Volume 13, Issue 4 — February 29, 2016
|
Editorial Editorial Editorial Editorial
- A Byte of Apple
Raymond Kent : Managing Principal, Sustainable Technologies Group
|
|
Industry News Audio TVs Projection Control & Signal Processing
|
|
|
Why Crestron Stopped Exhibiting at CEDIA – The Facts and My Opinion of the Impact on CEDIA
By Gary Kayye rAVe Founder
Update: So, now there’s no more guessing as to why Crestron pulled out of CEDIA as I literally got the one (and only) interview with Crestron President and CEO Randy Klein, who spends 10 minutes outlining exactly how the decision was made and why. Watch the interview here.
There’s been a lot of talk surrounding Crestron’s announcement to pull out of exhibiting at CEDIA. Oh, I guess if you hadn’t heard that, yes, they have decided not to go to CEDIA any more.
Crestron’s been one of the largest exhibitors at CEDIA for over 10 years and has actually had one of the largest three booths at CEDIA for seven of those 10 years. In addition, they’ve held a giant party, a plethora of educational sessions and even a private suite where they’d launched new products. So, suffice it to say, they’ve been one of the companies that has spent the most money at the annual high-end residential AV show.
But, last week, via CEPro, Crestron made it public that they’ve decided to no longer exhibit at CEDIA.
So, why?
I reached out to them last week and here’s what they said: “As a market leader, we are [still] focused and committed to the luxury residential market, and are significantly increasing our investments in this key area of our business.”
Shows are expensive to do, as you can imagine.
So, why not support the show in another way? Here’s what they told me (word-for-word): “We’ve elected not to participate in the 2016 CEDIA Future Home Experience because our strategies are not the same as those exhibited by the association today. Instead, we are increasing the number of marketing and other events in North America.”
Crestron also sent me a statement that they feel that CEDIA, “caters to the entire residential market (from DIY and production homes all the way up to the luxury space). Over the past few years at CEDIA, we have observed a greater shift of exhibitors and messaging towards the entry level side. This year we have a laser beam focus on the luxury market and want to concentrate our efforts on activities that speak more discernibly to the high end. For example, we are presenting at the Luxury Portfolio International SUMMIT for leading real estate companies later this month in Miami and we are exhibiting at the Architectural Digest Home Design Show in NYC from March 17-20th.”
That means they don’t seem to like the direction that CEDIA is headed.
Crestron did go out of their way to tell me that it’s still a CEDIA member and will continue to support the organization’s activities around industry education and certification. And, they even went as far as to say that “exhibiting at the association’s annual event may fit into our plans sometime in the future.”
So, there’s a possibility they will come back.
And, they’ve decided to spend their money on a new showroom plan. Here’s what they said about that: “We’re excited to announce the opening of our showroom in the Design Center of the Americas in Dania Beach, Florida. This multimillion-dollar facility is the ninth location of its kind to showcase the Crestron experience. We have appointed a residential executive team to include industry veteran, Ami Wright, as director of residential programs. Ami will be joined by a new VP of residential systems to be revealed soon.”
And, to reassure residential integrators, Crestron told me they invested in a new development lab at Crestron’s Rockleigh, NJ campus. They say it’s staffed with 10 full-time engineers dedicated to making new residential AV products.
I’ve been to 22 straight CEDIA shows. I love them. I have both a personal and professional interest in CEDIA.
That said, I completely concur with Crestron’s observations — the show does have more DIY’ers than ever before. And, the show’s no longer exclusively a high-end show. It’s far from a CES, but it does have a lot of consumer-based technology there. And, Crestron wants to stay integrator-focused.
Despite what many may think, Crestron isn’t a brand that’s aiming to be a household name. Sure, everyone loves the marketing value of that — a name that rolls off everyone’s tongue. But, that doesn’t do you anything unless you’re selling to them — the consumers. And, in the high-end residential market, the consumer doesn’t drive the sale, nor should he (or she).
Integrators have the historical knowledge and expertise to design, specify and build high-end home systems. Yes, Apple builds a set-top box that you can talk to but, it can’t open the shades, it can’t adjust the lighting and it can’t monitor the security of your home. But, Crestron (and high-end integrators) can, and do.
CEDIA wants to grow. And the high-end residential market isn’t growing. it’s nowhere near what it was pre-2008 recession — far from it, in fact.
