What do you find as most reliable; Z-Wave, Insteon or old X-10?
That is a "loaded" question; one which almost goes into the realm of much debate.
Today I use all three plus one called UPB.
I have gone full circle with X-10. I have this traditional outdoor illumination "thing" every year around Christmas time. Many years ago I started with X-10. Just the past 10 years I have used Z-Wave and Insteon and UPB for said said endeavor and also switching from incandescent little bulbs to LED lamps and back again to incandescent bulbs.
I have sort of regressed these last few years in my old age to using X-10.
Mostly because of the programming time involved and wanting to get the endeavor of holiday lighting done quickly.
Some folks always had issues with legacy X-10; mostly relating to powerline noise. Its is the first and a very simple transport. Here today I have upgraded my X-10 by utilizing JV Engineering XTB boosters. I configure all of the switches to one code and send a command to them and they all go on at one time. I do not get poweline feedback other than seeing them go on.
The natural progression of the X-10 protocal was an end user device device that could talk using the old X-10 and something new.
Insteon was created as a hybrid of powerline and wireless bridging technology. I used it and it worked. I had devices that continued to talk X-10 to the Insteon devices and other devices that spoke Insteon to same said devices. Initially first generation was using wireless bridging between phases of electricity in the home. Today 2nd generation Insteon has evolved a bit related to use of wireless methodologies. Today this has been good or bad depending on how you look at it. The old users of first generation Insteon either welcomed the changes or just decided not to "ride the wave" of the Insteon protocal "divorcing" themselves from it.
Pause here - my home electrical has always been metal tubing with the 120VAC wires and metal cans for all of the outlets and switches.
I tried Z-Wave next which uses pure wireless and does dynamically create its routing of things protocal. Fast with their little CPUs. What a great idea it is to use an evolved wireless protocal for automation. This does add a bit more complexity when dealing with wireless battery operated devices though relating to its routing and the "checks and balances". It is quick and easy.
Concurrently utilizing a pure powerline transport called UPB which has evolved a bit over the years.
So relating to your OP (original post).
Z-Wave (pure wireless) is almost newest today such that the ideology of what is newer can be better?
That said Insteon (hybrid of wired and wireless) topology and methodology has kind of reinvented itself in the "race" for the standards of automation transport; such that Insteon is new new again and again (X2). It can be also considered a "natural" transition from X-10 to ...
I do not dim my LED lighting today and do utilize automation for turning it on or off. I am going with baby steps here as its still very new stuff. I have redone all of my outdoor lighting over the last 4 years switching from incandescent 12 VAC with huge toroidal transformers (1000 watts each X 4) to smaller DIN mounted 12VDC less than 100 watt transformers. Still an experiment looking to connect the entire infrastructure to batteries and and solar charging with maybe wireless control transport.
I have no real answer other than give Z-Wave a try with the Almond + and see how you personally like it; I am looking forward to getting my hands on an Almond + to do the same.
Personally I have not tried Zigbee yet and also look forward to giving it a spin with the Almond +.
