Adagio and Crestron's iPhone application

While I had played with the Crestron Mobile iPhone application when it first came out, it wasn't that interesting - limited functions + scope meant it was going to take a lot of work to focus the results and make something useful.

Yesterday, the "real" Crestron Mobile application hit the AppStore.  It took all of 10 (1 minute to add, 9 to wait) minutes to add the iPhone to my Adagio AMS room and it was up and running...

It's a little slow and still lacks a few items but it's massively quicker than the efforts I've gone through on other platforms and it works (you'd think the large companies would figure that out but the Lutron iPhone app is misery.) 

Great job.  Now I'm going to build a page just for all the things we worry about 1 minute after leaving the house

Alarm armed?

Lights off?

Garage door closed?

Basement lights/AC off?

Lawn irrigation system on or off?

Crestrons' Prodigy system vs. Control4

Prodigy is a response to Control4 but the two companies approach control very differently.  We are a dealer for both lines, although we do substantially more work with Crestron.

Control4 is, at the core, a fixed configuration system with a fixed user experience that modules plug into.  Crestron has clear separation of hardware and software with many different software tools. Control4 has a strong bias towards Zigbee communication protocol, Crestron has a multi-protocol environment.  This eases Control4 integration of 3rd party products while enabling Crestron to have a massively larger group of tightly integrated 3rd party products.

SOFTWARE TOOLS

For users, the difference is substantial.  In Control4, audio/video devices, lights, audio zones can be added and modified very quickly.  The program for the control system isn't changing - just the configuration (for geeks - think stored procedures in SQL vs. a compiled + linked program.)  The user model is fixed, however.  How many clicks to turn on TV in Control4? 5 or 6 usually. Prodigy has 3 levels of programming available.  Composer provides the same quick configuration model as Control4. There are plus and minuses to the user experience - Control4 is TV focused, Crestron is remote control focused. Composer produces files editable in another tool called System Builder.  System Builder is a rich point/click authoring tool that produces full programs. Any arbitrary logic can be built and the user experience can be changed completely.  It produces SIMPL programs - the most powerful and flexible programming tool around.  Or one can program the Prodigy system in SIMPL.  Using SIMPL, one can make Prodigy part of any larger Crestron system or program the hardware in any way you want. (I took an advanced environmental control program I wrote that does air monitoring and controls fans + ducts and brought it over to the Prodigy environment - there were no limitations at all.)

WHOLE HOUSE AUDIO

The iPod dock on the Prodigy side is much stronger.  Everyone complains about the Control4 iPod dock.  The Control4 system can directly play back media files on a PC without any added cost.  The per zone costs are similar expect for the smallest systems.  Prodigy has programming support to manage a receiver zone 2 output out of the box.  It's also fairly straightforward to merge distributed audio zones into a system with a surround zone.  Control4 is a bit clumsy in managing this - usually the zones are out of sync without a bunch of button presses.  Personally, I really like the way Crestron has enabled use of the reciever functions in a really rich way. Control4 just uses the reciever as a switcher, moving two-way AM/FM/XM control to their own tuners.  Crestron has a really nice interface for the reciever itself.

AUTOMATION

Most "cool" automation functions are easier to implement in Control4 because of the richness of the partner network.  I think CardAccess, a 3rd party developer very close to Control4, fills a very cool space that doesn't have a comparable partner in the Crestron developer community.  Crestron needs to enable Sequel Technologies or ELK inside of Prodigy Composer to have some of the same features. Although Card Access being Zigbee based is still a huge advantage.

EXPANSION

Control4 is easier and lower cost, Crestron is substantially richer.  Control4's treatment of legacy products worries me - I have not been able to bring the older customers hardware into the new set of features (1.6/1.7 and I presume 2.0 doesn't run on the 1st gen hardware.) This is quite a bit different than dealing with old Crestron gear.

COST

System cost will not be substantially driven by a Prodigy vs. Control4 choice or even a Crestron vs. Control4 choice.  Does your integrator use ultra cheap flat panel mounts or something like this. Those two mounts have a 30X cost difference.  

MAKING THE DECISION

I think Prodigy is incredible.  But for an experienced Crestron system designer, it's sort of like a Porsche 911 that only can drive in a 20 mile radius.  Would you like the 911 experience for 30% of the cost of a full one? Especially if you could upgrade it? Or would you rather own a Corolla that can go on vacation? I remain envious of the Zigbee 3rd party integrations on the Control4 side but I don't think Crestron is going to be left out of the game.   I'm not that fond of either the Control4 nor the Prodigy hand-held remote currently shipping.  If I had any whole house audio, even just reciever based with 2nd zone speakers, Prodigy would be the choice.  If I had extensive automation desires in a low-end system, Control4 wins out (did I mention I wish CardAccess made products for Crestron?) .  For a simple, press a button, turn on the TV and control the Tivo, I just might keep putting in Universal Remote MX-980's for a few more months. When the PLX3 ships, Universal Remote will be toast around here....

Update on Friday, June 24, 2011 at 10:27AM by Aaron Rosenbaum

This post is very popular - people find it from google searches almost 100 times per day.

I think it's outdated.  The question today isn't so much C4 vs. Crestron but centralized vs. De-centralized.  I'm still pro Crestron but today.  I think Crestrons iPad solution is superior as are their envirormental controls.  However, decrentralized solutions, with Crestron or C4 still involved, are the real solution for distributed control.  If it's multi-system automation - like AV system integration - you still need an integration platform but many stand-alone products work just fine without a central controller now.

Crestron Prodigy - Breakthrough or me too?

Crestron Prodigy  is the answer to 2 questions: How do we deploy multifunction remotes with feedback into large hospitality projects and how do we keep more dealers from starting mid-market integration practices focused on Control4 product.

