It is hard to give constructive ideas when you see the machine this far in.
But may be:
1. Stop your manufacturing plants from coming up with their controls ideas and BASD being forced to support all these products.
2. Sometimes, like people who use windows, you just have to use what is available instead reinventing the wheel. I am talking about your LON side, how much money have you sunk into LON API ? You should have stuck with LNS and pay the royalty. You are buying the FT-10 trans anyway.
How far and how much money did you dump into CEA-860 project?
Nice smilies though, be cool like my Corona Qtip !
Wow, They came out with the drivers for the XP platform. If I learn something new, the day has not been a loss. Something tells me it has to do with the V16 solution.. free upgrades???, from the greediest, toilet bowl of a corp. like AMS ?? I think its like Tolkien said "All that is gold does not glitter." I can see several reasons not to cross that bridge yet.
Both points you bring up are beyond the control of most if not all of the "Trane guys" that post on this board, all R&D decisions are made at a differenrent level than us. We are the ones that have to deal with the products they produce and utilize them to the best of their abilities. As for the Trane product being "Crap" like a lot of people say around here, those to be nameless, I like it and do not have many problems with the devices as some make it sound.
Our LON ( Comm 5) devices are not a bad product and the protocol we use is very stable, I have jobs out there with over 2 miles of comm like and 80+ devices and have had no problems at all. Integrating other vendors has not been a problem either. As for being open to all configuration and points available, Sysint will probably chime in soon, I feel your pain of using "Trane" products, but with all the money spent on R&D why would we expose "ALL" points to other vendors, as with Bacnet protocol if you want points from a chiller there is a standard points list of about 15 items but many more possible. What other manufacturer out there give all the possible from their product? Do they not stay within a standard profile created by Lon? Is it true that Trane does lead the industry for have the most equipment out there that is capable of supporting Lon protocol?
Ok so on to the BCU, or boat anchor as some Say, I have debated this device many times and researched different options and come to the conclusion that believe it or not I like it. Yea it adds to the cost of a project but so does anything else used by other vendors to do the similar job. Thought it is possible to have a complete site operational with out one it does a good job for its purpose.
I just woke up so I am not all here but the questions above are honest Q's, not ment for bashing. As you can see I do not post much here but visit daily for information and to see what is going on else ware. I don't mind trying to help someone out with the Trane produts when I can, as I am not "Trane Washed" as you might think. I am also not as Opionated as other posters about the products that they choose to use. Thanks for the reply Amigo but as stated up top, it is out of our control.
Thanks for all the help.
The files that Contemporary Controls said would work "CCSI_ARCNET.INF" and "COM20020.SYS" I finally got and the card and xp accepted it. They probably came from ver 12. I'm still on 11 and summit is keeping the arcnet selection grayed out. My guess is that 11 is not going to work. One other problem might be that this new pc came with an ethernet card on the mother board which is active. We think we saw it some where in the Summit doc where you can not have both active. I'm going to reload summit after disabling the ethernet card and see if I can get summit to allow the arcnet selection. If that doesn't work up grade to 12 or 16. I let you know how it works out. We are getting close thanks again for the help.