HVACR Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Just a dumb question. Why is LOR using cat5 cables and using old school tech for communications format? Why not use WIFI and internet based communications? Just saying..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobschm Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Hmmm. My cat5 has never crashed out or lost connection. Wifi? Not so much. Just saying. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOR Staff Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Just a dumb question. Why is LOR using cat5 cables and using old school tech for communications format? Why not use WIFI and internet based communications? Just saying..... 1 - Way back when all of this started, Ethernet (which is what you meant to say, not IP or Internet, as you want to talk about the transport medium not the protocol that runs on it) communications was expensive. RS485 was a much cheaper solution that also took care of several inherent problems with Ethernet. The first problem being resilience to signal noise. RS485 is MUCH more suitable for noisy electrical environments - and what could be more noisy than thousands of bulb filaments vibrating on and off ? Secondly is distance. RS485 is good for distances up to 4000'. Ethernet is good only for about 300'. Third was cost. RS485 transceivers at the time were MUCH cheaper than Ethernet, and could run on cheap phone wire (vs expensive CAT-whatever cables) 2 - We have supported wireless RS485 for many moons as well. Our wireless bridges (called ELLs) do so with ease. 3 - RS485 is still in WIDE use. DMX and other industrial control devices use RS485. 4 - We actually DO support IP communications, and have for years. That is called E1.31, and is DMX over Ethernet. Just saying.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Besides, can you imagine every day users trying to deal with routing protocols and the like? Imagine the home user who decides to connect their IP enabled controller to their home network. Unless you know what you're doing (or versed in E1.31) the IP addressing would be a nightmare. I can only imagine the support requests coming in from people who decided to connect their IP enabled devices to their home internet router, and wonder why things aren't work as expected. Sure, it can be done, but it's not something that would be intuitive to most people. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mega Arch Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 For most people like me, you need to somewhat keep it K.I.S.S. If not, I'd probably still have a Mega Static display. Thanks LOR. Just saying... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HVACR Posted April 22, 2015 Author Share Posted April 22, 2015 Point taken Don. So stability and cost, but mainly stability and reliability of the connection. Bought two sets of ELL's at the spring sale seemed easier that running cable from house to house. Still learning about this LOR. Thanks for the information. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robongar Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 If it ain't broke,.................... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobschm Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 And if you ain't broke...buy more lights! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryDrumAZ Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 I can only imagine the support requests coming in from people who decided to connect their IP enabled devices to their home internet router, and wonder why things aren't work as expected. Sure, it can be done, but it's not something that would be intuitive to most people. The reason why you use a dedicated network for all E1.31. My home network and WIFI is crowded enough without flooding it with useless lighting commands.Point taken Don. So stability and cost, but mainly stability and reliability of the connection. Bought two sets of ELL's at the spring sale seemed easier that running cable from house to house. Still learning about this LOR. Thanks for the information. What part OK are you from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 The reason why you use a dedicated network for all E1.31. My home network and WIFI is crowded enough without flooding it with useless lighting commands. Yep. You know how to do that, and I know how to do that. Can you imagine explaining it to someone who may not be as technical as us? No matter how simple it is to us, it'd be a nightmare to others. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryDrumAZ Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Very true Don. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HVACR Posted April 23, 2015 Author Share Posted April 23, 2015 Where am I from? Home of the Southwestern Oklahoma State Bulldogs! Go Bulldogs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgrant Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 I suggested this a couple of years ago when I first got into LOR. I was "slammed" for the lack of a better term about imagine someone hacking our displays, complexity issues and all sorts of things. Truly, it would be "faster" and as mentioned already, E1.31 already does this. DevMike is correct that given the correct conditions, RS485 can go far distances and they were wise to use TCPIP cabling instead of formal RS485 wiring therefore it kept the costs down for us. The average user will never exceed the 64 devices on a single RS485 buss although that many would indeed slow it down. Things evolve as do our lights! Look at how many people are switching to RGB and in such a short time, therefore the command protocols and hardware/software changes evolve too. LOR is stuck with evolving to keep up with demand and competitors plus keep up with the types of lights and user requirements we place upon them. Anyway, TCPIP would be faster. Making hardware changes to accommodate TCPIP into the AC controller design would be something LOR would have to look at but they already have a proven method of communication built in now, so increasing the cost of a controller to allow for these changes...the question comes down to if us users are willing to pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcroc Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 Thought ethernet was good for up to 300 meters? I have lines on my home network that run well over 300 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k6ccc Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 Officially the spec is 100 meters - which is just over 300 feet. And yes, it is commonly exceeded, and in most cases you can get away with it. With the faster speeds becoming far more common, it is harder to exceed it and get away with it. Back in the 10Base-T days you could get away with some really crappy wiring and it would still work. At 100Base-T it is far pickier. For example I ran 10Base-T over 25 pair telephone cable that also had plain old telephone, PBX phone, ISDN, and broadcast audio all in the same cable with no problems at all. 100Base-T did not like that very well. And as Gigabit (1,000Base-T) is becoming fairly common, proper cabling is far more the requirement. One advantage of LAN traffic however is that if the run is quite far, stick a repeating device (generally a hub or switch) every 100 meters and you are good to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now