This object is in archive! 

Are Zipato correcting any bugs at all in the Rule Creator?

David Pritchard shared this question 8 years ago
Need Answer

Many of us have been very patient with the Zipabox's shaky reliability, but almost six months after buying it, hardly a single significant bug that I have reported has been fixed (apart from one or two particularly bad regressions).


In response to another bug I reported the other day, I was told that they can't "debug individual users' rules". Wow. Zipato seem to be moving into the denial phase.


My money is tied up with other things just now, but as soon as I have some free cash, either I see a significant improvement or my Zipabox is going on eBay.

Replies (2)

photo
1

Hey David,


which bugs in the rule creator do you mean. I am running more than 50 rules for steering LEDs, remote controlls, garden pumps depending on temperature, movements and so on. I know, that it is no good idea to send too much calls to device in short time, but this seems a z-wave problem. I want to learn from your experiences: which bug did you find?

photo
1

The ones I know of are:


- IP Devices don't work properly. Adding a few of them causes the device to run out of memory (I have 3 Sonos speakers and 2 Nest thermostats) and continually go off line. The workaround is to, ahem, delete your IP devices. A fix has been promised for months now, but no news so far.

- There appears to be a size limit bug for rules that prevents changes from being saved to them when they exceed that size (I have a rule listing public holiday and vacations to determine which days are working days; there's no way to get the rule to save the last set of dates).

- The scheduler. I have a rule set to run every half hour; it runs sometimes every hour, sometimes every ninety minutes. Previously it ran once a day, so I suppose that's an improvement. Also some apparently random failures schedulers with other rules, although I get the impression they have become less frequent.

- String attributes are all handled as numbers (example: any string attribute associated with the weather station, such as "weatherDesc" or "winddir16Point"). The only reaction so far has been to propose removing "weatherDesc" from the interface(!)

- Changing a switch twice in quick succession fails. This has a workaround, which is to put a "wait" of 1-2 seconds after the first change. Otherwise, the second change is not registered.

- The latest problem I had was the failure of a straightforward boolean condition, which should have evaluated to "true" but didn't. This provoked the comment about not debugging my rules. Lovely, when we're the ones doing the free debugging for Zipato.


That's without even getting into all the things that have been promised but not delivered, such as ModBus support.

photo
1

interesting, so what device would you swap too?

photo
1

Maybe the Vera. I'm not sure. I did look in detail at all the devices on the market a while ago, and Vera was one of the most complete in terms of functionality. My main complaint was the lack of KNX support, because it seemed to me that I needed it to connect my ventilation system. However, I think it should also be possible to do it via IP/ModBus, something promised by Zipato but so far not delivered. I believe (but I'm not sure) that I could connect such a device to the Vera.

The other thing that seems attractive after all these months with the Zipabox is its lower-level approach. With the Zipabox, we're in the ludicrous situation where you can get all sorts of good information with a HTTP GET request, but because they haven't bothered to create a way to get that information into the Zipabox, it's useless.

The higher-level the UI, the more effort you have to make to incorporate all the necessary high-level functions into it. Lower-level systems are harder to use, but they give you more building blocks to do things yourself. Zipabox need to grasp this if their platform is to be a success, but so far it seems that is not the case. (The refusal to handle string values(!) is another illustration of this).

photo
1

*I mean the Vera's lower-level approach. Should have clarified that.

photo
Leave a Comment
 
Attach a file