(^ these aren't meant to be sassy rhetorical questions, I'm genuinely curious if everyone else just views this a different way than I do)
(^ these aren't meant to be sassy rhetorical questions, I'm genuinely curious if everyone else just views this a different way than I do)
Agree about the complexity as well. Analog circuits don’t have an API that changes every few years — a modern 3-way light switch circuit would be easily understood by an electrician from 1920 (and vice-versa). Good luck doing that with Lutron gear from a decade ago.
I probably dropped $5k on home automation stuff. While I could afford it and it was partially a research project, the main lesson I learned was that home automation is generally more trouble than its worth at any price. Sure, it’s great that I can tell Alexa to turn my lights off, but I also have to make sure that the 3 services required to make that work remain talking to each other. I would cumulatively save more time by just walking downstairs to turn the lights off.
I agree about reliability. It's one reason I won't get a Nest thermostat. I live in snow country and I'm not going to do anything that potentially introduces a new failure mode into my heating system.
(I actually have a couple of the Nest smoke detectors. The internet connection isn't required for them to function as dumb detectors and they work well in my experience.)
I can appreciate not wanting to allow Google the opportunity to brick your thermostat (and hence your furnance) through some kind of software issue but if you’re willing to extend that faith to their smoke detectors, why not your furnace?
It's probably paranoia about the thermostat too TBH. But other than looking cooler than my old programmable Honeywell, a Nest thermostat also wouldn't really do anything for me anyway.
I suppose if it fails with the relays energized it's going to get pretty hot inside, but in the meantime if I have issues with the HA system I can just turn it off and use the old thermostats. This was great while I was debugging my design.
On the flip side, my Ecobee notified me that my furnace was broken while I was at work.
I don't really see name-brand smart thermostats in the same category as most home automation devices. There's also a lot of nice features that can improve efficiency. For example, we drastically cut our cooling bill by utilizing the scheduled fan mode to pull cool, main floor air into the air handler and redistributing it (partially to the second floor).
Most will. Some will break within 3 months. Our old home tech (there is nothing analog in a light switch) isn't as flawless as most people claim. Power outlets do short circuit, wires to break, circuit breakers to burn closed.
They are still way more reliable than most electronic trash people push as smart home devices, but at this point, it's a marketing decision not an inherent property of electronics.
It's an inherent property of many things that increased complexity tends to mean increased failure rate (or earlier failure).
It is an economic decision to make choices about the level of complexity you are willing to tolerate from device to device. The lights go out, I can burn some candles, but I would still rather have my lights working despite their relative complexity over the candles, but I want them to always work with a manual toggle. The toggle shouldn’t have 30 pages of legalese and a promise to not violate my privacy too much for too much personal gain, with the words “too” and “much” defined rather loosely in all the legal jargon.
Unless one is bedridden, it's better to get up and turn the lights on/off manually, including the stairs.
this problem doesn't always exist in all setups. I have lights that connect directly to Google Home/Nest that have never lost a connection. As long as Google assistant is up, it works without issue.
I've had other setups that use a hub and if the connection is not working for some reason, you're provided with that feedback at the time you issue your command.
I can look at the house security cameras set up years ago and that required a dedicated sever, video recording software and all sorts of networking knowledge.
Now people are just able to buy Ring devices.
Similarly, smart lights are often problematic for a range of reasons. Most need to use an app to control them, or some incantation for Alexa to do the same, neither of which are discoverable (or maybe even accessible) to someone in your house who isn't you. If you have them connected to a regular light switch, they stop being "smart" when someone uses the light switch on the wall to turn them off. All of these problems are easily addressed by using smart switches instead of smart lights. Everybody knows how to use a light switch, and any failure of your "smart" systems means the light switch still works like every other light switch out there (meaning, get off your butt, walk over to the switch and it turns lights on and off).
