Dependencies to iPhone App

[wexfordman]

Hi ident,

To be fair, the first and only limitation I am aware of is that the cwm will not operate the iPhone app! It would nit be unreasonable to expect a webserver to also perform the same duties as the ucm in this regard!

When I purchased my cwm with my comfort 2 panel, there were no limitations as a user that I came across! The only issue I had from a maintenance perspective, which I discovered later was that I could not fw upgrade comfort without a ucm, so I went and bought a ucm/USB to allow me to so this! Now, I need to purchase a ucm eth also if the cwm will not allow me to! ( I currently have a borrowed ucm eth in my system)

As I said, if it is technically feasible to allow the installer or user enable/disable the f0 requirement then this would resolve the issue?

Btw, can u confirm what the cwm firmware upgrade will do, and do you want testers ?

[ident]

The CWM has the same limitations and benefits as when it was first sold, it  has not been degraded because of an iPhone app which has been developed to run on the UCM/Ethernet subsequently, and this is what everyone should keep in mind The two are different products.

Technical feasibility is not the only consideration. There is also a price to be paid in incorporating  a new feature in a product, eg taking time away from time spent to improve the app and other improvements in the pipeline We cannot do everything at the same time.

From your previous posts it seems that you have already used the iPhone app with the UCM/Ethernet. Are you trying to use it on both  UCM/Ethernet and iPhone at the same time?


The CWM version 6 firmware will allow its firmware to be upgraded like the UCMs

[slychiu]

However we recognise that this may be a desireable change in CWM and wil be considered in future, bearing in mind the constraints raised by ident

[davestevens_uk]

Thanks Chiu, I\'d certainly vote for it.

[wexfordman]

[user=86]ident[/user] wrote:

The CWM has the same limitations and benefits as when it was first sold, it  has not been degraded because of an iPhone app which has been developed to run on the UCM/Ethernet subsequently, and this is what everyone should keep in mind The two are different products.

Technical feasibility is not the only consideration. There is also a price to be paid in incorporating  a new feature in a product, eg taking time away from time spent to improve the app and other improvements in the pipeline We cannot do everything at the same time.

From your previous posts it seems that you have already used the iPhone app with the UCM/Ethernet. Are you trying to use it on both  UCM/Ethernet and iPhone at the same time?

Hi Ident,

yes, I am using both at the same time, but my iphone app is pointing towards my \"borrowed\" ucm/eth not cwm.

I would prefer to use cwm in the long term for both rather than have to purchase a UCM specifically for the app (an extra 200 euros + for example).

P.S:- I appreciate that development work has to be paid for, and the work done in development, fw upgrades, development of Iphone app (which is fantastic btw, and improves the system tenfold).

Tbh, I expected the iphone app to be a paid application, and would not have found it unreasonable to expect to pay a nominal amount for it!



[user=86]ident[/user] wrote:
The CWM version 6 firmware will allow its firmware to be upgraded like the UCMs[/quote]


Cheers!


With regards the CWM device overall, and this maybe needs some further thought on my part, I wonder overall about the long term future for it, when the majority of its functions can now be migrated to an iphone app, albeit in a more restricted way.

I wonder could the cwm be \"altered/enhanced\" to provide alternative functions such as remote monitoring via IP/Internet, delivering push notifications to iphone app etc!

[ident]

Tbh, I expected the iphone app to be a paid application, and would not have found it unreasonable to expect to pay a nominal amount for it!

Now you tell us!:X

With regards the CWM device overall, and this maybe needs some further thought on my part, I wonder overall about the long term future for it, when the majority of its functions can now be migrated to an iphone app, albeit in a more restricted way.

That is a real dilemma for all such products, they are now less viable due to these alternatives. Our focus has to be  less on the webserver now.

I wonder could the cwm be \"altered/enhanced\" to provide alternative functions such as remote monitoring via IP/Internet, delivering push notifications to iphone app etc!

We are looking at the iPhone app itself providing push notifications, which would be more relevant and useful

[wexfordman]

[user=86]ident[/user] wrote:

Tbh, I expected the iphone app to be a paid application, and would not have found it unreasonable to expect to pay a nominal amount for it!

Now you tell us!:X

With regards the CWM device overall, and this maybe needs some further thought on my part, I wonder overall about the long term future for it, when the majority of its functions can now be migrated to an iphone app, albeit in a more restricted way.

That is a real dilemma for all such products, they are now less viable due to these alternatives. Our focus has to be  less on the webserver now.

I wonder could the cwm be \"altered/enhanced\" to provide alternative functions such as remote monitoring via IP/Internet, delivering push notifications to iphone app etc!

We are looking at the iPhone app itself providing push notifications, which would be more relevant and useful

Cool, push notifications would be fantastic addition to the app (almost one I\'d be willing to pay another 5 quid for :-) )

CWM wont be completely redundent, I would always like to use it for more detailed access to my system, but I wonder looking at the way that the iphone app works, would it be possible to build a web page that interfaces to comfort via the ucm/eth rather than via cwm ?

[ident]

The UCM/Ethernet does not have a webserver, nor does Comfort so  it would not be able to host a web page to be accessed from a browser, like the CWM