Subject: From: Date:

RE: [ECS] Security-IFC Michael David Sun, 9 Aug 1998 21:18:23 -0400

---

 - Mark!

ECS has been our security system since day one with no problems. For the
first 4 years or so, it was all done with hardwired door contacts, motion
detectors (which also double for triggering the lights when we walk into a
room), two keypads, 12 smoke detectors, an internal siren, and an external
siren.  It has all worked flawlessly from the beginning (of course, the
system is on a big UPS).

A couple of years ago, I added sec-ifc-a for wireless sensors which I use in
all those places hard to get by wire.  I also have a transmitter in the car,
so ECS can announce when one of us has come home.  As I mentioned in my last
email, the dog really appreciates this advance warning.  :)

Anyway, the best thing about ECS being the security system is programming
flexibility, especially for complex security logic.  It also makes it easy
for the quick change for the day's exceptions (e.g. It's a hot day, you want
the dog to have the freedom to go down into the basement, so you need to
disable those motion detectors)

All in all, I see no advantage to a separate wired system.

Cheers!

Michael David
michael@michaeldavid.com


-----Original Message-----
From:	Mark Gilmore [mailto:markgilmore@cococo.net]
Sent:	Sunday, August 09, 1998 9:03 PM
To:	ecs-list@vancouver.ml.org
Subject:	Re: [ECS] Security-IFC

Dan, If you want hardwired security, I would definitely
suggest the use of a simple digital-input card(s) over
the Vision-Plus (which is primarly a wireless system).
Those by Alpha products (Digital-Input-A) are probably
as good as any and they are cheap.
Note that under this scenario, ECS IS the security-system
(versus that in which ECS interfaces to a stand-alone
system).
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OUT THERE ?


Dan Dubay wrote:
>
> Hello Mark,
>
> I would like to install a hardwired security system that communicates
> with ECS.  Sct-a does not have hardwired control stations.  Yes I would
> like more than 6 hardwired inputs but I could make due with this.  I
> think that taking a chance with sct-b is my best option?  Even if I had
> to pay you for some debugging it would probably be worth it.  Do you
> have any other suggestions?  Let me know what the panel costs and two
> control interfaces.
>
> Thanks
>
> Dan Dubay
>
> Mark Gilmore wrote:
> >
> > Yes, But I don't know why you would want it, esp. considering
> > that it may not work with ECSW. You can do everything you
> > want with sct-a and a digital-input card(s). Note that sct-b
> > only has 6 hardwired inputs.
> >
> > Daniel Dubay wrote:
> > >
> > > Mark,  I primarily would like a stand alone hardwired security system
> > > that will talk to ECSW.  I will still use wireless transmitters for
> > > autos.  If wireless security-Interface-b will not communicate with my
> > > current sensors then I will continue to use security interface-a.  I
> > > will send you the test results soon.  Can you sell me security
> > > interface-b?
> > >
> > > Thanks  Dan Dubay
> > >
> > > Mark Gilmore wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dan, from that last dump, it appears that you are running an
> > > > old copy of ECSW.EXE, as it contains no additional trace code.
> > > >
> > > > I have fixed the false "OPERATIONAL" problem.
> > > >
> > > > SCT-B & SCT-A are mutually exclusive, and do not work
> > > > together - please see applicable chapters in ECS.DOC.
> > > > --
> > > > Mark Gilmore
> > > > Omnipotence
> > > > http://members.a2zsol.com/omnipotence.html
> >
> > --
> > Mark Gilmore
> > Omnipotence
> > http://members.a2zsol.com/omnipotence.html

--
Mark Gilmore
Omnipotence
http://members.a2zsol.com/omnipotence.html

---