Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ox40]

Hehe, the funny thing is that you keep saying the CM11A is incapable of doing the things the CM15A does. If it is not the device - but the server making the 'decisions', the actual memory and capabilities of the device are irrelevant.  The conversion from CM11A -> CM15A is like the conversion from Gas -> BioDiesel. Not a ton changed in the engine itself.
And about the Windows Vista analogy, Sure, it could run on older hardware. You just couldn't use all of the spiffy new features - like the new GUI, etc. But yes, it could run on older hardware.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to show that they have put no effort into backward compatibility of their product.  And, it is possible to make backward compatible. I have been engineering software for a while now - nothing I have seen has shown this statement to be false. 

If you bought a couple of hundred dollars of new products then X10 came out and said 'We have changed our protocol, and nothing new will work with anything old.', you would be upset too.  (A little extreme, I know, but it attempts to get the point across.)

[Dan Lawrence]

Hehe, the funny thing is that you keep saying the CM11A is incapable of doing the things the CM15A does. If it is not the device - but the server making the 'decisions', the actual memory and capabilities of the device are irrelevant.  The conversion from CM11A -> CM15A is like the conversion from Gas -> BioDiesel. Not a ton changed in the engine itself.
And about the Windows Vista analogy, Sure, it could run on older hardware. You just couldn't use all of the spiffy new features - like the new GUI, etc. But yes, it could run on older hardware.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to show that they have put no effort into backward compatibility of their product.  And, it is possible to make backward compatible. I have been engineering software for a while now - nothing I have seen has shown this statement to be false. 

If you bought a couple of hundred dollars of new products then X10 came out and said 'We have changed our protocol, and nothing new will work with anything old.', you would be upset too.  (A little extreme, I know, but it attempts to get the point across.)

The CM11A did not do what the CM15A is capable of.  PLUS the serial CM11A give certain motherboards hissy fits with the COM posts, driving XP users nuts. The only certain way to get it to work was the USB to COM converter cables.

BTW, the version you got of AHP is version 3.198, which came out in December 7,2005. That makes it going on three years old and AHP is now at 3.204 and 3.07 with one of the plug-ins.

As I posted before in this somewhat useless thread, X10 is NOT going to make AHP backward compatible with an outmoded interface that they no longer make  In fact, last year they cleaned out the warehouse and sold AH/CM11 under a different name to people who didn't know it was an outdated product.

[Tuicemen]

CM15A can can see security modules! No extra hardware needed
CM15A can send and receive RF! No extra hardware needed
CM15A controls Pan N Tilt bases (ninjas) no extra hardware needed
CM15A can control Commander II and VCR Commander (not just A1 on/off commands) no extra Hardware needed
True if the unit is connected 24/7 to the PC and the software running making the decisions then they come close!
Both units can do the same things with PLC!

And about the Windows Vista analogy, Sure, it could run on older hardware. You just couldn't use all of the spiffy new features - like the new GUI, etc. But yes, it could run on older hardware.

Sorry but not with out major upgrades, and the I'm sure you'd get tired of waiting for it to load! why would any one pay over $200 for that?

If you bought a couple of hundred dollars of new products then X10 came out and said 'We have changed our protocol, and nothing new will work with anything old.', you would be upset too.   (A little extreme, I know, but it attempts to get the point across.)

MicroSoft does this every 5 years! and the upgraded software isn't free

If X10 made AHP backwards compatible, what would you be willing to pay for it?
Ox40 have you tested the EU version of AHP since the CM11 is still big in Europe and AHP was redesigned for the europen market maybe it will work with the CM11
Though I have my doubts!
Worse case you can as you stated

I will just have to design a driver that creates a virtual USB device then translates commands to the COM port

But since the protocol has changed you'll have to convert that too!

[dave w]

I got the software because I thought it was backward compatible with the CM11A - no physical or electronic limitation exists that makes it impossible to make backward compatible.  The CM11A is the same as the CM15A if you are using a server - for all intents and purposes.

What a load....The CM11 dates back to the early 1990s!  Two interfaces use completely different processors and completely different coding.

While you are at it, why don't you demand that Microsoft make Vista run on a 386?