Walking around CEDIA 2015 I thought it was one of the best CEDIA’s ever — certainly the best in the last half-dozen years. Everyone was upbeat, there was more innovation than any other time this decade and the sho floor had the best attendance since. But, nearly every new exhibitor over the past five years has catered to the DIY’er. Sans Barco, Epson and Christie (with their new residential-focused offerings) the majority of new exhibitors have represented stuff like qpp-based control companies (with Apple and Android-based control), distributed audio system companies (with recessed can replacement LED lights with built-in speakers) and even home security companies are all DIY or more CES-focused than custom residential focused.
This represents a healthy reflection of an emerging market. And, truth is, most of these DIY’ers will absolutely move up — meaning they will start with app-based control and eventually want something more Savant-like, then even Control4-like and then hop on up, eventually, to a Crestron-based system. But, that said, look at what Savant launched in to the market at CEDIA — a DIY remote called the Savant Remote.
So, it totally makes sense why Crestron did this. Crestron isn’t at CEDIA to pick up more dealers — and you should be glad they aren’t. They’re there to support the dealer channel they already have — and, of course, to announce and demo new products.
And, as we all know, the web now launches products — or at least, you can pretty-much find a new product or details about a new product on the Internet. And, as for supporting their dealers, they said, specifically, they’ll do that via the aforementioned Design Center and the Architectural Digest Home Design Show AND they said they’d continue to support CEDIA’s educational initiatives.
So, if you put this all together, spending the kind of money one of the largest CEDIA exhibitors was spending, it makes sense they’d eventually consider pulling out. So, I guess this year was the year they happened to be evaluating the ROI of CEDIA and they came to the conclusion to the speed the money elsewhere.
However, they also left the door open that they’d consider returning. They didn’t set specific conditions for a return, but they pretty much made it clear that they aren’t interested in the DIY market, though. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
|
Who Owns the Code?
By Mark Coxon rAVe Blogger
Let me start by saying that I know this blog is going to draw criticism from both sides. This is a long standing argument in the AV community, one that has yet to be universally agreed upon, and I’m certain this piece will NOT change that fact. There will still be people who fall on both sides of this argument, but perhaps at the end of this you will either understand the issue better, or potentially even jump from one side to the other.
First, let’s define what code we are talking about. When we ask “who owns the code?”, typically we are talking about the code for the control system we use to control our installed AV systems. When we ask “who” owns the code, I think we generally agree the programmer, being an employee of a company, does NOT own the code. Where we disagree is whether that code is owned by the integrator or whether that code is owned by the end user who paid for the AV system and its corresponding hardware, programming, and installation.
Some integrators claim the code is “my Intellectual Property” or “my IP,” while others assert that the end user should get everything required to maintain the system as part of their purchase.
First I’d like to explore the concept of “my IP.” Is this code actually copyrighted by the sheer fact that it was written by the integrator? To answer this we have to look at a couple factors.
First, in general, a copyright is “a property right that springs into existence when a sufficiently creative idea is reduced into or onto a tangible medium.” –Hawley Troxell
By this measure code, meets the copyright standard. Some of you are saying: case closed. Not so fast.
Let’s quickly think about a piece of code for an AV control system. First the code is written in a language like C+, Java, Simpl, etc. and the control system manufacturer lays out the rules by which this language can be used in their systems. Secondly, the code includes what I will call “industry code” from manufacturers that includes all the commands needed to execute operations on those devices. Thirdly, there is “operational code” that creates an execution of, combination of, and transition between those “industry codes” to operate the system. Finally there is code that pertains to the GUI or the look and feel of the interface.
Can the integrator lay copyright claim to all of these types of code individually?
Programming Language: This language itself already has a copyright owner. A programmer using common instruction sets from a programming language really hasn’t exhibited a “creative idea” at this point, and would have no more claim to a copyright on that than I would on the English language because I wrote this blog using it.
Industry Code: This code typically already has been written by someone else. Many times the control system manufacturer even manages a library of these code sets for their programmers to use. Given this, the integrator would have no copyright claim to this piece of the code. As an exception, sometimes this code DOES NOT exist and must be written. We will tackle that soon.
Operational Code: This is where the integrator strings operations together utilizing both the programming language and the Industry Code above. This part of the code is at least reasonably able to be claimed as “my IP.” We will return to all this later.
GUI Code: Many times, the GUI is created from an existing template provided by the control system manufacturer or a third party. In those instances, the copyright actually resides with them and not the integrator. An integrator may claim that their arrangement of those items within the template is still “my IP” and we will also revisit that shortly. However, if the integrator creates a custom GUI with new graphics and objects, that would definitely be their IP, no argument there.