This concept holds true in my house for garage door openers, door locks, fireplace controls, and a whole raft of other stuff. The existing systems function like they should to a user who knows how a garage door opener (or whatever) is traditionally supposed to work. In addition, they get some extra functionality[2] if everything is up and working as designed. If things aren't working... well you have to press the garage door opener button like it's 2010.
[1] https://hackaday.io/project/20217-iotea-kettle [2] https://github.com/aderusha/MQTTCarPresence
Not obvious what fills it with water.
This is so true. I really wonder about all the people installing these WiFi enabled light bulbs into lamps that end up being connected to some regular dumb switch next to the door in the wall...what's your rationale for putting the "smarts" in the bulb and not the switch, the device whose sole purpose has always been to stop and start power distribution to a dumb bulb that just glows when it gets powered?
The failure mode of augmented switches, if the smart control stuff for some reason doesn't work or is not accessible, is super obvious and simple: they just revert to being a switch on the wall. And it's not just about that, it's also often just more convenient to enable the light the old-fashioned way by touching a rectangle when entering a room. I'm very satisfied with my light setup, allowing control of the living room lights via programmed conditions as well as by a Logitech Harmony remote. But most other members of my family tend to ignore these and just like to use the switch. Sometimes I do as well, like when entering or exiting the room, but I wouldn't want to miss the additional remote control options. With the smarts in the switch (and the home control server behind it wiring it all together), we're all satisfied.
–Mitch Hedberg
Particularly in China, there was a rash of news about it after that video came out where the woman narrowly managed to push her child to safety before being dragged feet first into the machinery when the safety grate failed. You essentially get turned into (raw) human pulled pork. Very unpleasant.
1) Smart switches don’t add colors to your bulbs.
2) Bulbs are a lot easier (or at least less intimidating) to install than switches.
Although I do agree that the smart switch sounds smarter than the smart bulb.
People are afraid of electricity and don't want to replace a switch. Anyone can replace a light bulb though, so it's default solution for the kind of person that doesn't own a screwdriver. It's definitely an inferior approach, but I suppose it fulfills the needs of a certain segment of the market.
Here in Australia you have to be a licensed electrician to perform any works, even to do something like replacing a lightswitch or running cable inside a wall (even running ethernet cable, although there are special low-voltage electrician's licenses for data cabling specialists that aren't as intensive as a "real" electrician's license) - unlicensed electrical work would void your insurance, make it difficult to sell your house (would need to be inspected, remediated and brought up to code if necessary, and signed off on by an appropriately licensed electrician), and could expose you to civil and even criminal liability (if your unlicensed electrical work harmed someone).
I'm not a licensed electrician, so if I wanted to upgrade my house to smart switches I'd have to get someone in to do it. For most people here it's a lot easier to just screw in a bulb.
The failure mode of augmented switches, if the smart control stuff for some reason doesn't work or is not accessible, is super obvious and simple: they just revert to being a switch on the wall.
I can't help but think the failure mode of smart bulbs is super obvious too, they should just revert to being a bulb, but for some reason it doesn't seem to work that way whenever I hear about them failing.
a) fall back to being a bulb: power off = no light, power on = light
b) allow for some kind of control to be possible via the switch, like: power off = no light (that's easy), power on = restore whatever the lamp was doing before (if it was off before it should stay off, if it was on and just switched off via the switch it should turn on immediately)
Most customers probably want b) to be a supported feature, because they cannot make that switch next to the door disappear, so people will use that switch and expect the light to "kind of" respond normally to that input. But b) is mutually exclusive with a), which would have to be implemented if you'd like to have the bulb fall back to being a dumb bulb if the wireless stuff doesn't work right (the bulb cannot wait to assess whether there is something wrong with its "smarts", because people expect immediate reaction from their bulbs, not reaction after 30secs of pinging a server and whatnot).
(I assume "null" is the same as "neutral")
Personally, for the bulbs that are smart, I simply don't use the switches, save for restarting the smart bulbs (haven't had to yet, though) but the smart stuff I have is smart for a reason:
The living room recessed lights are Hue bulbs, and that's so we can change the color on the fly, automatically when watching a movie, and schedule off when we've gone to bed and I've forgotten to turn them off.
