Talk:C-Bus (protocol)
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
CEBus != C-Bus
[edit]Oppose the proposed merge of C-Bus (protocol) and CEBus: My familiarity with CEBus is from many months of work in 1992 and 1993 implementing the first development system: that is, a system for developers to create, debug and test CEBus hardware and software. The devices available at the time communicated by powerline carrier, though the standard mentioned twisted wire and several others (RF, IR, coax, fiber optic). We knew CEBus initially as EIA IS-60.06. The names Consumer Electronic Bus and CEBus arose almost immediately. I think IS meant Intermediate Standard while EIA was finalizing the specification which eventually became EIA-600.
The literature for C-Bus ([1]) appears to avoid technical details which would definitively determine whether they are related protocols. However, some technical items appear as differences:
| CEBus | C-Bus | |
|---|---|---|
| maximum devices | 232 | 255 networks of 100 devices, using C-Bus Network Bridges, no limitation when TCP/IP used. |
| powerline carrier | yes | no |
| twisted pair voltage | <= 12 | 15-42VDC |
| power supply | integrated into devices | separate bus units and integrated into certian devices |
| manufacturers | multiple | Clipsal Australia |
| version for North America | yes | Yes, SquareD |
| available | 1993 | 1994 |
Presumably these differences suggest the protocols are unrelated. Though one has to admire the similarities of implementation, application, timing, function and name! — EncMstr 18:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Also a lot of installers provide information about C-Bus installations to be much more reliable and higer level, than CEBus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.141.203.192 (talk • contribs)