Alright, so let’s come back to operational code and arrangement of items in an existing GUI template as potential IP. In order to accurately assess this, we may have to look past copyright in general. This really comes down to if the assembly of existing parts in a particular order is protect-able.
There is a great scene in Flash of Genius when Ford’s attorney asks Robert Kearns if he invented any of the parts within his intermittent windshield wiper circuit. He answers no on all counts. Under cross examination, his own attorney asks him which of the words in his plays Shakespeare created. Again the answer was none, and the attorney asserted it was in fact the order of the words that made them unique and not the words themselves.
By this test alone ,it would seem operational code and GUI arrangement is IP, but the U.S. Supreme Court may see that differently.
In 2007, “the Supreme Court decided that when elements, techniques, items, or devices are combined, united or arranged, and when, in combination, each item performs the function it was designed to perform, the resulting combination — something the court called “ordinary innovation” — is not patentable. This can be true even if there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to make the combination.” (1)
In other words, a new control module not in the existing library for a piece of equipment, operational code, and GUI arrangement are most likely “ordinary innovation”, not IP. These are no more an original work than copying 10 pages from 10 different books and binding them all together. Kearns’ situation was different in that he combined parts not previously combined to perform a new function not performed before.
Given all this, the only part of the control code that can realistically be called IP is custom GUI code. Now this could be a GUI that the integrator built and uses across several clients and projects, or it could be one created specifically for the client at hand.
In both cases, it seems that the problem is that there is no practical way to provide the end user a file that includes the industry and operational code (not IP) while excluding the custom GUI code (IP).
The interesting shift in the conversation here is that most integrators I have spoken with about this, actually don’t care too much if the customer has the code or not. They typically can’t do anything with it on their own. They don’t have the hardware or the skill-set to use it to launch internal DIY efforts and circumvent the integrator in the future.
The main concern seems to be that it will wind up in the hands of their competitors. The client may hire someone else next time, and if the customer has the code, they can hand it to the new firm who can then utilize it in future rooms as well as other jobs. (In the majority of cases, a large chunk of the code needs to be redone each time anyway to adjust for different components and room functionality).
So what is an honest integrator to do to protect the work they’ve done?
All of the following solutions require the integrator to do one thing they may not typically do. Have a conversation with the client at the beginning of the job specifically about code ownership.
My problem with the whole “who owns the code?” conversation is that in my experience, the client rarely knows that he won’t get the code as part of the project, that the code can’t be pulled from his system by another authorized dealer and that without the code, only the original firm can ever work on the system to maintain or upgrade it. In short, the customer is getting less than what he thought he was getting.
I’d never buy a car that could only be fixed at the dealership I bought it from.
By having a conversation up front about code ownership, the integrator and the client can come to a common agreement and appropriate price structure based on what code they want to own.
The code can be defined specifically as “work made for hire” meaning the end user owns it and pays the associated cost. Any client specific GUI should be done this way in my opinion, as it can’t be leveraged elsewhere anyway.
The integrator could provide a licensing agreement that defines how the code can be used. This would allow the end user to own the code, but also pay a per-device fee for its use. This is helpful when the integrator has invested in developing an in house custom GUI they want to leverage across multiple jobs, as they can offset the development cost through licensing per system.
The integrator could relate they never sell their code and allow the end user to decide up front if they are comfortable with the arrangement. In this case, it would be ethical to include a clause that says if the integrator goes out of business, they will relinquish the code to the client at that time.
The integrator should also include contractual language to the effect that the GUI used in the system is their copyrighted IP and cannot be reused elsewhere.
Conclusions?
If you are providing systems with custom GUI code then you do really have IP. Have the code discussion up front. Define the client’s wants and needs and price them accordingly. If there is additional work being done specifically for this client that will never be leveraged anywhere else, define it as a work made for hire, charge accordingly and relinquish the code to the end user as part of the close out package.
If you are providing a control system from a manufacturer programmed in their language, using existing industry code, and utilizing an existing GUI template, I would assert that by the standards above, no IP has been created here. The only reason to not include the code as part of the project in this case would be to maintain an unfair advantage on the customer in case they try to hire another integrator later. (If you disagree, there is a comments section below, so fire away).
Systems that implement wholly new ways of doing things or combine things in ways that are not obvious, logical extensions of existing arrangements would also be an exception.
