well, i got my windows xp computer configured. that turned out to be an incredible more amount of work than i had planned. as i installed it (xp pro from many years ago, laying idle). getting the thing to finally accept service pack 3 took forever (complicated by the fact i have broadband that's not the fastest). then windows kept trying to install a new sound device every time i booted. nothing fixed it. i tried driver after driver. the problem was caused by the video card. apparently, even without sound windows recognizes the architecture of a soundcard and thus wants to install drivers. this was fixed by an obscure download from nvidia. who woulda thunk? not me! this took the better part of 2 days to get it configured. i've been spoiled by windows 7
.
which brings me to my next point: many of us here are making a significant investment in both time and money to get AHP implemented. i am mostly interested in AHP for automation (including my greenhouses). i have also bought a lot of x10 security stuff to use with AHP, because i'm using ahp as a backup/supplementary system. unfortunately, AHP's reputation here precedes itself, and i am not relying on x10 for security. good or bad, that's the it's very difficult to know what to do without taking a few lumps on the head with buying the wrong stuff, etc. i've already spent around $1500 on security/automation in the last few weeks. i pick x10 for this because it's cheap to add a lot of sensors/switches to the system. if i spend another $1500 and it automates "well", then i've got my money out of x10 and i will consider it a big success.
so the proposition is this: can i make AHP effective enough if i buy the various filters, etc? i can't work with an 80% system. it's got to be highly reliable. can this be achieved? i am going to try to dispose of my prejudices and give this thing a fair go.
i am going to try to establish a reliability range, and use a system in that range. one thing that interests me is that you could make multiple systems check each other with some redundancy throughout the day. i am pondering running 3 or 4 systems simultaneously. first, i have a lot of projects to automate, with the consequences of failure being quite expensive. for example, if my greenhouse controls failed, my entire stock of plants could be lost in just a few hours. splitting their control up between 4 computers reduces the risk of failure greatly. so if one of the 4 systems failed, then the other 3 would catch that failure with checks (and notify me).
how reliable is your x10 system? what critical things do you automate with it?