control system with NO tp?
jisaac Posts: 34
Has anyone ever encountered a client that wanted an automation system but did not see the value of or insisted on not using a TP, rather a PC/laptop to interface with their home?
If so what did you do? What was the end result?
If so what did you do? What was the end result?
i HAVE DONE many systems that are only controlled by web interfaces. Specifically tp3 web control.
It works very well and is very reliable. I even figured out a way to make a dev of multiple panels, so you could have like 8 of the same web panel open and all the feedback updates correctly.
Be mindful you can only have a couple of instances of the browser running at any one time though. (4 max if I remember correctly..and requires you to mod the html files for it work with multiple instances)
I have found G3 web control to be sufficiently flaky that I try to avoid it where I can, though it is a good solution when you can get it to work.
It's just not reliable when it should be, and you can never ever depend on it (imo)
I would rather have a customer invest in a wired touchpanel of some sort for control...
If only 802.11 could go further than 10 feet!
The main issues we see with G3 web control are related to the java platform the PC is running - most sites are way past 1.4.x these days.
Recently one client had exactly this issue, so they dedicated a machine with the low rev of Java and then users access the NI via this machine through VNC. No other machine needed the lower rev of Java.
Worked ok - little bit slow though.
sure, the distance is a factor, but only for administrative purposes. Give the customer a real TP and a web interface to control his home from his vacation location
If you give them a real TP, you don't need a web interface . Just provide them with a VNC client and forward a port to the panel. Do make sure you password protect it though, I've had hackers find a customer's panel with VNC and play around turning music on and off.
You could have the benefits of VNC, Graphics, ect without the need for an actual TP.
You could also use this to act as a master panel that could connect to any other G4 panel on the network. Buy using G4 computer control you can control one TP from another TP without any additional programming. Try it, it really works!
[silly] Was a greatly overused and abused video effect from the broadcasters in the seventies...let's fire up some Pink Floyd and get on with the AMX show....now where's that scooby?!! [/silly]
G4 web control pages are served from the G4 device itself, not the NI webserver.
At one time I had several G4 panels set up for different projects, but just for the
heck of it, I experimented a little with the G4 computer control.
I found that if you have a project with identical G4 touch panels, you could
ultimately only have to load the primary programming into one panel. All the other panels
would only have a G4cc window linking them to the first unit.
I suppose this would only be an advantage if you had many identical panels
that required frequent updates.
As with many others, I am anxiously awaiting the day when AMX develops
some type (but definitely not browser based) of PC application that emulates G4 functionality without a physical touch panel needed.
then you would also see the day that AMX is going to charge you for that PC application... I would rather have them keep on doing it the way they do now, and keep it free
if they also add (good) pocketpc support, count me in too, but for a WebApplet alone, i'm not paying...
We have a software development team that specialise in writing pocket pc apps. We are currently developing a beta version for running G3 and G4 webcontrol. PM with any q's
Also, the G4 web instances must have the ability to handle multiple users, and even more importantly, must have the external buttons available. Otherwise it's a waste of time.
Perhaps AMX development can produce a web based version of panel preview as at least a starting place...
I would be quite happy for something more scaled down. A G3 web control that actually worked, reliably, would be fine. I am leaning more towards the widget route myself, but the tools to customize and produce them quickly don't exist yet, so it's not completely practical yet.
File optimization these days is awesome. These *often* huge files can easily be rastered down by a program to manageable/web sized files...
Like I said, panel preview is basically EXACTLY what we need, even has external buttons (when you find them!) so surely this is a good starting point to now enable panel preview to reach your netlinx code...
However I gotta agree with Snr Bolton.. it would be a fabulous tool whereby we were able to preview a panel that interfaces with the master. Integrate the thing into Studio..
There's a decision AMX had to make here, whether they thought it through or not. Lose the profit generated by the sale of a touch panel, (and miss out on all the support issues you mentioned) or potentially lose the sale of the WHOLE SYSTEM to the competitor that has more flexible options.
I don't think Cre$tron has suffered any when they move system hardware out the door that happens to not include a physical touch panel.
that's because Cre$tron is asking money for it's the use of PDA based webcontrol. Control using a browser is free tho
But yes, a PDA executable (not web) license costs a few $$$.