[Puck]

While you are at it, why don't you demand that Microsoft make Vista run on a 386?

Ahhh... there may be a future for my old Commodore PET after all.   

[steven r]

...you keep saying the CM11A is incapable of doing the things the CM15A does. If it is not the device - but the server making the 'decisions', the actual memory and capabilities of the device are irrelevant....

The CM15A is capable of making "decisions" while disconnected from a computer. If all you need is software to control the functions in your CM11A, then the original AH software is a much better choice than trying to hack a solution to make AHP work. The end result, if  (and it's a really big if) successful, would not be able to anything more than the original software and likely be subject to more bugs. If you want more features controlling your CM11A than AH gives you, then look at some of the 3rd party software.

Bottom line, as I see it anyway, is...

• Possibly waste a lot of time hacking a solution that most likely not work as well as the original AH software,
• Get a USB to serial cable and use the old software,
• or Bite-the-bullet and buy AHP with the CM15A and all the plug ins that are free with it.

Personally I know just enough programming to know I would easily spend way more than $49.95 of my time if I were to attempt to make AHP work on a CM11A.

Whatever you decide, I wish you the best of luck. I just hate to see intelligent people waste their time.

[Dan Lawrence]

I'm getting the feeling that arguing with Ox40 is like arguing with a 5 year old - they won't listen to you unless they want to.   Very logical statements have been made by several posters in the three pages of this thread,  Ox40 just brushes them off and marches to his own drummer.  He downloads an old version of AHP, wants X10 to make it backdated to work with an outmoded interface, claims he has an unused CM11A in the box and won't download AH 1.42, still available on the X10 downloads page.

[Ox40]

I'm getting the feeling that arguing with Ox40 is like arguing with a 5 year old

Sorry, I expect straight answers which I just recently received:

CM15A can can see security modules! No extra hardware needed
CM15A can send and receive RF! No extra hardware needed
CM15A controls Pan N Tilt bases (ninjas) no extra hardware needed
CM15A can control Commander II and VCR Commander (not just A1 on/off commands) no extra Hardware needed

That is exactly what I was looking for. Not "It just won't work."
I did download AH, and I remarked that it's interface, though better than most, is still horrendous.
The reason I 'brushed them off' is because the answers were either irrelevant or just non-problem-solving.
I now know _exactly why_ it has not been designed to be backward compatible - and I thank Tuicemen for that answer. Before this, it was my understanding that the CM15A was basically a CM11A Spoofed up with a Transceiver module 'attached'. Now I know that this is untrue.

Oh, and yes, I do 'march to [my] own drummer'... I am a drummer.  ;-)

[Dan Lawrence]

So, are you going to get AHP 3.204 and the CM15A USB interface or keep fooling around with the old AHP you downloaded?

[Walt2]

Hehe, the funny thing is that you keep saying the CM11A is incapable of doing the things the CM15A does. ...  And about the Windows Vista analogy, Sure, it could run on older hardware.

OK, then, is you are so sure, please install Windows Vista on a Radio Shack TRS-80 or even an Apple ][ (or choice which), and post back here just how successful you have been.

Hopefully, after you have a "go" with that, you will have a better appreciation of what we are trying to explain about just how different the CM11a is from the CM15a.

[Ox40]

Hopefully, after you have a "go" with that, you will have a better appreciation of what we are trying to explain about just how different the CM11a is from the CM15a.

I would still argue that the CM11A <-> CM15A is more comparable to a Windows 2000 computer and a Windows Vista computer.

But yeah, I will deal with my CM11A + AH for now, until I find the need for the CM15A.

Thanks for the help!

[Dan Lawrence]

My final comment:  PC technology is always changing.  Just look at printers. Printers used to be always printer port connected, now it getting hard to find one, almost every printer today is either USB or ethernet connected, even cheap ink jet ones.  Even in the CM11 days, PC's were built with only 25-pin ports, so your CM11 cable had to have a converter plug to connect the 9-pin cable to it.

If you have a X10 system with no cameras, AHP and the CM15 do the same job.  When I got AHP and the CM15A, I was able to create a keypress macro that turns off all lights on three housecodes with a single keypress of A5 OFF.

If you want to keep using AH and the CM11A, it's your choice.