The bedroom ones turn on automatically when we go to bed, and when we go to sleep, I use my siri shortcut to dim them to almost off completely, but just enough to provide a night light while starting some music we listen to while sleeping.
I have a smart light in the basement that turns on at dusk because it gets too dark down there to walk, and turns off when I trigger my bedtime shortcut.
I would never advise someone to smart everything in their home, but if you have reasons to add automation or have a desire for enhanced functionality, why not? Do your due diligence, know what you're buying, and know how to hook it up safely. I have a number of IP cameras on my property that are explicitly blocked from the Internet, and are only accessible to my home made DVR. I have all smart devices, where able, on a guest wifi that has no access to my computers or other devices, and has location services disabled. This stuff can be used safely and securely, and frankly the wider community looks ridiculous with the impression being they have a printer from the 90's on their desk, it's the smartest thing in their home, and they keep a loaded gun next to it in case it makes a noise they didn't expect.
I also think, in terms of cost, an IKEA Trådfri bulb is a compelling alternative to dimmer pucks in the switch.
Then you can control the light intensity and light temperature (or color if you fancy that). With a smart switch it's only on/off.
I mostly don't object to optional "smart"/Bluetooth/WiFi features. I'll use them or not use them as I see fit. What I really object to is if some perfectly good appliance no longer can be used because the manufacturer stopped updating an application and now it doesn't work with the latest iOS version or whatever.
If they were to fail or EoL, I'd be out some money but all you have to do is unplug them.
How much does it draw?
Standard Chamberlain or something exotic?
You might think I'm just unlucky, but it turns out most of them are like that.
How about the stuff he discussed in the article? All of it seems valid.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind a little home automation that works with a voice ui. Over time, it’ll become cheaper, more reliable, and transparent.
Also, I prefer to optimize for 99% of my time instead of the rare event. I can pull out a pot when the power goes out.
Like people who would rather use gas cars instead of electric because of range and there are 180,000 gas stations in the US, you might want to check back in 10 years.
i've installed a dozen or so zigbee-based ikea tradfri led bulbs and switched outlets in my apartment (along with a half-price zigbee-to-wifi gateway from the bargain bin) and they work great. if any part of the network goes out, i can just use them as regular bulbs by actuating the switches already in the wall or built into the lamp.
my favorite addition is using a motion sensor for the walk-in closet bulb, since the built-in light switch is awkwardly placed in a back corner. i open the door and the light goes on, close it and it goes off a few seconds later, a simple pleasure.
the tradfri gateway also now connects via homekit to my existing apple tv, which is used as the apple home server. that way, i can turn lights on and off from the control center on my phone from anywhere via icloud. the apple tv and gateway are on their on vlan and have restricted access to the internet and the rest of my network.
sure, you can go crazy trying to add automation to everything, but so far, i've had no extra stress or complexity, just simple additional convenience.
I previously had a dark stairway to the house and got home after dark. A timer would have sufficed (I haven't seen them for wall switches), but I got a IoT switch that turned the light on at sunset.
I had a detached garage that let out to a busy street and would often forget to close it when driving away. I didn't get around to installing something, but wanted something to close it after 15m of being open.
My floor heaters consume a lot of power and other people in the house forget to turn them off. When they were installed, they included WiFi and an app. I wrote a bridge to HomeKit and set it to turn off at 11am and 11pm.
When traveling I reduce the heating/cooling. It's nice (especially when getting home close to midnight) to turn it back on when landing at the airport so you don't come home to an uncomfortable house.
It's not quite IoT, but my kid is too young to tell time so we have an alarm that changes color when its ok to wake up. I had a dumb one, similar to an alarm clock. It was annoying to set. A more expensive, bluetooth, one sets time from my phone. I was a bit worried about the bluetooth one when traveling (time zone changes, not having wifi), but it worked great. I think the nicer one worked better because of build quality and not because of IoT stuff.
