Our system here is very simple. @romon commented that perhaps I have not had sufficient on/off cycles of our devices for it to find them. If that is true then I am indeed going to have a long wait. I have read a lot of the materials on this forum and the Sense website explaining why manual intervention will not work. Every excuse they give is based on their desire to perfect the detection System. Basically they have placed the development of the device ahead of the needs of the user community.
While this may fit a technical development model; is is a poor user support model.
I constantly see people falling back on the claim that I could not possibly mark a device in the meter at the millisecond level. I would not plan to even try. This ignores the fact that I do not have to. What I have proposed from the start is to let the Sense equipment do the detecting. Just as it does now with one exception. When it puts up a flag in the meter as it does now; I should be able to click on that flag and tell sense what that device is; if I know; even if I have to do it again when the device turns off.
That identification would in fact be in context; noise and all; and could then be used by Sense to ask me later when it thinks it has seen that device again. I would not be the one identifying when the device comes on an off; Sense would be doing that. All I would be doing is giving it some idea of what that might be. Too be fair; in this scenario I should have already entered the device in the listings for my home as I have.
As to polluting the data base these guys are developing; that would not happen if they recognize and isolate those identifications until they prove out over time. That is far easier than they claim in these forums. Meanwhile, I at least have a chance to reduce this unknown bubble and increase the number of known devices.
I seem to have to keep repeating this. I like the idea of a device like sense. I am enjoying using the one I have. But It is far less useful to me if it is clueless as to what I have in my home. At this juncture it is no better than many other monitors that cost far less and are marketed with the abilities they actually possess.; not those they they say it will have some day.
I should also say that my home is not complex. We have a breaker box that has only one side, so two sided detection is not an issue. There are only two of us here, and things get turned on and off a lot but individually. So the cocktail party analogy is far less applicable to us than it might be to others. Though I recognize the issue, and what I propose might help with that as the Identification would be in context.
I am not suggesting a “teaching” system where users turn on single devices and identify them. I agree that this would be counterproductive. I am suggesting allowing users to identify devices in full context of normal use.
The take away for the Sense folks from all of this should be this. They need to either provide some way for people to manually identify a device that Sense can see going on and off; or they need to explain on the outside of the box that SOMEDAY this device might be able to detect devices on its own; but that the technology is not yet mature.