8 ms·

The smart home freak show stops here

officialchicken 11y ago
It's the surveillance home for marketing and ads. Actual smart homes need a lot more dumb and existing technology first. If it were really smart, I'd have a toilet and shower that uses 1/4 of the amount water, my gas stove would not have a pilot light, and "dumb" motion sensors for light have been around quite a while - but not ubiquitous (more common the EU). Commercial buildings have had computers driving heating and cooling systems for a couple of decades (without thermostats but with temp sensors) so you don't need internet for that either. And I've never seen a house with VAV's installed in the ducts to actively heat/cool only the occupied portions of the home. And the easiest of all before construction - just "rotate" the foundation towards the sun to take better advantage of passive heating and cooling, that's an easy 15% energy bill savings.
- prawn 11y ago
  Or a bathroom that can be cleaned with a pressure hose rather than scrubbed by hand every couple of weeks, yet still look attractive.
  - lucaspiller 11y ago
    I lived in Asia last year, and the whole bathroom was tiled and waterproof, with a small drain in the floor next to the bathtub (where water usually drops after you get out). There was also one in the kitchen, I assume they were intended for draining excess water after mopping. As well as that the bathroom had a bidet sprayer [0], so that's what I used for cleaning the floor and tub - it which was pretty much the same as using pressure washer. After I was done I just left it to dry which took an hour or so. [0] http://brondell.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/500x500/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/c/l/cleanspa_luxury_bidet_installed_shot.jpg http://brondell.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/500x...
    - witty_username 11y ago
      Yep, most homes in India are like this.
    - dsfyu404ed 11y ago
      So You want a typical state university dorm bathroom with more upscale furnishings?
    - artmageddon 11y ago
      > There was also one in the kitchen, I assume they were intended for draining excess water after mopping. My wife's family, in Iran, has a drain in the middle of the floor for this reason. She think it's very strange that this isn't common here in the US.
      - prawn 11y ago
        My bathrooms in Australia have central drains but painted ceiling, cabinetry that isn't entirely waterproofed, etc. I wonder if you could automate the cleaning and drying (blasting hot air) like some new public toilets or a dishwasher. Put away towels and trinkets, walk out, close the door and press a button. Hell, even just self-cleaning toilets and basins would be a start.
  - techdragon 11y ago
    Oh my god yes. I've been describing this as a feature of my dream home for years.
- jahnu 11y ago
  Well put. I was even surprised that most US homes don't have an electric kettle for boiling water but put a 'dumb' kettle on a stove!
  - cguess 11y ago
    To be honest, most US homes don't really need one. We're not a tea country and most boiling of water is done in a pot to cook with. It's changing, and I personally love the things (Alton Brown suggests cooking hard boiled eggs in them), but my parents don't even own a kettle I think...
    - jahnu 11y ago
      Fair enough :)
    - nmrm2 11y ago
      Or, more accurately, most US homes do have one -- it's in the coffee maker :-)
      - kazinator 11y ago
        I have used a coffee maker just to make hot water. In a hotel room. :)
    - jmspring 11y ago
      We own a kettle here in California, for tea and press coffee. In the morning, they are quick and work well. Only problems are arguments over too little or too much water. Despite a nice gas stove, the electric kettle is quicker to use. It also has some "brains" in that it shuts down after awhile if not turned off (say 3-5 minutes at desired temp). I don't know how many times I've had things cooking on the stove and forgot about them due to work, etc.
    - skrause 11y ago
      The main use of my electric kettle is parallel processing for my cooking water. I put one fourth of the cooking water into the pot and turn on the stove, then I put the other three quarters of the water into my electric kettle and turn that on as well. The kettle is usually done right before pot and then I pour all the water from the kettle into the pot. This greatly reduced the time to get boiling water for cooking.
- mschuster91 11y ago
  > my gas stove would not have a pilot light A gas water heater usually has an always on pilot light to avoid leaking unburned gas in case the main valve is stuck-open (or not fully closed). It's a failsafe, not a bug. (Which is why many heating systems refuse to turn back on automatically if they detect the pilot light goes off) > Commercial buildings have had computers driving heating and cooling systems for a couple of decades And they're expensive as fuck, and even today companies manage to mess up their setup (Berlin Airport cough).
  - officialchicken 11y ago
    Always-on systems constantly burning petrofuels are an engineering failure. Solar radiators acting as heat exchangers have no pilot light. Neither do "instahots" or on-demand water heating systems that waste energy keeping 50+ gallons at 82+ degrees F. As for your stove, well, let's just say that there are other options for lighting them, including a bic or more "exotic" electric heat. They're only expensive "as fuck" because they're more like an overpriced SCADA system with multiple fail-overs and backups than the 12-20v system you have in your home. But that happens when you have 10 - 250 tons of heating and cooling for 500 - 30,000 people in a building. For every over-engineered Berlin Airport (Siemens runs there, right? Arup won't make that make mistake) I can show you 10,000 buildings, factories, and warehouses done right. Or one Viipuri library (1935).
