I found the article to be packed with great information. However, the final edit semed to leave several run-on sentences that promoted confusion.
Look at this example taken from the last portion of the article:
The integration of Z-Wave hardware in own projects is quite...
To my eye, the word "your" was probably intended to go between "in" and "own" but is missing. This kind of omission is sprinkled througout the article.
Overall a well-researched article by someone obviously familiar with Z-Wave. Nice overview.
The link to the BuLogics website is giving me trouble because of the trailing slash.
Full Disclosure: I work for BuLogics.
the problem is that: it's nearly a single vendor thing, unlike zigbee.
z-wave is easier to implement while zigbee is not, however zigbee seems more open, also i don't think zwave support 6lowpan
Z-wave rules for HA(home automation), Zigbee is still _trying_ for SE(smart energy) after so many years, I worked on zigbee for a long while and hated that, it's too complicated for simply sensors, the protocol/profile design is terrible(i.e. no two profiles can co-exist on the same node), the only thing good about zigbee is that it has a fancy name, its spec is made by marketing folks instead of engineers.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.