Crestron vs Savant, or how expensive home automation systems differ from cheap ones
The market for home automation systems for a person who is not “cooking” in it all the time is strange. It seems that similar solutions may differ in price by 10 or more times. I'd like to understand where the deception is. Cheap systems do not work, or on the expensive we want three prices?
The funny thing is that there is no cheating, there is a difference in functions. And more specifically, in the details.
The market for low-cost systems is mainly targeted at the DIY (do it yourself) segment. In these systems, having passed through no complicated independent learning, the future owner of the automated system adjusts it himself. And he gets it most often. In the framework that the system allows. A person gets the result, he can use the configured automation system (turn the lights on and off, control the stop valves on the water pipe, listen to music and watch movies). Profit!
And then the details begin.
In order to turn on the light or (oh, a miracle!) Change the color of the backlight, you need to run one program on your smartphone.
To turn on the TV and watch it on the series from a network player - another program.
Access to video surveillance cameras is provided by a third program, etc.
Running a scenario in which multiple systems would be involved is often not possible. Systems about each other "do not know and do not want to know."
In addition, it suddenly turns out that the rest of the home are not in such a hurry to use this automation. For some reason, they strive to turn on the TV with a TV remote control and control the light using a wall switch.
Details translated the DIY system, rather, into a kind of owner’s hobby than into something useful for others. If that was the goal, it is achieved. If you wanted a different level, the choice of a platform for automation, and the budget for it was wrong.
Expensive systems do not assume installation by their owner. This should be done by a certified installer. The systems are quite complex in their internal logic, they require quite a long training of installers in several stages, only official dealers and installers have access to configuration programs and technical support services. And the setup programs themselves often cost a lot of money.
It would seem, why so limit the market? Why not give future owners the opportunity to customize everything themselves if they want it? The main problem - a potential sea of problems that arise from such a not very well tuned system. The system simply will not work normally. Claims will not be to the one who set up, but to the manufacturer.
“Your boxes do not work, and I paid a lot of money for them!”
')
The result is a market divided into 2 camps. One is DIY, the other is professional. The relationship between these camps is far from cloudless. The advantages of the first one are low cost solutions and the ability to “twist the glands”. The advantages of the second one are the possibility to assemble different subsystems of the house into a single whole, make them work together, achieve additional functions by using different scenarios (I came home, the access control system recognized me and removed the room from the guard, lighting turned on, background music turned on, etc. d.).
In which of the two camps to go, you choose yourself.
I will try to compare the two professional-type management systems with which I have to work.
Both systems came to us from the US market, both belong to the older segment, both work both in the home automation market and in commercial projects, both allow us to combine the most diverse subsystems of life support and entertainment, having a single design, the logic of which is customized to the needs of the customer .
Further differences begin.
Crestron Electronics was founded more than 40 years ago, it employs about 3 thousand. a person, only an engineering staff engaged in equipment - more than 350 people. The list of manufactured "iron" contains several hundred names of only the main points.
Development Platform - Windows
Savant Systems was founded in 2005. The list of equipment produced at times (if not ten times) is less.
Development Platform - Mac OSX.
At the same time, Savant, according to the results of a 2012 survey for the US market conducted by the Inside Track agency, ranked first in terms of customer loyalty to its customers among AV and installation brands. In 2011 she was in 3rd place. An interesting trend.
In Russia, Crestron has long occupied the niche of expensive, high-quality installations in both the home and corporate segments. A top class conference room or an expensive Crestron cottage is a frequent occurrence.
Savant in Russia is almost unknown. Attempts to “drag” the brand to Russia have been made before, but they only seriously started promoting it this year. At the same time, more than 25,000 installations in 34 countries have been made in the world.
But let's leave marketing to marketers, and try to look at these systems from the user’s side. And from the engineer.
A user of a complex automation system doesn’t care what is written on the boxes, which are buzzing and blinking lights in the river in the back room. He may not go there ever. The user deals with touch panels and remotes. And with the logic of the system.
And here it turns out that the consoles and panels can be the same - iPhone / iPad. They say that Crestron still has an Android platform, I don't know, I haven't tried it. Savant this year also hired Android programmers. Looks like moving in this direction.
There may be remote controls such as a TV remote. With mechanical buttons. Both have it too. Understand that one brand is written on some, and another on another.
And Crestron has its own touch panels. The cheapest at 5.5 inches costs 2280. Dollars. For my taste, the solution is rather corporate. To prevent iPad from being accidentally taken from the conference room :-)
User interfaces themselves
And here and there they can be any, which will succeed. Any design and logic that can be crammed into the system. Manufacturers offer several options for design patterns for different devices, third-party manufacturers make their options.