So who owns the code? Well possession is nine-tenths of the law so if the integrator chooses not to release it as part of the project, that is ultimately up to them.
From an IP standpoint, most of the code is likely not protect-able as the integrator’s IP, either in its written form or methodology, so there is really no reason not to include it as part of the project. In the rare cases that the system GUI is completely custom, IP claims are justifiable. In all cases, a code discussion should be had with the end user up front to set proper expectations for what will and will not be included, and if done properly, the appropriate pricing can be assigned to that agreement as well.
References:
- Combination Inventions
- Who Owns the Source Code?
Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
Click above to learn more
|
|
The Challenge of Brand Protection
By Lee Distad rAVe Columnist
Manufacturers and distributors aren’t just responsible for growing their brands’ business and market share — they’re also responsible for maintaining their brands’ image and position in the marketplace, as well as supporting the best interests of their dealers.
Products deserve to be sold for what they’re worth, and dealers who support the brand deserve to make a profit for doing so. That’s where vendor reps come in, and they have to be responsible for making sure that the vendor’s products are being sold to resellers whose goals are aligned. It’s not easy, though, and too often, efforts at brand protection amount to little more than closing the barn door after the horse has gotten out.
At the AV integrator I used to work for, one of our HD display vendors wooed us to install its brand new 65-inch HD LCD flat panel in our showroom as a centerpiece technology. Back then, manufacturer’s suggested retail for the 65-inch model was $22,999.
Our vendor rep was very keen to have his brand’s flagship TV on display in a high-end AV Pro shop, where it could be beautifully displayed to the kind of high-roller customers who like that sort of thing.
Still, it was a lot of money to spend on a demo product that’s going to sit in the showroom for a year or more, so my boss negotiated fiercely for a substantial floor-model discount off of dealer cost. Once it was delivered and installed into the middle of a connected living-room setting it did indeed look fantastic, and several of our clients ooh-ed and ahh-ed over it.
Not two weeks elapsed after we installed our demo model than the same 65-inch LCD appeared on the floor at our local Costco.
Costco’s posted price? $17,999.
My boss was apoplectic. Even with his office door closed, I could hear him yelling at our rep all the way on the side of the building.
The rep apologized and apologized with lots of empty platitudes but the damage was done. “We traced them to the retailer in Iowa who sold them to Costco and we cut him off,” he said, as if that made it any better.
Really? Didn’t the local territory rep wonder why a ma and pa retailer out in Iowa needed 190 twenty-thousand-dollar TVs? Or was he too busy cashing the commission check in his head to care where they were going?
Now that I work on the distributor side, I’m very conscious of the experiences like that one I had working for a dealer, and the best interests of my dealer network are at the forefront of my mind when I’m the one making the decisions about who I’m going to sell to.
Believe it or not, vendor reps don’t always open up new accounts to anyone with a pulse and a credit card. Not long ago I received an inquiry from a company that was interested in our cellphone signal boosters. We spoke about it, I got more information about their company and I was honest with them that they weren’t a good fit for our business.
That’s not the only instance of me declining to open up a new dealer, either. I remain convinced that being particular about choosing new dealers as business partners saves headaches down the road. And to date, none of my dealers have ever screamed at me over the phone about competitive issues like our poor TV rep years ago. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
|
A Byte of Apple
By Raymond Kent Managing Principal, Sustainable Technologies Group
By now you should have heard about Apple’s battle with the federal government over the unlocking of Syed Rizwan Farook’s iPhone for use in the investigation of the San Bernardino shootings. If you have not been paying attention and you work in the ICT industry, you should. In short, the Federal Government has secured an order from a Federal judge demanding that they cooperate with their investigation into the San Bernardino shooter’s potential ties to terrorist organizations in the Middle East. The demand for cooperation is such that they want Apple to create a way to unlock Farook’s iPhone so that they may scan it for any information related to terrorist ties. On the surface this looks like a great thing as it could potentially provide information that may lead to others who want to do harm to the US.
If you dig deeper and really understand the consequences of this demand it becomes a real scary place for the rest of society who live and breathe through technology. The Government insists that its intentions are noble and ethical which may (or may not) be true depending on your perspective. However, this would in fact create a gateway into encrypted devices such as the iPhone that could have nefarious outcomes. If this were to move forward, what if any safeguards could, would, and should be put in place to prevent anyone from using this technique to access other cell phones or electronics — including your own. And by anyone I am referring to the government, law enforcement, criminals, other countries, or other bad actors who would seek to cause harm, spy or steal.
