R72

[matt]

Maybe maintaining a set of "stable" releases people could use. Clearly denoting what they are for and when they came out.

Is that a typo about version R204? Sounds like Almond, not Almond+ (this section). No need to add to the confusion...

I assume he meant that as hyperbole, that in years the only thing he could go back to would be 70as, and nothing in between.

[bwainscott]

Maybe maintaining a set of "stable" releases people could use. Clearly denoting what they are for and when they came out.

Is that a typo about version R204? Sounds like Almond, not Almond+ (this section). No need to add to the confusion...

Yes, a set of firmware downloadable from their site would be nice.  And no, it was not a typo -- I meant to say that if all firmware from now on is LCD only, then 5 years or so from now (R204 -- some large future value) I will be unhappy having no recent good firmware if there is a problem.  I just picked a largish number at random...  sorry for any confusion.

[fillibar]

Heh. My mistake. Almond firmware IS at R200 so it seemed too close to me to be random.

Yeah... It will be a problem. Hopefully, like I said, this was a limited test of the LUI or some correctable difficulty. We shall see.

[mr23]

Well at some point firmware updates should become rare (not soon, but eventually), so the added inconvenience should not be a big deal.  I just never want to get to the point where I get a bad firmware update and there is no way to roll back to a known working version.  Having a known good firmware sitting on my laptop ready to go is very reassuring.  I'd rather not have to downgrade from R204 to R70as because that was the last firmware of which I have a copy.

As long as manufacturers are rolling out new compatible sensors, Securifi will need to issue sufficiently prompt updates, so owners can use them, correct? At some point new tech will replace them, and we'll all upgrade to Almond++. Securifi should be able to find a way to separately upgrade sensor support from the main image, some plugin or patch...

[fillibar]

I am probably wrong, but I think they have some framework (at least a start or concept) in place to do this.
Look at the file name of past versions. It looks like it is broken up into different identifying pieces for parts of the code like ZigBee and Z-Wave.

Quick, automatic patching for sensor support just makes sense. Especially if it will be able to refresh added, but unsupported, devices to make them supported.

[Ab]

I'm for it too .... I'd like to have one or more stable versions that I can roll back to. This is a necessity not just a need. For e.g. I had to rollback my Netgear routers firmware which corrupted very conveniently after the service warranty expired and Netgear wanted me to pay the equiv of a new router for something which only a simple firmware rollback and roll forward resolved the issue and w/o having to incur any downtime. This spells savings all around! 

So Yes! this is a absolute must! dear management!

[LGNilsson]

If you want the firmware file, simply contact the support team and they'll provide it.

[fillibar]

So... Lars help! We need the firmware.
Just joking.