what is preferred programming platform??

[jlu]

Between crestron and amx, which one is good for video teleconferencing purpose. I know the varibales are many here- type of equipments, vendors etc. But I just want to know what route to follow if you want to integrate many AV euipments and video conferencing equipments.

[Gary Miyakawa]

There are two trains of thought between the companies.

AMX is a MUCH smaller company and I think, from my standpoint, the most significant thing is that the code to run the panel and control unit is stored in "source" format.

Crestron requires you to compile the cost and then upload it to the control unit or Touch panel.

I believe, the two have basically, similiar capabilities.

I know a few of the integrators won't use AMX because the source code is exposed. They want that stuff under lock and key.

I'm sure others will chime in...

Gary Miyakawa

[vtjoe]

Originally posted by Gary Miyakawa@Jun 10 2004, 08:45 PM
I know a few of the integrators won't use AMX because the source code is exposed.  They want that stuff under lock and key.


I am not an AMX programmer, but have worked with AMX products in the past including upgrading the control software and touch panel (mainly for the Tandberg Educator). I thought once the software was uploaded on the AMX, it could not be downloaded. This may be different for newer AMX products. In theory, the touch panel could be upgraded by the dealer/reseller on-site or over a modem without giving the customer access to the code. And I also believe a "token"/compiled file can be created for AMX touchpanels.

I work in an all Crestron environment, but once again am not a Crestron progreammer. It is my understanding that on the Crestron systems, the controller software is compiled before uploading to the controller (and very difficult, if not impossible to reverse compile). However, downloading the software off the controller is as easy as upgrading the software. It just can't be tinkered with once it is downloaded. Giving a copy of the Crestron controller to the customer doesn't do them any good other than the specific machine the program was compiled for (or an exact duplicate integrated setup).

Somebody, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Either way, I suggest that anybody purchasing these products also get the source code from the integrator as part of the purchase. It will cost you more upfront, but when you need the small changes done, you won't need to find your original integrator. What happens if your integrator is out of business, can't find their code or just not responsive? - not that that happens in this business :lol:

[mazzarak]

On my side, I have seen a lot more clients with Crestron than AMX, but does that mean they are better? I'm not sure. In my experience these things are only as good as the user who's using it...

[Toney]

Can add my 2 cents worth here. We use Crestron and love the kit. We have all our conference rooms integrated with Crestron controllers. Although I'm not a Crestron programmer, I did go on their introductory training course. I had integrators build our rooms and program up the Crestrons, but I found with a little playing around, I could actually alter the code quite easily.
And I certainly strongly suggest (like the others did) to insist on getting the source code from the integrator. It'll come in handy if you need to troubleshoot something or more importantly, upgrade your systems. My experience here in the UK, is that with so many integrators coming and going added with the fact that they all use independent programmers, you may never be able to track down the code again if you need to work with it in future.
With Crestron, their resources are extremely good, you can download alot of prefab codes for different vendors from their site. It saves you or your programmer from having to create control codes for the various pieces of equipment from scratch.
On a geeky note, I actually find playing/programming with Crestron quite a bit of fun... :rolleyes:

[Talon Oak]

I'd like to add my two cents worth as well. I have been working with video conference systems for over 12 years now and I've worked with both Crestron and AMX.
The early Crestron control systems (Crestnet II) was a very bulky system to work with. While the control system program could be written up on a PC the easiest way to program it was by pushing buttons in sequence. The only way that I have programmed one was by pushing buttons in sequence and then downloading the program onto a disk.

The newer Crestron systems (those now in use) are written in a command code similar to the AMX. What I have seen of it, it is easier to understand than AMX, but it is compiled before loading onto the control system. The command code can be downloaded from the Crestron control system now and it is in clear code, so changes can be made almost immediately and tested.

The AMX system was used by the company I worked for instead of the Crestron control system simply because you didn't have to spend a lot of time pushing buttons to program it. You could write the code, compile it, upload it to a control frame and test it before you even got to the site. Again, this program had to be compiled but by keeping the clear code you could make changes and compile it again, then load the new code. Unfortunately, the AMX control frame only had 64K of memory (later that was upgraded to 128K) so unless you had a very basic program you couldn't load the clear code with the compiled code. That is why you couldn't get the clear code from the AMX frame.

The new AMX control system (I forget the name of it) can now be controlled over a LAN system and the clear code can be downloaded from the system. I have done this myself, but didn't take the time to try and debug it, I left that up to the programmers.

All in all, I would say that whether to use AMX or Crestron depends on the end user and what they are comfortable with. If you've never used either one, then it becomes a coin toss as to which one to use.

[George]

I'm interested in knowing how you all got into programming in the first place. Also are there any places on the web a newbie could go to learn the basics?

[Entropy3XD]

Originally posted by George@Jun 15 2004, 11:26 PM
I'm interested in knowing how you all got into programming in the first place. Also are there any places on the web a newbie could go to learn the basics?
For AMX, go to www.amx.com and create a "consultant" account (free). The training section is a good place to start. They have on-demand courses and you can take the cert tests online.

[MACC the AVCOtek]

Originally posted by jlu@Jun 11 2004, 02:24 AM
Between crestron and amx, which one is good for video teleconferencing purpose. I know the varibales are many here- type of equipments, vendors etc. But I just want to know what route to follow if you want to integrate many AV euipments and video conferencing equipments.
You can get a good and functional system using either Crestron or AMX. These systems are similar enough that it doesn't really make much difference, from an end-user standpoint, which one you go with. What does matter however is finding an integrator who knows what he's doing. Find one that has a track record using AMX or Crestron and tell them exactly what you want your system to do.

If you are going to be coding this yourself, I suggest Crestron because it's a little easier to learn. AMX programming, on the other hand, is much more flexible than Crestron.

My company - we're an integrator - uses AMX almost exclusively. We are only now broadening our horizons and are exploring Crestron systems as well. Our choice of AMX was not necessarily based on them having the better equipment or programming - it was based on customer service. Until recently, Crestron's customer service was very bad. They have made a conscious effort to change this though and are gaining market share because of it.

[dbc3804]

I am a certified AMX designer/programmer/installer. Having programmed various computers for over 30 years, my personal preference was to go with AMX over Crestron due to the programming language and development environment. AMX source code is compiled into an intermediate form, much like BASIC was handled on the original IBM PC. When the program is downloaded to the NetLinx master controller, it can be installed with or without the source code files. The token file is what is used by the system, and the source code (if desired) is saved in a zip format on the master. Source code can be downloaded or not, and password protected.

Being an independent programmer, I download the source code with the token file, and generally also provide a copy of the complete project to the customer. Some AMX-provided modules do not come with source code - only the token files. Reverse-engineering a token file may be possible in theory, but woule probably be very nasty to work with.

I give my customers a non-exclusive right to use and modify my code as they see fit. However, I reserve the right to reuse the code for other projects.

[bgoez]

I am also a certified AMX designer/programmer/installer, and have played around with both systems. As far as who is better? I'm not sure either is a better platform. I like the communications side of the amx systems better. As far as which system looks better in your application that's up to you. The Code isn't an issue with us as it is also compiled as stated in the post above. if you don't want your clients to have the source you don't put it in the master. A lot of very neat controls are in the AMX side but Crestron also has some pretty neat stuff.