What I want to say:
> Alexa, open the garage door
What I actually need to say
> Alexa, tell Some App Name to open the garage door
What I want to say:
> Alexa, open the garage door
What I actually need to say
> Alexa, tell Some App Name to open the garage door
The thing that annoys me is when this doesn't work.
> "Alexa, play <station name as it appears in Alexa App> on Pandora"
> "I couldn't find <station name as it appears in Alexa App>, here's some crap on Amazon Music"
I try and get it to play Kiss FM UK and says a strange word and then dies. Raised it to Amazon and they are looking into it.
> they will fix it
The reality: > they are looking into it > they are looking into it
The reality: > it's written in a ticket somewhereI wonder if they changed something, or my memory has tricked me. (The weird thing is not only that I remember doing it that way, but I have no memories of having any troubles with it, and this is certainly what I would do on my first try)
What I want it to say:
> Alexa, tell %NAME% it's time (for a nap|to go to bed|to eat dinner)
What I have to say:
> Alexa, tell Toddler Boss to tell %NAME% it's time to go to bed.
It's not natural sounding at all.
This is what he did on HBO's Silicon Valley. It was quite..weird.
I have a TP-Link Smart Switch and have their Kasa app integrated with my Echo, and all I need to do is name my switches and say things like "Alexa, [device name] on", "Alexa, turn on [device name]". So it's definitely possible for 3rd party apps to turn devices on and off with Alexa without requiring users to mention the app name.
Maybe you just need to change your app to add your garage door as a device to the Echo and use the provided on/off commands rather than register your own custom commands? I can imagine the device on/off paradigm could be limiting for certain use cases, but not for this one.
I have a google home, and through integration with IFTTT I can say "Okay Google open the garage door" and it will work. It's so much smoother than telling the garage to "turn on", or telling the front door to "turn off".
It's the major reason why i've stopped using and actually sold the echo but i'm getting a second home soon.
It's not for everyone, but i'm really enjoying the setup. Although if i could I would remove IFTTT from the whole equation. Everything else is running off of a server in my house, so IFTTT is the only part that's really not fully in my control.
But as it's nothing but a "layer" on top of the rest as an "ease of activation" kind of thing, i'm not that worried.
IFTTT is the ONLY thing on Google home right now that lets you create fully custom voice actions. It's got a lot of things like this.
There are a few similar services, but at the end of the day, if it's within my capability to talk directly to a service, I'm going to just write my own code to talk to it (or my FOSS HA system will more likely support it very quickly).
IFTTT's power to me is completely in its ability to integrate with otherwise "locked down" services.
Isn't this quite a security risk? I'm imagining a burglar standing outside with a megaphone and ordering your house to let them in.
But that aside, it's setup so that my home automation system will only listen to the voice actions if there is someone home. But that was more to prevent IFTTT bugs from opening when I'm not home.
If someone wants to go through all that trouble to break into my house, let them. I have insurance and security cameras. I'm not going to build my house like a vault to prevent someone from stealing my TV any more than I'm going to walk-around in a bullet proof vest to prevent someone from shooting me.
Edit: Sorry if this comes across a little shitty sounding. I get asked this just about every single time I bring this up. I have this response pretty loaded...
I'm not sure if that part is open to developers or not. It looks like it is. There's a "Get More Smart Home Skills" button that shows 59 options, so it's probably not just for the big boys.