Apple, Microsoft, and Google all vehemently are against designing a solution to this as it may not be possible to just “unlock this one cell phone” without making possible to unlock all of those million of iPhones out in the public. The encryption is what provides the assurance to the consumer that their private information is as safe as possible. Often today many of us store passwords, banking and other financial information, health information, and other data that could be used to destroy our lives or the lives of others including companies we work for. There is already a steady rise in network hostage taking by criminal elements who hijack corporate, government, and healthcare networks for ransom. Allowing intrusion into the encrypted play space only adds fuel to the fire.
It is in the not too distant past that many Americans became absolutely outraged by warrantless wiretaps being conducted in the name of national security. Because of the public outcry it is now illegal for law enforcement to do so. This request to unlock the iPhone is far worse in a way that would make the movie Minority Report look like a comedy. In the encrypted world the “key” to a system is one that unlocks access to the data within a system. Once that information is known it becomes like a master key that can be used over and over on any device.
In the Information Communications Technology industry we are providing systems that often use encryption to protect our client’s data and more often than not these days security of these systems is becoming more of a concern. I wrote back in August of 2015 about a major potential back door in technology systems (Who’s Guarding the Back Door of Your Network?) and provided in this article one of many potential solutions that relies heavily on encryption as its main way of blocking access into the network through non-IT but network connected electronics. As the Internet of Things continues its march forward, this will only increase in complexity with a multitude of devices coming online using encryption to securely traverse information around a network. These systems are more and more often tied to building management systems to increase energy efficiency, reduce the carbon footprint of a building, and provide operational efficiency while reducing operating costs. They also need to reside on the network infrastructure to operate.
Currently roughly half of manufacturers of IoT devices are not confident in their ability to provide secure product capable of defeating a cyber attack (MPI Internet of Things Study). This lack of confidence in providing end users protection is critical to the success of the IoT industry and its ties to the ICT world. The companies that are confident are using encryption techniques to process data secure it over the network. So how does this relate to the iPhone? Well the technique used by Apple may be replicated to crack other encryption schemes giving over that master key. We live in a world of big data, cyber crime, and opportunity (in a bad way) to give a few or many unwanted control over personal or corporate information by handing over the keys. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
|
CEDIA Predicts Opportunities for Home Technology ProfessionalsThe CEDIA Technology Council has released the first white paper in a series aimed at providing insights into the technological advances and market pressures which may affect CEDIA members over the next five years.
The first installment of The Home Technology Professional of 2020 focuses on general marketplace predictions and highlights ways home technology professionals can stay ahead of the curve. Highlights include taking ownership of network security and privacy; cultivating recurring revenue streams; and home personalization through the use of voice recognition, location awareness and incorporation of personal preferences for all users of the home.
“We want our members to be prepared to profit from the evolution of the market, not be surprised by it. This white paper series provides insight into the changing market conditions by highlighting the emerging opportunities and threats to the industry. Proactive home technology professionals can use this resource to make necessary business adjustments before their competition,” said Dave Pedigo, senior director of learning and emerging technologies.
Other white papers in this series will be released throughout 2016 and will address topics such as home entertainment, control and connected devices, sustainability, lighting, aging in place and security, privacy and safety. CEDIA members may download the white paper at no cost in the CEDIA Resource Library. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
Click above to learn more
|
The Michio Kaku Interview – a One-on-One with a True Futurist
Gary had a chance to sit down with the keynote speaker for ISE 2016, Michio Kaku — author of the book Physics of the Future. Gary has been a big fan of his since 2011 when he read Dr. Kaku’s book. Since then, he’s required all his students at UNC read Dr. Kaku’s book predicting how technology will affect everyone in the immediate, mid-term (50 years) and long-term (100 years from today) future.
Kaku is amazing. His personality and excitement for the future comes through in Gary’s interview with him. Dr. Kaku also has a new book out, The Future of the Mind, that everyone should read!
See the interview here. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
If You’re AN AV Integrator, Now’s the Time to Attend the Digital Signage ExpoDigital Signage Expo (DSE) will present a full-day pre-show program on Tuesday, March 15 specifically aimed at Professional AV/IT System Integrators.
Produced by System Contractor News Editor-At-Large Kirsten Nelson, the Connected Screen Conference will run from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. focusing on building better AV integration business models. The program will feature top industry experts tackling the digital signage issues that are vital to today’s AV integrator.
