Comparison between Monitor and Monitor-less in an Intercom System
Published on 17.07.23
Frequently asked questions
Choice of Monitor or Monitor-less
- It is often asked to Managing Agent (MA) and Management Corporation Strata Title (MCST) in an overhaul planning
- Usually raised by residents in the annual general meeting when considering an expense for upgrading of intercom system
OUR OPINION
Whenever Possible, Keep the Monitor in the Intercom System
In today’s technology-driven world, IT failures are an inevitable part of life, despite constant investments in infrastructure and systems. However, one way to mitigate the impact of such failures is by incorporating an intercom system with a monitor. This integrated setup allows the system to continue functioning through the monitor even when the IT infrastructure is down.
The monitor in an intercom system serves as a crucial component that enables certain features which would otherwise be inaccessible. For instance, in emergency situations, a panic call feature can be activated through the monitor, providing an immediate means of communication and assistance. This is particularly beneficial for senior or physically constrained family members who may require immediate help.
In addition to these essential functions, the monitor can serve as a versatile device for other purposes. When not in use for intercom communication, it can be utilized as a smart switch or control panel for home automation applications. This means that the monitor can be integrated with various smart devices, such as smart lighting systems, allowing homeowners to control and customize their home environment.
Advantage
Why Choose Monitor-less Interfaces?
- Suitable as a second best solution for homes with existing analogue infrastructure and where full IT infrastructure overhaul is not desired.
- Cost-effective alternative to re-laying cables and building new infrastructure for an IP system, saving significant expenses.
- Monitor carries heavier one-time acquisition cost. Monitor-less requires yearly license fee. Cost disparity between 2 options wiped out over time.
- Saving a space on the wall of the residence
Disadvantage
Disadvantages in Monitor-less Interfaces
- During IT downtime, the monitor-less intercom system fails, requiring visitors to contact the host by phone upon arrival. The host must personally go to the lobby to fetch visitors since they can’t use the elevator without permission. This inconveniences residents who heavily rely on online shopping or food delivery, especially if the intercom system is disarmed due to IT failure.
- IT failures could be inevitably an occasional event. APP sponsored by government despite constant capital investment and professional management cannot escape the experience.
- Missing product features (current or new) built in monitors for home safety and smart home.
- Hacking? Possible. Concern can be alleviated if choosing credible brands.
Final thoughts
Conclusion and Recommendations
In summary, the monitor version remains the preferred choice when infrastructure and cost allow for it. The cost savings argument alone is not sufficient to justify opting for a monitor-less system. However, in situations where budget constraints limit infrastructure investments, monitor-less systems serve as a viable alternative, providing residents with the benefits of IP technology. Nonetheless, these systems come with limitations, relying solely on IT performance without a backup plan. Additionally, residents miss out on the improvement features and functionalities available through monitors, such as enhanced safety features and integration with home automation applications. Overall, the monitor version offers continuous functionality and a more comprehensive experience, making it the optimal choice when feasible.
