Three paths of development of small integrated systems.
In this article I will try to predict the future. Currently integrated systems exist only in computer implementation. Yes, some of them are quite economically justified for small objects, right down to individual apartments and summer cottages. However, the use of a computer, quite large in size, requiring regular maintenance is scary (otherwise, it is very likely that dust will stop the fans in a year, and then it is not far to disaster). And the computer is not so easy to operate that a retired grandmother could use it. Add a grandson (a young hacker) of a pensioner, and you will definitely not want to install such a system on an ordinary residential property.
Do you think I'm talking about those who are going crazy with fat? Do you think integrated systems are not needed by anyone at sites smaller than a metallurgical plant? Not at all. Video intercoms, video baby monitors, and car video recorders are quite common in the mass market. Security alarms do not seem unnecessary to anyone who owns real estate (even a room in a communal apartment), although not everyone decides to install them. Especially fire alarms — they are now mandatory in all new residential buildings. All components of integrated systems are quite common.
Maybe no one needs integration at small sites? Of course they do. The reasons are the same — the cumulative synergistic effect provides a significant increase in the quality of an integrated system compared to a set of independent subsystems.
Moreover, in small systems, serviced by non-professionals, this effect is significantly higher. The system should have one control panel, one interface for remote monitoring, and should itself record video in case of an alarm and remind that it should be viewed before making a decision. And all this with a simple interface designed for an untrained user.
The most obvious trend of integration is in the so-called GSM alarms, i.e. security systems initially focused on transmitting notifications via cellular networks. In fact, they now often use GPRS or even 3G networks to transmit large amounts of information, but out of habit they are collectively called GSM alarms. This name emphasizes both their origin and their main purpose — monitoring several sensors of a fire and security alarm. It is quite natural to transmit an acoustic signal (voice channel) in addition to transmitting an alarm notification via cellular communication to verify the alarm, and sometimes in the opposite direction, to try to scare the criminal via a speakerphone. As cellular technologies developed, some systems began to offer the transmission of images or even video clips using MMS or simply via a data channel via the Internet, like regular webcams. The same trend can be found in classic wired alarm systems of the apartment and cottage class. Many manufacturers add specialized modules to them that provide the transmission of several image frames. However, this path of integration development does not look particularly promising, since most existing fire alarm systems are initially designed to process only a few bits of information. Such systems have very weak processors, and their entire architecture is not designed to process audio and video signals. Even access control, if provided at all, is for one or two doors at most.
The second trend, the second way of emergence of integrated systems for small objects is the evolution of computer systems, originally intended for medium-sized objects. What do we dislike about computer systems? Excessive complexity of maintenance and redundant capabilities, hindering non-specialists. However, now microelectronic technologies have developed sufficiently, so it is quite possible to make a computer, powerful enough for many PC-based integrated systems (with a built-in video recorder, access control, alarm, etc.), but at the same time free from most of the shortcomings of conventional computers. It will not have fans (and generally no moving parts, including hard drives), it will have low consumption (and will be able to be powered from a regular uninterruptible power supply), finally, it will not have a keyboard or mouse, but only a sensitive screen. And if the operating system is configured accordingly, the user will not have access to any capabilities, except for the security system itself. Such devices (or almost such) are often released by developers of software for integrated systems. Pre-configured and configured computers, compact and reliable, designed for specific tasks. Unfortunately, pre-configured compact computers are still a bit expensive for widespread use in the low segment — residential apartments and houses. And the functionality of such systems is initially focused on fairly large objects, they are not simple and convenient enough for use in everyday life. However, this path also leads to the emergence of integrated security systems suitable for small objects.
Finally, the third way, which has recently emerged, is the development of autonomous compact (non-PC-based) video recorders for integration with security and fire alarm systems. The processing power of any video recorder is more than sufficient for simultaneous control of the interface units of the alarm system. Unfortunately, video recorders and alarm systems are usually manufactured by different companies, and each has its own closed communication protocols. However, there are cases when cooperation between developers leads to the possibility of direct control of one system from another. Thus, integrated systems appear in which an autonomous video recorder for several channels also acts as a central processor of the alarm and access control system, controlling security and fire alarms using inexpensive expansion units. Another advantage of such systems is the possibility of remote monitoring via the Internet, since the video recorders on which these systems are built usually initially have this capability, often with a convenient and simple web interface, i.e. they do not require any special software on the client side.
Which systems seem preferable now and in the future? Depending on the circumstances. If you are equipping objects intended for centralized monitoring, the first type of systems will probably be preferable — based on classic security systems, because they have advanced means of communication with standard centralized monitoring consoles. Video signal processing will be only a small addition, expanding the capabilities of these systems.
If the client is a modern, educated young person who readily accepts various new technologies and is not afraid of the rather complex interface of serious security systems, then a system of the second type may be appropriate, based on a conventional computer integrated security system, only slightly adapted for reliable operation and smaller dimensions: after all, no advanced fan of new technologies would want to monitor this system every week and carry out routine maintenance.
But it is most likely that even an advanced and educated person will prefer not a serious and complex (and boring) information system, but, as they say now, a new interesting gadget — a kind of thing that can be quickly and easily set up, communicate beautifully with it from Australia via the Internet, but not bother with serious efforts to study it. Just like most people who consider themselves modern choose newfangled mobile phones, but in fact do not know, and do not want to know, how iOS differs from Android. And indeed, new technologies should make life easier, not more difficult. Small systems solve standard problems, have standard functions and therefore should not require the owner to deeply understand the features of technology and technology.
It is enough that in any case, the installation of a security system includes the installation of at least a dozen devices — detectors, alarms, video cameras, etc. This, of course, will be gladly done by specialized installation organizations. But you shouldn't expect the system owner to call in specialists or study 700-page system manuals every time he needs to reconfigure the system. The system should work like a mobile phone. The main functions are available right away, some additional ones can be configured if you spend a couple of minutes digging around in the settings, and if you want something special, only then should you finally study the features of the system, the architecture, and all the intricacies of its configuration.