They created the Connected Screen Conference to bring the AV design and installation community together with leading digital signage innovators and end-users who are demanding the latest and greatest in this market segment. Those who attend our day-long series of AV integration sessions will walk away with practical business perspectives on how these new trends could boost their business.
The day will include five modules, a “Lunch and Learn,” plus two breakout sessions:
- Skip the Line – Interactive Signage Makes Quick Gains in Quick Service Restaurants
- Networking Breakout Session: Best Practices for Quick Service Restaurants Business
- Smart Spaces – Building Large-Scale Video Displays for Immersive Branding
- Networking Breakout Session: Best Practices for New Types of Content in Digital Signage
- Lunch and Learn – Digital Signage Integration Case Study
- Monetizing Interactive Signage
- Networking Breakout Session: Best Practices for Monetizing Interactive Signage
- AV Integration Business Models – A State of the Industry Report
Registration for the Connected Screen Conference, or any of the DSE 2016 pre-conference events or educational conference seminars, which are sponsored by BroadSign International and are eligible for Digital Signage Expert Group (DSEG) certification renewal credits, is available online here. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
InfoComm 2016 Registration Opens, Will Showcase the Internet of ThingsThe Internet of Things will make its presence felt at InfoComm 2016, June 4-10 at the Las Vegas Convention Center and Westgate Las Vegas Resort and Casino. Show organizers expect nearly 1,000 exhibitors, occupying more than 500,000 net square feet of show space, making it the largest AV tradeshow in North America. InfoComm 2016 builds on last year’s record attendance, with attendees from all 50 United States and more than 100 countries around the world.
Registration for InfoComm 2016 is officially open here.
InfoComm 2016 will feature a pavilion on the show floor devoted to IoT technologies and solutions. There will also be a day-long Super Tuesday session dedicated to how AV professionals can understand and exploit IoT advances in their AV/IT systems and business processes. Samsung and Crestron are official sponsors of the IoT pavilion and education program. From networked devices to advanced sensors, IoT technologies enable smarter spaces for collaboration, entertainment and more. Everything from digital signage to conferencing can benefit from the intelligence that is inherent to IoT solutions.
“The Internet of Things is changing the way organizations operate,” said Jason McGraw, CTS, CAE, senior vice president of expositions, InfoComm International. “AV professionals have had a front-row seat to the rise of IoT, starting back when the first network port appeared on an AV device to help streamline management and control. Now, with the wealth of actionable data that the IoT generates, they are in a unique position to create new solutions that digitalize processes and enhance the user experience of audiovisual and communications systems. InfoComm 2016 in June will be the place to learn about the intersection of pro AV and IoT.”
In addition to the fresh focus on IoT, over 75 percent of this year’s InfoComm University program will feature new content. Based on the success of last year’s Unmanned Systems and Drones pavilion and training program, each will be expanded for InfoComm 2016. New this year is the Digital Signage Summit, presented in partnership with Invidis Consulting. To be held on Super Tuesday, the Digital Signage Summit at InfoComm 2016 will be the newest in a series of events focused on the digital signage and digital out-of-home markets. Invidis Consulting holds similar summits across Europe, most recently at Integrated Systems Europe (ISE) in Amsterdam. ISE is a joint venture of InfoComm International and CEDIA.
InfoComm 2016 organizers are making it easier for attendees to sample InfoComm 2016’s diverse education offerings by making the majority of the program available for one price. For the first time, attendees can pay one price for access to more than 90 sessions and workshops — each worth CTS renewal units — rather than register for sessions individually. For only $189 ($279 for non-InfoComm members), AV professionals can attend any seminar or workshop offered Wed. to Fri., excluding manufacturer training, tours or labs. If a conflict arises, or a different session catches the eye, they can simply attend a different session.
“This gives our attendees a chance to sample as much education as they have time for,” said Rachel Bradshaw, director of exposition content, InfoComm International.
For more information about InfoComm 2016, go here. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
Click above to learn more
|
Microsoft, Samsung, Intel Team Up For IoTA number of big industry names, including Microsoft, Samsung and Intel, team up to form the Open Connectivity Foundation (OCF), an entity with plans to create unified Internet of Things (IoT) solutions. IoT is expected to drive the future of the connected home.
Other OCF founding members include Cisco, Electrolux, General Electrics, ARRIS and CableLabs. Their mission is “unlocking the massive opportunity of the future global IoT segment, accelerate industry innovation and help all developers and companies create solutions that map to a single, open IoT interoperability specification.”