I don't have any "scenes." Just a few, very specific, items with rules. I added outdoor Christmas lights this year because last year my kid kept hiding the remote and I didn't plug things into an accessible place outside. A lot of people seem to like being able to turn off house lights without getting up from their bed. I'd never blindly recommend any of this, but if it might solve a problem they have, I'd walk them through my experience.
Analogue, immediate action have physicality that is satisfying to a our being; take out a pot, fill it with a cup of a water, add half a cup of rice, light a burner and begin the process.
Sure: "give me rice!" might seem simpler but "let us now debug the rice program" will become as difficult and infinitely less satisfying.
See: Ready-at-hand and all the Heideggerian terminology concerning this stuff.
There is still much to go wrong in an ordinary light switch, but I have plenty in my home over 50 years old which work perfectly. Where I live, I can flip the switch and the light comes on and I don't even have to think about it, often forgetting I had done so. It is this mindlessness and lack of attention which defines convenience, which purports to be what home automation is about. I can't imagine what kind of revolution must take place in the computer industry to create smart home automation products with equivalent cost, longevity, convenience, and which instill equivalent confidence in their operation.
I also try to buy devices with local control, vs. cloud-based control.
I think there is an S-curve argument in here somewhere. There was a time where putting in an electric stove was just asking for trouble because of the reliability, but there were early adopters who were excited about the idea. Fortunately, those guys shook out the bugs for the generations that followed.
Ultimately though, I'm probably in the same part of the S-curve as you. I spend much of my day doing (hacking | improving | debugging) (code | business | people | self) so adding another layer sounds like a PITA, but if you're an early adopter, my hat is off to you and I send my thanks for shaking out the bugs for the rest of us!
This was done in an experimental way, with an amateur approach, and ended up failing to work when I was away and leaving my wife with 30% of the lights only.
It was not a big deal for me since I was away :) But surprisingly not that a big deal for her either, after explaining me how she would fillet me when I am back home. But then she read more than usual (the tv was out of service as well) and it was finally ok.
My lights usually works but the added value of the automation is really there. Sure we can live without but it is a nice touch.
I would say that YMMV depending on how you balance availability with some added value you could live without.
A lot of smart home devices support ZigBee standard and with a device like ConBee (ZigBee USB adapter) you can get rid of the reliance on external services. Run your own gateway that can talk with a lot more different devices and run it in the middle of nowhere, if necessary.
You can also run your own voice command recognition software if you also want to have some voice control for all of the devices.
I use homekit/homebridge to do some basic stuff, switching on/off all the lights, computers, displays and audio gear in my office all at once, pushing just one button. This saves me a minute each time I enter and leave the office and it’s just very convenient
This setup has worked flawlessly for a full year now and I don’t expect it to break any time soon.
The idea there would be that they have the light when they need it, without having to switch them on and off.
Yes, we should. I'm currently building and I wouldn't touch this stuff with a 10 foot pole. The only thing I'm considering is Philips Hue bulbs, but only for the configurable colour temperature and brightness, and if I can find an alternative that doesn't need a web connection I will use that.
The xiaomi equivalent is pretty good too (yeelight) at half the price. That's assuming your OK with the brand
>alternative that doesn't need a web connection I will use that.
All these things need an initial Web connect and usually app to configure. After that you can firewall it off and use a local server like home assistant. Well for the xiaomi. Not sure Philip's
Bulbs and switches use ZigBee ZLL (AFAIK, they don't have WiFi capabilities at all), and IIRC it can even work without the bridge (just turning on and off) as switches can talk directly to bulbs.
Bridge device surely can work without Internet. It's essentially a small webserver that exposes an API for the smartphone app (which talks to the bridge directly as long as they're on the same network) and then talks to the devices over ZigBee. IIRC, there is even FLOSS RPi-based alternative implementation somewhere out there.
Don't know if Internet is required for the initial setup.
Also, if you just want motion activated lights, there are switches with IR motion sensors built in.