl, installer just asked if I had dsl and turned on a built in filter.
With DSC my guys tell me even with the filter they can't make it work...

 

[Robert Skinner]

What, do you work for Ademco? I have had a very small percentage of proven
problems with DSC and dsl. Add a filter and poof, no more problem.

I rarely use Ademco (I dislike ADI) but I have not heard that they have
problems either.

 

[Mark Leuck]

I don't know about any ademco and dsl problems.I have it in my house and
have dsl, installer just asked if I had dsl and turned on a built in filter.
With DSC my guys tell me even with the filter they can't make it work...

Built-in filter? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Sorry but NO panel I have dealt with (including Ademco/DSC/Napco/ITI) has
any kind of DSL filtering. It sounds like the installer either is BS'ing you
or didn't know what he was doing. DSC (as well as the others) will work fine
with a DSL filter. I recommend Excelsus

 

[Mark Leuck]

What, do you work for Ademco? I have had a very small percentage of proven
problems with DSC and dsl. Add a filter and poof, no more problem.

I rarely use Ademco (I dislike ADI) but I have not heard that they have
problems either.

I deal with Ademco more than DSC these days and I know of no panel that
can't work with DSL and a filter

 

[petem]

I don't know about any ademco and dsl problems.I have it in my house and
have dsl, installer just asked if I had dsl and turned on a built in filter.
With DSC my guys tell me even with the filter they can't make it work...

no built in dsl filter is available on any ademco or First alert panel that
i know...

and i do use exelcus filter on dsc and ademco panel with great success..

i wonder were you have your info from...

 

[Paul]

I even discontinued using the 433 remotes on a couple of Maxsys
systems , DSC has really blown any credibility (how ever small) they
might have had in the market. Maybe Paul had a DSC originally
Ademco as you know is much better except the occasionally flaky
5808/LST

I din't want to interfere in this discussion but as you mention my
name let me comment on it..

I think that what isn't clear to you, and many others, about the RFI
problem is that isn't the operational features who are involved, its
the receiver ONLY who capture ALL incoming wave on hiss frequency +
side attenuated more powerful signals and a lot more as i have
described in my post =>4.
Of course the receiver decoder will not take any action on signals
who have not the correct ID and coding but that is not the problem
neither?
The receiver due to RFI is put in a postilion that he is unable to
receive ANY sensor signal, the interference muzzle or render
un-decodable its entering signals.

The receiver distinction between good and bad entering signals is not
in hiss hands when generated on the wireless alarm system frequency,
its an external signal transmitter who jeopardize the entering signals
and there the manufacturer has no control over.
Don't forget that the wireless alarm system uses frequencies who are
shared, unprotected and of free use. RFI is a normal deal on those
frequencies due to the asynchronous burst principle but those
conflicts are covered and rejected by ID decoding. However, permanent
transmissions escape on this rule and are an unavoidable nuisance.

Paul