In practice, they often stop at one of the designs offered by the manufacturer. For they do not ask for money, but they look decent.
And here the differences begin. Crestron "drags along" the design ideology of past years. No, I know very well about SmartGraphics, Core3UI and other fashion trends that should offer users who are accustomed to the iPhone / Android a similar interface. And in some cases it even turns out. But the adventures are often more than the result. The programmers are so accurate.
Savant was originally based on the ideology of Apple interfaces. When the iPad was released, Savant completely ceased production of its touch panels. Only iPhone / iPod / iPad. And the logic there is from Apple. Someone likes it, some don't.
Interface output on the big screen
The idea that if we turn on the TV or the projector, then these devices can be controlled through the menu items displayed on the screen, in Savant it is realized “in full growth”. It is possible through the menu buttons, you can scroll through the channels or "covers" of movies, as the songs scroll through on the iPhone. Crestron doesn't have it. You can dodge much, give the touchpad interface to the screen, but there is not much point in this. This function is not incorporated into the system initially.
Otherwise, the difference in interfaces for the user is that at the level of individual parts. Who is more accustomed to what.
Price
Both systems are expensive. An installation of, say, 8 video zones and 12 audio zones (a large apartment or a nice cottage) for Crestron equipment costs $ 50,000.
The Savant price level is similar. But "one to one" these systems do not compare. Say, an entry-level controller (MC3) for Crestron is 30 percent cheaper than Savant, but the latter, in addition to managing the system itself, can generate up to 8 audio streams and work with the iTunes catalog. Make a source on 8 audio streams on Crestron - it will not be cheap at all.
Another thing is that Crestron has a hefty secondary market (ebay.com), where many components can be bought significantly cheaper. Modern models from Savant I have not met there.
On the hardware, the difference does not seem to me to be fundamental.
That is, each company produces its own set of “basic building blocks,” but what brand is indicated on them is not so important to the installer. Anyway, they will be screwed into the rivers or arranged in rooms. Ideology is similar. There is a "brain system" - the controller or controllers. There are all kinds of audio sources, audio-video switches and multichannel amplifiers. There is light and climate control. There are interfaces to other control systems such as BACNet or KNX.
We select the components manually or on the configurator, estimate which interface we will connect with, and where we need to pull it, unfold the cables and arrange the equipment.
The hardware is assembled.
Further programming begins.
It's all more interesting. There is a difference and it is global.
There is a feeling that Crestron focuses more on the hardware, while Savant focuses on software.
I deal with Crestron for several years, on Savant I have so far assembled only one system.
Crestron is complicated to set up. Really complicated. If graphical interfaces are made in a fairly familiar way (panels, buttons, sliders), then the SIMPL event language is something. As a person who started his programming work with the languages Pascal, Prolog, C, and not even to the night mentioned, BASIC, SIMPL was not easy for me. I understand that after completing several training courses, by bringing a couple of systems into a state of deep collapse, you can teach yourself to think with logical blocks — symbols, analog, digital and serial joints, and to cheerfully add the missing modules to “like C ++ — SIMPL +, but this must be done without stopping. At the same time there are almost no restrictions. What we want, we program. This is a plus (for a qualified programmer) and a minus - you can trick it up ...
Programming Savant to a large extent happens by dragging the individual components of the system to different rooms with a mouse, and then by connecting different interfaces to each other. And the task of triggering logic for different events. The system “guides” the programmer in the best possible way, prompts what to do, offers a well-made user interface. But it does not constrain it the way Control4 does, for example. You can change the buttons and logic. If you really have to.
It is clear that the same driver scripts sometimes have to be refined. And this is XML. But also for this task there is a special editor.
What causes questions is the choice of a home-use computer (Mac Mini) as the basis for the system controller (in Savant this is called the host). But on the one hand, possible failures are solved by installing a backup controller, and on the other hand, already this year a demo of the Linux Box was shown, which should take over the host functions. Yes, and it should cost much less.
And even in the current version of the host - Mac Mini, the system is actively put on yachts with the possibility of full control of this yacht through Savant. And there the price of a mistake is slightly more than an unlit lamp.
A definite plus Crestron - this system is well known. There is a huge base of completed installations, many trained, certified installers and programmers. The system is already "accustomed."
Savant in Russia is a new system. It will take not enough time for familiarization, "grinding in" to the system. It will take the development of standard installation kits, which are well understood how they work, and how to customize them. Not with all common systems Savant now interacts well.
So, to control the engineer (light, climate) often use components based on the KNX protocol. With light and curtains on KNX Savant can integrate, but with the climate is not very. They promise to fix it by summer, but for now the climate can be driven through BACNet or through CoolMaster gateways.
