Scotmod Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Because oxo in the space of an hour you went from telling the guy that it would be welcome to then put up or shut up. The guy has been nice enough to take the time and reply. He's clearly passionate about it otherwise why bother signing up here to defend his kit. It's not like he's claiming it to do things it can't. Then again it raises the big old question of who gives a monkeys what grade it is. If it works it works. They would have more customers if they advertised a bit more and lowered their prices. How many diyers would buy it knowing all they had to do was stick it on the wall? Granted it doesn't look like much but then again I like the look of Pyronix kit and think Risco looks like it was done on a napkin on someone's tea break. If ADT has taught us anything over the last year or two it's that grading means nothing. Nice looking kit that does the job sells. Customers don't know what grading is and they don't care. I
Oxo Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 I feel your still incorrect in the way you interpreted my questions. It was asked , well look back and see. I mentioned he was "defending" himself too much. Quite as I am doing now from your comments. See the comparison? If the equipment is as good as mentioned then it might kill off certain DIY tat that is next to useless. I would mention names , but this would then leave this site open to litigation. But you know the Response from an associated Harvard (If you cannot work out the connection, don`t worry) ..........are totally different. So if this IS able to be graded, as stated and the prices reduced then it could be viable in the market. There was no need to be insulting to anyone, as the case seems to be here at the moment. I certainly was not. Mentioning being too defensive is not an insult. You are of course right to point this out. Perhaps you can use this insight in other threads to assist others being attacked?
oasistechnical Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 i think i will stick to Honeywell Galaxy wireless. and its cheaper!! and i trust it!!Oasis but for those who dont know and do not have our ability and expertise its a good idea
Gamma7 Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 Just a quick update, I am pleased to be able to say that we have today been granted the EN50131 certification. I have attached a copy of this here for the people that slated me and my products, and those that were actually really interested. We will get the certification uploaded to our gamma7 site in due course as we must instruct our web team to undertake this work. We are not increasing prices or changing anything we do, we will still prebuild any system sold and set it up how the clients want them configured. This enables us to fully test the systems before they are sent out and also enables the installers to have a pain free installation as all works first time and no need to contact sellers for help installing while on site. However on that note we are on the end of the telephone or email and can help with all matters of the alarm should installers require help. We try to make this as pain free as possible for both the installer and the clients
AdrianMealing Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 The approvals listed are wrong:- EN50131-1 is a system standard, nothing to do with components. EN50131-2-4 is for dualtechs, not PIR's, i don't see any dulatechs on your website. No EN standard for the control equipment. No mention of PD6662 the UK scheme for EN and BS standards. To have any validity the certificate and testing must be carried out by a laboratory that complies with EN45011 and ISO67, this should appear on the certificate and the test reports. The standards you listed before are all legal requirements to apply a CE mark, so these would be expected.(although not guaranteed.) Not trying to slate your product, but the facts you have presented are incorrect, and potentially misleading. Question:- do any of your products have removal from mounting tamper detection? amealing@texe.com Head of Industry Affairs Visit Our Website Texecom
Adi Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 Nor would the certificate have a false first name only signed on it. I really can't be ar**** with it anymore.
matthew.brough Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 The approvals listed are wrong:- EN50131-1 is a system standard, nothing to do with components. EN50131-2-4 is for dualtechs, not PIR's, i don't see any dulatechs on your website. No EN standard for the control equipment. No mention of PD6662 the UK scheme for EN and BS standards. To have any validity the certificate and testing must be carried out by a laboratory that complies with EN45011 and ISO67, this should appear on the certificate and the test reports. The standards you listed before are all legal requirements to apply a CE mark, so these would be expected.(although not guaranteed.) Not trying to slate your product, but the facts you have presented are incorrect, and potentially misleading. Question:- do any of your products have removal from mounting tamper detection? Can't knock your knowledge www.securitywarehouse.co.uk/catalog/
Cubit Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 Nor would the certificate have a false first name only signed on it.In his defence, it's standard practice for them to adopt English names.
Ronnie Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 Does any of this matter? I can't see anyone on this forum giving this product any credibility so it's just going to turn into a slating match.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.