PSIOctober2018

www.psimagazine.co.uk
EDITORIAL
Product upgrades:
Smartphone App
Connect SmartCom
Wireless Wall Plug
Micro Contact-W
Texecom Connect App
WiFi & IP Communicator
Connect SmartPlug
Wireless Miniature Contact
Go big or bespoke
The idea behind research and development is
to create a product that the market wants so
that when it is launched it makes money for
the manufacturer. But if you could have any
technology, what would you go for?
One of the joys of this job is to get out and meet the readers
of the magazine, in other words chatting over a cuppa with
an installer. We have the monthly Meet the Installer
articles that for which I travel around the nation talking shop with
security installers and those managing businesses in the security
sector - and it’s great fun.
In general we talk mostly about sports and music before
finally getting down to the task in hand and recording an
interview about security. The set of questions is the same each
month and the answers throw up a range of views and concerns.
One question that always has people thinking is “What is your
dream security technology product?” More often than not, the
subject of integration is mentioned and remote monitoring and
maintenance crop up regularly too. However this month I met up
with a father and son team who gave me two answers that I
hadn’t had before and one of them raised an interesting point.
The dad in question suggested that he would like hybrid vans
for the company as they would be ideal for the short, trafficheavy
journeys that installers tend to make - a sound idea that
any business that has to buy fuel will associate with. The son
however came up with an answer that was the polar opposite of
what many installers have asked for over the years.
As I mentioned earlier, the majority of people say that they
would like one security product that carries out fire, video,
intruder and access functions, fully integrated and monitored and
maintained remotely via a networked device. You may well go
along with that opinion. The younger of the two being
interviewed suggested that he would not like the idea of one
‘jack of all trades’ as he put it, as it would likely be a ‘master of
none’. He said he preferred to use separate systems that are
developed specifically to do one function very well; you want
CCTV, buy a CCTV system; you want access, buy access etc. Not
for him the super duper clever route, which is the conundrum for
security systems developers. We expect our devices to be ‘smart’
and able to do everything, invariably leading to a situation where
one system breaking down renders the whole operation
unworkable. Is it too much of a risk to have one system that is
responsible for everything? Is adding functions a risk?
In the 1970s, my dad refused to have a radio in the car as he
said it was just one more thing that could go wrong. Maybe he
had a point and we should be thinking along those lines when we
dream up single solutions for managing entire security and fire
applications in the future.
Is one size fits all just one point of failure after all?
Andy Clutton
EDITOR
5