As a successor to Open Interconect Consortium (OIC), the OCF will work on all levels — silicon, software, platform and finished goods — to bring together all connected devices (be it appliances, phones, PCs or industrial equipment), regardless of vendor, OS, chipset or transport, under a single set of open standards.
Such a goal is worthy enough, even if the OCF lacks a number of notable industry players (some of whom are pursuing other standards with other partners). But the clout of the likes of Microsoft, Intel and Samsung might bring about a chance to united the diverse standards that plague connected home.
For more information, go here. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
|
Triad Speakers Now Offering Dolby Atmos-Enabled Modules for In-Room LoudspeakersTriad Speakers today announced the expansion of its Dolby Atmos loudspeaker offerings to include Dolby Atmos enabled height modules in its Bronze and Silver series. Used in conjunction with LCRs to achieve the full effects of Dolby Atmos, the module’s function is to direct overhead effects towards the ceiling, which is reflected towards the listener. While ideally mated with matching Triad LCRs, the modules can be used with other front channel speakers.
Each Triad module consists of an upward firing top array optimized to bounce sound effects off the ceiling: the Bronze is comprised of four 2-inch drivers; the Silver incorporates four 3-inch drivers. The module either sits atop the LCR or is placed in close proximity appropriate for its performance such as in a cabinet or on a wall.
The Triad Dolby Atmos enabled height modules are passive, therefore require Dolby Atmos receivers or preamp-processors/amp combinations to power them. The Bronze and Silver modules are available in a wide variety of colors and finishes including custom paint-matched or veneered to match the décor of the room.
Here are the details. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
Auralex Unveils GeoFusor Sound DiffusorsAuralex Acoustics introduces the GeoFusor, a sound diffusor based on the geodesic dome pattern. The GeoFusor’s dimensional shape offers smooth, even diffusion and allows back filling with absorptive material for enhanced low-end control.
The GeoFusor is wall- and ceiling-mountable and is offered in two sizes (1′ x 1′ and 2′ x 2′). The 2′ x 2′ GeoFusor is sized to fit in ceiling grids and offered in fire-rated and non fire-rated variations. The GeoFusor’s contemporary aesthetic complements residential or commercial environments, and the complementary design of the 1′ x 1′ and 2′ x 2′ models permits arraying for acoustical and design purposes.
GeoFusor features:
- Addresses standing waves & flutter echo without removing acoustic energy
- 1’x1′ and 2’x2′ versions available
- Enhance the accuracy of a critical listening environment
GeoFusor specifications:
- GeoFusor 22 FR 2′ x 2′ x 4.5″ (23.75″ x 23.75″ x 4.5″)
- GeoFusor 22 2′ x 2′ x 4.5″ (23.75″ x 23.75″ x 4.5″)
- GeoFusor 11 1′ x 1′ x 2.25″ (11.75″ x 11.75″ x 2.25″)
- Fire Rating: *ASTM E48 Class A (GeoFusor 22 FR only)
For more information, go here. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
|
Premier Intros Large Universal Tabletop Stand for TVs up to 70â€Premier Mounts just launched a new Large Universal Tabletop Stand for Flat Panels (PSD-TTS-L). Building on the PSD-TTS-B Universal Tabletop Stand, the new PSD-TTS-L was developed to meet the market need to easily mount larger displays between 55”-70”.
The PSD-TTS-L features adjustable mounting arms that can be positioned anywhere along vertical poles to achieve the best viewing height, as well as a wide base that provides stable support and can be bolted to the surface for added safety. The chrome poles also offer cable management for a clean and finished appearance.
The PSD-TTS-L comes as a kit for a complete tabletop solution and includes the TTS-BASE-L, T40 poles and UFA low-profile mounting arms.
Here are all the specs. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
|
Coretronic Demos 4K UHD Ultra Short Throw Projector at ISEDelta and Coretronic make well over 70 percent of the projectors sold in the world. Delta has been selling Delta-branded (in addition to its OEM partners) projectors for years. Now, Coretronic is, too, with the European launch of a 4K projector called the DLP HLD LED as well as a home cinema line at next week’s ISE show in Amsterdam.
For the home, visitors will see the what Coretronics claims is the world’s first consumer-grade single-chip DLP HLD LED prototype projector. More than that, Coretronic is also demonstrating its full HD laser home cinema solution with lamp-less laser light source and ultra-short-throw features, which not only offers crystal-clear imaging, high contrast, high brightness, and a rich audiovisual experience, but also fits with many kinds of home styles due to its compact and sleek design. Future-ready, the projector can be easily integrated into smart home network to serve as a controller and display screen, adding to the convenience of life.