Judging by the court cases that are developing in the States between these companies, Crestron is “tensed up” from the appearance of such a “vigorous newcomer.” Let's see how things will be with us.
The funny thing is that there is no cheating, there is a difference in functions. And more specifically, in the details.
The market for low-cost systems is mainly targeted at the DIY (do it yourself) segment. In these systems, having passed through no complicated independent learning, the future owner of the automated system adjusts it himself. And he gets it most often. In the framework that the system allows. A person gets the result, he can use the configured automation system (turn the lights on and off, control the stop valves on the water pipe, listen to music and watch movies). Profit!
And then the details begin.
In order to turn on the light or (oh, a miracle!) Change the color of the backlight, you need to run one program on your smartphone.
To turn on the TV and watch it on the series from a network player - another program.
Access to video surveillance cameras is provided by a third program, etc.
Running a scenario in which multiple systems would be involved is often not possible. Systems about each other "do not know and do not want to know."
In addition, it suddenly turns out that the rest of the home are not in such a hurry to use this automation. For some reason, they strive to turn on the TV with a TV remote control and control the light using a wall switch.
Details translated the DIY system, rather, into a kind of owner’s hobby than into something useful for others. If that was the goal, it is achieved. If you wanted a different level, the choice of a platform for automation, and the budget for it was wrong.
Expensive systems do not assume installation by their owner. This should be done by a certified installer. The systems are quite complex in their internal logic, they require quite a long training of installers in several stages, only official dealers and installers have access to configuration programs and technical support services. And the setup programs themselves often cost a lot of money.
It would seem, why so limit the market? Why not give future owners the opportunity to customize everything themselves if they want it? The main problem - a potential sea of problems that arise from such a not very well tuned system. The system simply will not work normally. Claims will not be to the one who set up, but to the manufacturer.
“Your boxes do not work, and I paid a lot of money for them!”
')
The result is a market divided into 2 camps. One is DIY, the other is professional. The relationship between these camps is far from cloudless. The advantages of the first one are low cost solutions and the ability to “twist the glands”. The advantages of the second one are the possibility to assemble different subsystems of the house into a single whole, make them work together, achieve additional functions by using different scenarios (I came home, the access control system recognized me and removed the room from the guard, lighting turned on, background music turned on, etc. d.).
In which of the two camps to go, you choose yourself.
I will try to compare the two professional-type management systems with which I have to work.
Crestron and Savant
Both systems came to us from the US market, both belong to the older segment, both work both in the home automation market and in commercial projects, both allow us to combine the most diverse subsystems of life support and entertainment, having a single design, the logic of which is customized to the needs of the customer .
Further differences begin.
Crestron Electronics was founded more than 40 years ago, it employs about 3 thousand. a person, only an engineering staff engaged in equipment - more than 350 people. The list of manufactured "iron" contains several hundred names of only the main points.
Development Platform - Windows
Savant Systems was founded in 2005. The list of equipment produced at times (if not ten times) is less.
Development Platform - Mac OSX.
At the same time, Savant, according to the results of a 2012 survey for the US market conducted by the Inside Track agency, ranked first in terms of customer loyalty to its customers among AV and installation brands. In 2011 she was in 3rd place. An interesting trend.
In Russia, Crestron has long occupied the niche of expensive, high-quality installations in both the home and corporate segments. A top class conference room or an expensive Crestron cottage is a frequent occurrence.
Savant in Russia is almost unknown. Attempts to “drag” the brand to Russia have been made before, but they only seriously started promoting it this year. At the same time, more than 25,000 installations in 34 countries have been made in the world.
But let's leave marketing to marketers, and try to look at these systems from the user’s side. And from the engineer.
User view.
A user of a complex automation system doesn’t care what is written on the boxes, which are buzzing and blinking lights in the river in the back room. He may not go there ever. The user deals with touch panels and remotes. And with the logic of the system.
And here it turns out that the consoles and panels can be the same - iPhone / iPad. They say that Crestron still has an Android platform, I don't know, I haven't tried it. Savant this year also hired Android programmers. Looks like moving in this direction.
There may be remote controls such as a TV remote. With mechanical buttons. Both have it too. Understand that one brand is written on some, and another on another.
And Crestron has its own touch panels. The cheapest at 5.5 inches costs 2280. Dollars. For my taste, the solution is rather corporate. To prevent iPad from being accidentally taken from the conference room :-)
User interfaces themselves
And here and there they can be any, which will succeed. Any design and logic that can be crammed into the system. Manufacturers offer several options for design patterns for different devices, third-party manufacturers make their options.
In practice, they often stop at one of the designs offered by the manufacturer. For they do not ask for money, but they look decent.
