AdrianMealing
-
Posts
2,221 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
24
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by AdrianMealing
-
-
Ha ha are they having a laugh?
Clearly, collection only as well
-
Hi Adrian,
originally the com-ip with the app didn't work on earlier panels without it programmed as not used and the settings of the ip module changed.
This wouldnt allow you to program the the arc to send the messages out over ip and use the app?
Or has this been addressed with App using Wintex protocol now rather than Simple protocol?
No still the same protocol as far as I am aware, pretty sure its works with any panel that natively supports the ComIP which i think was version 7, it may have been earlier
-
Montex, I never thought of that. More like setting up your own ARC, I wouldn't call that private reporting personally.
Interesting to hear about the push notifications, will this become the new IP speech dialler; time will tell.
Do you know if it will require new hardware yet?
No new hardware required, the rest covered by the other guys. Should work on older panels as well, that's part of the testing, the IP protocol has not changed since introduction so i think it will work on Premier panels back to V7, maybe earlier.
-
It doesn't currently do private reporting AFAIK.
It can do it through Montex, but its not the slickest solution by any means. We are currently testing internally a new version of the apps with push notification, should be available early next year.
-
My son has the galaxy tab, and he really rates it, previously he had an iPad. As for yourself make sure you have some paracetamol handy
-
i only have 1851 and expect it to not be ok, i dont know yet its too early. Ade knows more than me it hasnt really reached our comittee yet, it just been discussed
Pretty much what has been said, its been around for a few years, likely to be a few more years before we see anything.
Imo it doesnt
I would agree
-
Thanks, I know they had to be separate for 2004, not sure if there was any changes for 2010
The difference is they have to be dedicated, not allowed to do anything else
-
I am not complaining, I am explaining what happens. (on Premier panels, I might add!)
Either way the correct action is taken at the ARC, I see no issue.
Good, as long as we are happy, pins are still **** though
-
Yes you can, as long as the HU fob does not perform any other function, and the buttons are dedicated to HU.
-
Same here, I say this from experience.
To clarify.
Two Guard zones 007 and 008 (for example).
If 007 is triggered and goes active an intruder pin is fired.
Then if 008 is tampered a tamper pin is fired not a confirmed pin.
Then use proper signalling
, pins should be shot, surviving pins should be shot again, and then buried with the rest of the dinosaurs. If a tamper signal cannot contribute to a confirmed activation, what's the point of tampers? It's parts of the standards like this that are trying to educate the industry to stop using outdated nonsensical technology. -
I don't believe this is correct.
A tamper from another device will send a tamper after the first intruder, the ARC will see the two pins and respond as a confirmed.
Sorry i misunderstand what you are saying, what you have said should be confirmed, Alarm from device 1 tamper from device 2 = confirmed alarm.
What i have said is tamper from device 1 followed by alarm from device 1 or vice versa does not equal confirmed.
-
Something that I am not sure on, however, when PD6662 is turned on with a Premier, it automatically selects the option of 'No confirm for device tamper', which makes me think that no confirmed should be sent
Tamp no confirm is only for the same device, so if the device goes active, then a tamper from the same device will not cause a confirmed alarm, however a tamper from another device in the confirmation window will.
Just had a look through my notes.
It should as James said send a tamper now if set, not an unconfirmed. However, if another detector triggers in the confirmation window it will send a confirmed is how i intemperate it?
I'm going to try it on a RI tomorrow,
Depends on the order, if tamper first then yes send tamper, if activation first then tamper from a different device, = Alarm + confirmed
dunno, it shouldnt a tamper isnt a confirm event now
but adrian knows more on the regs in his head than me
Only from the same device
-
Not that I don't agree Adrian, I'd do the same but their argument is if they were at home they could make a meal for £2.50 but are forced to buy one for £7 as they are being forced away from home. Surprising how the offer of a couple of free pints gets volunteers to do those jobs far away.
Like i said packed lunch, if staff on the road get lunch then so should office staff, all very short sighted IMHO depending on staff numbers all that cash just comes of the bottom line, eventually something will have to give. Usually jobs.
-
Years ago and I do mean years ago we used to get luncheon vouchers. Do they still exsist ?
Yes they have a queens head printed on them and come in metal and paper formats
-
If working away we cover all meals and drinks otherwise no.
I assume you mean away as in not coming home that day? Even so makes no difference, i cannot see why there is an entitlement, my place of work is my home, if i go to the office i pay for my own lunch, as does everybody else who goes to the office from their home, even though their main place of work is the office.
If you don't want to have to buy lunch then take a packed lunch, that's what i did for years. And before anybody says it, if it's hot get a cool bag, if it's cold take a flask with hot soup.
-
Chaps.
Tiswas. the ultimate show.
-
In fairness Adrian, what else can Risco say with regards to up time of their cloud service.
Non of them can guarantee 100%. Too many variables outside their control, but which they'll still be perceived responsible for.
Not even in house I.T. Dept's, yours included, promise 100%. And they are in control.
Firmware is also in your full control, recent history is hardly a ringing endorsement that gives bragging rights over others.
I cannot disagree with that, the problem is the perception of those who do not understand the implications of these systems, don't read the small print, then sell a service which has no guarantees. The end users perception, and sometimes installers perception from the marketing by the manufacturer is that it will work all of the time. Some truth around the limitations would i am sure go a long way to managing these expectations
-
We have a bite.
That's all your getting
-
A bit like firmware then.
But we don't say tough we fix things
BitchTeehee
-
does adjusting that time affect battery life much?
It will, i read the T&C's for the cloud, it basically says if it does not work tough. Kinda of what I expected.
-
is it a firmware issue ?
Lol
-
Report them to NSI, they should make them take it down, plain wrong
-
Don't torture yourself
I had forgotten it, now you have reminded me again
-
The Burnley massive expands
I now have a horrible image of Matt in a gold tracksuit, beany cap and sunglasses
, pins should be shot, surviving pins should be shot again, and then buried with the rest of the dinosaurs. If a tamper signal cannot contribute to a confirmed activation, what's the point of tampers? It's parts of the standards like this that are trying to educate the industry to stop using outdated nonsensical technology.
Bitch
Ebay Skip Fodder Bargain Of The Week!
in Just Joking
Posted
He's having a laugh with the pricing of just about everything he sells.