The bulbs could have been updated either by A) having a wifi bulb that then synchronized each other node via a low power mesh network, or B) by opening the app and connecting to the network.
We effectively used the BLE radio to make a mesh network and a BLE device (phone) could connect and send and receive over the mesh.
Instead I now have a crappy overly complex setup that involves a bunch of lifx bulbs, a flic hub and buttons and a synology NAS running some python scripts from task scheduler every few minutes to set the desired temperature at certain time ranges (hard coded).
That Twist idea sound(ed) perfect. What a bummer that it didnt work out.
MQTT + some schema for typical devices would be a dream. Maybe have some of those devices be able to act as hub themselves with option to connect to "bigger" controller (whether cloud or on premise) but still be able to handle basic functions when say internet is down
Matter/Thread exist as well, and some smart device makers claim to already have adopted it, so we'll see how that all goes.
> Matter/Thread exist as well, and some smart device makers claim to already have adopted it, so we'll see how that all goes.
I'm kinda worried it will be the usual bloated standard by comitee result; tho I guess even if that happens it would still be better to have to implement one bloated standard instead of dozen incompatible ones.
Also at least wikipedia page says its "Proprietary, by certification" so eh, I'm worried
Like, I converted one of (sadly out of production) mpower pro power strips (it was great, cheap 6 socket with power measurement per socket) to talk to it but it wasn't exactly great experience.
The config of IoT devices should be just "start an app, point it to your (or cloud) controller, done", not "browse compatibility list and hope HASS supports it and the manufacturer won't break that support on update".