Re: [mh] The Post Insteon World

I moved away from X10 several years ago to LightwaveRF, but have now 
abandoned this too for WIfi based devices using Tasmota.

Tasmota is open source software for the ESP8266 chips used in most of 
the wifi based switches and sensors.  There is a very active community 
with many videos on how to reflash  devices with Tasmota.  The MH 
Tasmota bridge works very reliably, but best of all, Tasmota devices run 
a web server so you can easily test if the device is in the state you 
think it should be.  It also supports MQTT which has an excellent 
heartbeat mechanism, so you can very quickly find if a device goes 
offline.  The MH-MQTT interface works well, but you do have to have a 
machine running an MQTT broker e.g. Mosquitto (this runs fine on a PI 
even if its also running MH).

I also have some Sonoff battery based devices (PIR, temp and humidity) 
these use an RF interface to the Sonoff-Tasmota Gateway that translates 
this to Wifi and MQTT which you can then use with MH.

Regards
Giles


On 15/05/2022 17:17, Bruce Schaeffer wrote:
> I'm looking for suggestions on how to move forward in a "post Insteon" 
> world.
>
> My own environment is a Raspberry Pi connected to a PowerLinc 2413U 
> running Misterhouse. The end devices are a mix of Insteon with X10 
> controllers. I "translate" X10 signals to Insteon commands within MH.
>
> The PLM and Raspberry PI are less than a year old. I had plans to 
> purchase a backup PLM, but it didn't happen. I see now it's no longer 
> an option.
>
> I would like to migrate from Insteon (and maybe X10) to something that 
> is more modern; keeping MH on the Pi as the main "server".  My MH 
> programming has more than 20 years of effort.
>
> I have read that MH is able to utilize technologies other than X10 and 
> Insteon.
>
> What direction are you folks leaning towards that is able to be 
> controlled with MH and is still in business?
>
> Please include hardware requirements for each suggested protocol so I 
> can begin working on a budget.  If your suggestion is also able to run 
> Insteon devices, all the better. I don't expect that to be the case 
> since the Insteon protocol was proprietary.
>
> The optimum situation would be for me to first purchase whatever 
> controller is needed for the new protocol (the device that would 
> eventually replace the Insteon PLM), get it talking to MH. I'd like to 
> think that MH would be able to talk to both PLMs.  Then I'd start 
> purchasing end devices that would replace my existing Insteon end devices.
>
> Your suggestions would be very welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Bruce
>
>
> ________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/misterhouse-users
>

________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from this list, go to: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/misterhouse-users