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.
My Mom the Radio Star Max MaxfieldPost a comment I've said it before and I'll say it again -- it's a funny old world when you come to think about it. Last Friday lunchtime, for example, I received an email from Tim Levell, the editor for ...
A Book For All Reasons Bernard Cole3 comments Robert Oshana's recent book "Software Engineering for Embedded Systems (Newnes/Elsevier)," written and edited with Mark Kraeling, is a 'book for all reasons.' At almost 1,200 pages, it ...