Add me to the list also. I have four existing manual controllers already wired and operational in different parts of my yard. I would love to replace them with Rachio Controllers, but there is no logical way to do so.
I’m glad I read this thread and related posts. Without proper integration, like others, I will have no viable option but to to go with another product that supports more stations. Shame.
So, all 5 of my Rachio systems made it through the Woolsey fire that ravaged our canyon. We lost all our barns, tack rooms, outbuildings and a lot of fence and trees, but saved the house and vineyard.
However we lost our booster pumps and water distribution manifolds and now the single controller limit issue is even worse. Without the water pressure boost for the main water line (Due to be repaired by August 2019) I am back to manually adjusting fixed schedules every time the weather changes here in Southern California. Except I am not able to live there (for another ±3 months) and I cannot get any real data on ground moisture so I have to drive over the 10 miles every other day to check on everything.
Multiple controller integration would help.
API so we could manage the system in other ways would help.
Multiple moisture sensors would help.
In fact almost all the things people ask for would help.
FIXED only schedules would help for allowing simplistic multi-controller set ups.
Look back in this thread - The need for MORE zones not less will only increase as water rationing increases across the country and that means we have to have a way to communicate with more zones. 16 will soon not be enough. In fact it already is. We are renting a small house on an R8 lot until our home is repaired. It has a small back yard (45 sqM) and a small front yard (30sqm) lots of planter beds and flowers in each yard. THey have 19 zones to keep water pressure in check when watering.
This thread is about what we were led to believe and what we were told was on the road map. Do I like Rachio the product? Yes. Do I feel the same about Rachio the company? Not so much.
I don’t follow the line of reasoning described by the CTO. Seems like an attempt to overcomplicate.
From a very high level these devices are nothing more than wifi connected, database controlled, 24v relays. How difficult can it be to make one unit act as a dumb slave to a primary unit. For one database to extend the other. If this is complicated to implement at the database level, something is very, very wrong already.
My personal issue is not that I need over 16zones. I simply have two dumb controllers that I want to turn into a smart system without having to extend the 24v lines to a single point. Having me buy two units to accomplish this seems like an easy money maker for rachio Mr CTO.
I would sit down with your database and software guys again and take a more constructive approach to solving this moneymaker before the competition arrives with an easy fix.
The fact that two devices can be on the same network unaware with each other in order to not interfere with each other without user intervention, (manual scheduling) seems beyond strange in 2019. In a world of connected devices, this seems like a must have feature.
I love the simple intuitive UI that is miles ahead of competition but this is such a thorn that for me takes away the entire value proposition of ditching my dumb timers…that do work.
Raising my hand here as another residential multiple unit user. I have a 2.5 acre property, and I’m currently running 3 controllers, 8+8+16. Conflicts for me mean the pump shuts down, and that’s no fun. I really like the product otherwise; I’d love to be able to take advantage of more of its features. An API would be great; then I’d just roll my own schedule adjuster.