james.wilson

No not at all I use home assistant. It's free but I pay for it. If no one pays it fails to exist. Like cloud alarm platforms

Opps

I'd prefer a cable for all options. I don't see the advantage of CAT6 for cctv over CAT5. I'd also suggest that even if cctv per channel needs more that 1gbs that CAT5 will be 10gig. Copper wins imo over short distances over fibre. I reakon that's true for my lifetime

Not directly with anything decent. I'd seperate the issues. Diy you could use texecom with it's issues that would sort your detection. Then WiFi bridge your cctv

As anove

I'd go with a diy option we wouldn't but in your case you want the support if your emailing them already

None. The uneducated will say it makes a difference it won't. If you plan on breaking gigabit per channel I'd like to know how

al-yeti has trade status however alarrm inputs to use in the logic of the d/n/xvr and an output.

nothing anygood. Id use a wireless bridge between the buildings

Not in the panel programming. You would need to add a pulse relay or use a sounder with 2 different inputs

Why has noone thought of that before. So simple

Nvm = non volatile memory. If its forgetting stuff it's probably unreliable

I'm afraid it's a site rule. I have no idea without you going through vetting what you or others would do with the information. Other sites may but we are a group of security professionals doing the right thing not just looking for clicks etc. You may do better asking a specific question

As per site rules no engineers manuals on public side if trade see of you meet the req for trade status

yeah you could use links for this and progam the circuts as PA

AI has guessed that fingerprints may not be unique Are we going to have a short term thing of claiming one hypothesis until professor AI disproves it. or are loads on convictions unsafe Our fingerprints may not be unique, claims AI - BBC News

What galaxy is it. You need to locate rio 102 I'd assume it's a damaged smart rio. Maybe in the panel if its an older galaxy

I think your gonna have to remove all probable issues. Split the loop. See if it happens next time. And where. The lads here have huge experience and highly talented but you have a problem. Narrow it down a bit and keep doing that. Even Mr H xtral ball can't help you. Normal stuff, keep slimming it down then you will probably be pissed of when you see what it is

Not meant to be is a. Redirect your fireguard comment to admin. I have various models for sale some are chocolate but I prefer my barely used, one good owner never raced or rallied water ones.

Have finally looked into writing for android. I use windows tablets for us and I released a unique code generator for windows some time ago. Wondered if there was any demand for this here? Im thinking it will be like the old windows mobile techmaster app adding features as requested etc. Let me know James [update] Now released and available in the play store for testing. see the trade area post for more info. To add this software is designed for alarm companies to have unique codes per site, it will not generate an engineer code for an existing system that is not programmed using this app. qny enhancements features etc let me know.

So if mine goes Mr H organised it Couldn't insure it where im from. Must be racist thing

Rs4s etc were normally nicked to do a job with, is joyriding back?

It's like the old gti gsi days. They are getting harder to insure. My s4 isn't cheap to unsure

To add some detectors have a rep for not detecting when inactive for days but not all of them ie napco champs from years ago but only 1 and would be found on the service etc

Going back to the original point if it hkc signalling and as you claim hkc servers were down the panel would of retried. I've tested loss of comms etc and it does go through on WiFi reconnection. If your talking about detector sensitivity you now think it's a detector issue. I personally use hkc at home as well as work etc I've never had a failure to detect, failure to alarm or failure to report. Probably need to add a lot more info else it looks like your blaming kit with no evidence of it being at fault. Arc logs would be a good start then panel logs. Nothing identifiable. Comms type etc etc. As it is i can only summise that detector areas were not used. For all detectors to not detect then it wasn't armed