And here the differences begin. Crestron "drags along" the design ideology of past years. No, I know very well about SmartGraphics, Core3UI and other fashion trends that should offer users who are accustomed to the iPhone / Android a similar interface. And in some cases it even turns out. But the adventures are often more than the result. The programmers are so accurate.
Savant was originally based on the ideology of Apple interfaces. When the iPad was released, Savant completely ceased production of its touch panels. Only iPhone / iPod / iPad. And the logic there is from Apple. Someone likes it, some don't.
Interface output on the big screen
The idea that if we turn on the TV or the projector, then these devices can be controlled through the menu items displayed on the screen, in Savant it is realized “in full growth”. It is possible through the menu buttons, you can scroll through the channels or "covers" of movies, as the songs scroll through on the iPhone. Crestron doesn't have it. You can dodge much, give the touchpad interface to the screen, but there is not much point in this. This function is not incorporated into the system initially.
Otherwise, the difference in interfaces for the user is that at the level of individual parts. Who is more accustomed to what.
Price
Both systems are expensive. An installation of, say, 8 video zones and 12 audio zones (a large apartment or a nice cottage) for Crestron equipment costs $ 50,000.
The Savant price level is similar. But "one to one" these systems do not compare. Say, an entry-level controller (MC3) for Crestron is 30 percent cheaper than Savant, but the latter, in addition to managing the system itself, can generate up to 8 audio streams and work with the iTunes catalog. Make a source on 8 audio streams on Crestron - it will not be cheap at all.
Another thing is that Crestron has a hefty secondary market (ebay.com), where many components can be bought significantly cheaper. Modern models from Savant I have not met there.
The view of a software engineer
On the hardware, the difference does not seem to me to be fundamental.
That is, each company produces its own set of “basic building blocks,” but what brand is indicated on them is not so important to the installer. Anyway, they will be screwed into the rivers or arranged in rooms. Ideology is similar. There is a "brain system" - the controller or controllers. There are all kinds of audio sources, audio-video switches and multichannel amplifiers. There is light and climate control. There are interfaces to other control systems such as BACNet or KNX.
We select the components manually or on the configurator, estimate which interface we will connect with, and where we need to pull it, unfold the cables and arrange the equipment.
The hardware is assembled.
Further programming begins.
It's all more interesting. There is a difference and it is global.
There is a feeling that Crestron focuses more on the hardware, while Savant focuses on software.
I deal with Crestron for several years, on Savant I have so far assembled only one system.
Crestron is complicated to set up. Really complicated. If graphical interfaces are made in a fairly familiar way (panels, buttons, sliders), then the SIMPL event language is something. As a person who started his programming work with the languages Pascal, Prolog, C, and not even to the night mentioned, BASIC, SIMPL was not easy for me. I understand that after completing several training courses, by bringing a couple of systems into a state of deep collapse, you can teach yourself to think with logical blocks — symbols, analog, digital and serial joints, and to cheerfully add the missing modules to “like C ++ — SIMPL +, but this must be done without stopping. At the same time there are almost no restrictions. What we want, we program. This is a plus (for a qualified programmer) and a minus - you can trick it up ...
Programming Savant to a large extent happens by dragging the individual components of the system to different rooms with a mouse, and then by connecting different interfaces to each other. And the task of triggering logic for different events. The system “guides” the programmer in the best possible way, prompts what to do, offers a well-made user interface. But it does not constrain it the way Control4 does, for example. You can change the buttons and logic. If you really have to.
It is clear that the same driver scripts sometimes have to be refined. And this is XML. But also for this task there is a special editor.
What causes questions is the choice of a home-use computer (Mac Mini) as the basis for the system controller (in Savant this is called the host). But on the one hand, possible failures are solved by installing a backup controller, and on the other hand, already this year a demo of the Linux Box was shown, which should take over the host functions. Yes, and it should cost much less.
And even in the current version of the host - Mac Mini, the system is actively put on yachts with the possibility of full control of this yacht through Savant. And there the price of a mistake is slightly more than an unlit lamp.
A definite plus Crestron - this system is well known. There is a huge base of completed installations, many trained, certified installers and programmers. The system is already "accustomed."
Savant in Russia is a new system. It will take not enough time for familiarization, "grinding in" to the system. It will take the development of standard installation kits, which are well understood how they work, and how to customize them. Not with all common systems Savant now interacts well.
So, to control the engineer (light, climate) often use components based on the KNX protocol. With light and curtains on KNX Savant can integrate, but with the climate is not very. They promise to fix it by summer, but for now the climate can be driven through BACNet or through CoolMaster gateways.
Judging by the court cases that are developing in the States between these companies, Crestron is “tensed up” from the appearance of such a “vigorous newcomer.” Let's see how things will be with us.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/207544/
All Articles