The product approach is quite different.  The Prodigy product is massively stronger in some areas but way weaker in others.  The strength of the driver model, the focus on the reciever as a multi-zone switcher in the home along with the leverage of better underlying product (Infinet primarily) is a real strength.  Control4 has a reasonable retro-fit whole house music story that isn't part of the Crestron message at all.  Control4 also has interoperation between controllers that neither Prodigy nor regular crestron has (think automatic ISC's.)

All the same, C4 is toast.  This isn't the first salvo, this is the middle salvo of a broad based product shift towards products that integrate presumed operation model, specific user interfaces and form factor and pricing/packaging aimed at that solution.  I've said it before and I'll say it again - single market tech manufacturers are at a massive disadvantage to those who sell to broad markets.  Want to be a channel master (AVAD)? Fine, keep to a single market.  Have a massively broad market? Ok, that'll work (which I think C4 thinks automation is...it's not).  No, selling the same technology to lots + lots + lots of different markets is what will let Crestron be the first company in this space to break $1B/yr.

It started with the Adagio line.  Then the MPS controllers.  The MPC-10 is directly price competitive with the Extron MLC-104-IP.  The IPAC-GL1 from Crestron does everything a Lutron LCP128  or a Homeworks P4 does and more.

 Unlike any of these companies, however, Crestron is building off a single technology delivery platform - these products are VERY similar to one another. Well, they are the same on the back-end controller side.  The UI side is just all over the place....Why not a thermostat and a single gang controller that work like an APAD?  Where is my TPS-3X? The TPMC is nice and all but the TPS-6X is so nice...while were at it, how about a TPS-6X feature set in a form factor like an MX-980? Got me....

Where does it leave the dealer? I'm not going to go out all of a sudden and sell a deal for 100 classrooms.  But having the strongest product and the strongest vendor helps close deals.  And having strong partner products really helps and this product approach lets partners continue to treat a Crestron partnership as a required no-brainer....

Why Tivo should buy Vudu

Vudu has closed down their hw business and stated they would like to be a platform deployed to multiple customers.  OEM'ng your engine is a typical last ditch effort to preserve the worth of the IP - it allows you to call on all your potential acquirers in a straightforward manner.

I believe it would be a mistake and is unviable.  There just aren't the partners out there.

A good partner would be someone who could operate the store and hw and profit from the synergy.  They would have to have a compatible platform, have their engineering team in the bay area and have the possibility of having the movie distribution contracts portable.  It would also help if they weren't squeemish about porn as I bet that is a nice growth area for Vudu.

The scraps of the WebTV team are still down in Mt. View as MSFT but code isn't portable, contracts probably wouldn't stick.

Cisco could buy them for code + team but I don't think the brand + back-end service would be worth anything to them.

Real might be an interesting acquirer but I'm not sure they have the bucks to even support integration and relaunch.

Roku is a possibility but it doesn't enhance the utility play - more of an about face for the netflix strategy.

Dish's Sling group is in Foster City.  The video distribution patents coupled with the recent cablevision DVR case provide a really interesting play for Dish.  

I like Tivo.  While it puts them in competition with some of their partners, it also provides a platform.  Wouldn't a peer-to-peer distribution system be much cheaper for Netflix than streaming?  We'll see - I hope it doesn't all just die....

Energy Savings or spinning wheels?

I hear constant chatter from insiders and prospects about "green".  I think most of what I hear just doesn't make sense....

- Microzoning HVAC is a comfort feature, not an energy saver.   It's useful for evening out temperatures using varying degrees of energy but I haven't seen that approach actually save money.

- Lighting controls can be an energy saver but not nearly as much as just doing flourescents with light harvesting/metering.  If one is going to have lots of lights (which is very pleasant and one of the great luxuries of an automated home) then lighting controls are needed to tune the system but it's not an energy saver - more like having a surround sound reciever to balance all the speakers...

- Automation does not reduce laundry, cooking or food cooling power consumption.

- I haven't seen anything really compelling that shows that metering really effects behaviour in high-end homes.  I get variable rates for AC with a thermostat tied to the electic companies system.  I also get school + office displays to help create group support for HVAC + Lighting reduction efforts.  

That said, there are some real things that work:

- Active light harvesting with in-room meters with scenes designed to take the active light into account.  This can really help.

- Scenes based on motion detector time-outs.  I have this in my house.  Hallway lights on for 2 minutes, garage lights on for 10.  It can be annoying but it cuts energy.

- Class-D amplifiers.  All things be equal, AB amps sound better.  But they aren't equal.  Cool running D class amplifiers can be placed closer to the speaker which increases sound quality and decreases power consumption.

- Projectors.  Projectors use so much less energy than big flat panels.  Rear projection can be used when a really bright screen is needed.  

- Variable intensity flat panels.  A properly calibrated plasma is way dimmer than a typical mid-level LCD panel.  Most actually use less energy. The new LCD's with variable intensity LED's (Samsung 8000 series, for instance) also use less energy.

- LED + Flourescent lighting.  Massive savings vs. incandescent.  The LED MR-16 replacements I've seen are running at 20% the consumption of the Halogens w/ the same light output!

- Solar Panels.  The house is in a sunny area, the roof is available, why not?  It's not cost effective...I wish our jobs recovery program focused around Solar....Take sand, add high-tech assembly lines, add lots of field labor = reduction in oil demand...

The ultimate in energy savings? Smaller homes and tighter spaces.  I have been in EXTREMELY luxurious 8000 sq. ft homes that are nicer than any 20K home I've been in.  I've seen recent plans for 3 different homes sub 4K ft that are being built by owners that could build anything.