For corporate customers, Coretronic plans to provide total solutions, from its in-house-developed IR pen and light curtain touch (LCT) technology, to full HD ultra-short-throw projectors and smart connection software, offering simultaneous 10-point touch and an interactive experience. With its built-in light detectors and sensors to trace the motion of touch control, LCT turns any wall surface into an interactive interface. The smart connection software allows corporations to improve efficiency through high-tech, high-touch online meetings across regions and time zones through a wireless collaboration platform.
Coretronic’s education visual solution is powered by self-developed 134″ projected capacitive touch (PCT) screen and full HD ultra-short-throw projector, supports simultaneous 30-point touch input from fingers and pens, and allows using traditional teaching tools on an ultra-wide PCT and storing the class notes in the cloud just like using a huge tablet to establish a real interactive teaching environment.
Coretronics is here. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
|
PureLink Debuts 4K SwitcherPureLink has debuted two 4K matrix switchers in the form of the HTX-4400-U and HTX-8800-U, 4×4 and 8×8 switchers, respectively.
The HTX U series provides 4×4 and 8×8 models that support Ultra HD 1.4b at the inputs and convert to HDBaseT outputs. The HTX U series also provides RS232 extension to each HDBaseT receiver location, as well as an Ethernet hub feature. PureLink does NOT specify the Chroma Sampling rate so we are guessing it is likely 4:2:0) at a true 4K resolution (4096×2160).
Each extender is provided both transmit and receive ports for Infrared (IR) control. Each extender is powered from the main switch via PoE (Power over Ethernet), or you can utilize the locking local power connector if desired. The HDBaseT receivers will extend up to 328 feet (100 meters) and the HTX U systems supports HDCP 2.2.
You can see them here. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
URC to Ship MX-990 Next MonthURC is introducing the MX-990, what the company is calling its most advanced remote in the Complete Control line of products URC also claims the MX-990 can control anything without having to learn a new program.
Not only does the new remote have a better form factor and a 2.4-inch color LCD screen, but the new MX-990 has something they are calling a ‘Freeform Graphics’ feature where you can fully customize the remote’s graphics and store them on the remote or archive them on a PC. The new remote is completely compatible with all MX-980 files.
The MX-990 details are here. Leave a Comment
Share Article
Back to Top |
|
For all you REGULAR readers of rAVe HomeAV Edition out there, hopefully you enjoyed another opinion-packed issue!
For those of you NEW to rAVe, you just read how we are — we are 100% opinionated. We not only report the news and new product stories of the high-end HomeAV industry, but we stuff the articles full of our opinions. That may include (but is not limited to) whether or not the product is even worth looking at, challenging the manufacturers on their specifications, calling a marketing-spec bluff and suggesting ways integrators market their products better. But, one thing is for sure, we are NOT a trade publication that gets paid for running editorial or product stories. Traditional trade publications get paid to run product stories — that’s why you see what you see in most of the pubs out there. We are different: we run what we want to run and NO ONE is going to pay us to write anything good (or bad).
Don’t like us, then go away — unsubscribe! Just use the link below.
To send me feedback, don’t reply to this newsletter – instead, write directly to me at gary@ravepubs.com or for editorial ideas: Editor-in-Chief Sara Abrons at sara@ravepubs.com
A little about me: I graduated from Journalism School at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (where I am adjunct faculty). I’ve been in the AV-industry since 1987 where I started with Extron and eventually moved to AMX. So, I guess I am an industry veteran (although I don’t think I am that old). I have been an opinionated columnist for a number of industry publications and in the late 1990s I started the widely read KNews eNewsletter (the first in the AV market) and also created the model for and was co-founder of AV Avenue – which is now known as InfoComm IQ. rAVe Publications has been around since 2003, when we launched our original newsletter, rAVe ProAV Edition.
rAVe HomeAV Edition, co-published with CEDIA, launched in February, 2004.
To read more about my background, our team, and what we do, go to https://www.ravepubs.com Back to Top |
Copyright 2016 – rAVe [Publications] – All rights reserved. For reprint policies, contact rAVe [Publications], 210 Old Barn Ln. – Chapel Hill, NC 27517 – 919/969-7501. Email: sara@ravepubs.com
rAVe HomeAV Edition contains the opinions of the author only and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of other persons or companies or its sponsors. |
|
|
|