    - mschuster91 11y ago
      > Solar radiators acting as heat exchangers have no pilot light Depending on the technology used, not entirely true. If molten salt is used as heat exchange medium, it must be kept above its melting temperature at all times or you can scrap all the pipework.
- agumonkey 11y ago
  Let me exagerate a bit, there are videos of people living in woods on youtube, I feel their 'home' is smarter than mine. Everything is crafted from almost nothing, full of nice geometry tricks (baskets, fire pump).
riffraff 11y ago
I remember some years back an interview (maybe Bill Gates?) mentioning that software have a long way to go compared to other technologies. E.g. If you turn on the oven and it doesn't work it's baffling, while for any program to just fail is expected. Great to see we are fixing the gap by going in the opposite direction :)
- Pxtl 11y ago
  > I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out how to use my telephone. - Bjarne Stroustrup
  - colordrops 11y ago
    Says the inventor of the language used to write most of the complicated unstable software he was probably rethinking of.
    - Pxtl 11y ago
      I still think C++ is the best possible language that could have come out of the constraints they'd given themselves - near-complete backwards-compatibility with C, while adding OOP features in a style that maintains the C ideology of being as close to assembler as possible.
- pbhjpbhj 11y ago
  Ovens are pretty simple machines, there's a gradation surely. People are not so surprised when a digital oven timer fails as when an analogue thermostat dial. fails.
  - riffraff 11y ago
    Of course, the original text mentioned how "chairs" were probably considered technology at some point, but now we take them for granted. The same went for light switches, fridges, VCRs and whatever, each "new technology" had to mature, and so should computing but it hasn't yet.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
clockwerx 11y ago
If you went on holiday the cat would more likely starve than roast. Australian and many other cats also regularly endure high heat - 32 degrees C plus. The author really should have left that out or thought it through a little more, detracts from the argument
bengale 11y ago
If the WIFI goes down on the nest you just go poke the heatlink and it starts the heating. Then sort your WIFI out.
- rconti 11y ago
  I don't know what a heatlink is, but if I have to be physically present, that's a non-starter for vacation homes.
  - _JamesA_ 11y ago
    So it's a non-starter that you can't remotely control a Nest when the broadband connection to your vacation home is down? If it's that critical maybe you need to design in some network redundancy. That's not really a Nest issue.
monitron 11y ago
"No Wi-Fi, no heating" -- this makes no sense to me. I had a Nest and when the wireless network went away, it did the sensible thing and maintained its current schedule. The only thing it lost was remote control/monitoring and the ability to talk to Nest Protects. This is not to say that Nest doesn't have problems, but there's no way I'd have allowed it in my home if an Internet outage meant freezing my family.
- jmspring 11y ago
  Just from January - for some reason it was unable to call home, temperatures plummeted. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/fashion/nest-thermostat-glitch-battery-dies-software-freeze.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/fashion/nest-thermostat-gl...
  - Klathmon 11y ago
    That wasn't because it couldn't "call home", that was because an update caused a bug on the nest to lock up. It might not be any "better" of an excuse, but it's not the same thing as "not being able to call home"
- zippergz 11y ago
  Agreed. There are lots of legitimate problems with smart home devices. These arguments are weakened by throwing out things that are completely false.
cptskippy 11y ago
"My Nest thermostat, which after some early teething problems I’ve come to like, falls flat on its face when my broadband connection goes down." The implication here is that like the other thermostat mentioned, it doesn't work. That's simply not true, the Nest still works albeit only from the device itself like a traditional thermostat.
Udo 11y ago
There have to be open protocols and control needs to happen locally (as in: on the home network). The good news is, you can absolutely have that, today. The bad news is, it's not as easy to set up as a Nest. People have to understand this tradeoff.
rietta 11y ago
For my home, I fully believe that if things continue this way, I will need to have three networks at home. The household network and wifi for my wife and our family to use, the work network (hardwired Cat6 because that's how I like it) for my multiple work computers and NAS, and a third network with its own wifi just if IoT. IoT devices need not have access to the other two networks. It would be nice if this level of segmentation were to be built into the higher end home routers. Personally, I enjoy setting my house up "like a data center". But that is far beyond most home owners' abilities or desires for their network.
- Pxtl 11y ago
  Don't many wifi routers offer a "guest network" feature?
  - rietta 11y ago
    Yes, my router does have this. Which we use to have a simpler wifi password just to give to guests. It can only access the Internet and nothing on the LAN.
- edent 11y ago
  I tried doing this - but there are two complications. Firstly, how do you get your phone/server to talk to the IoT network? Some devices - like the Lifx - expect you to be in the same IP range in order to work properly. Secondly, some IoT devices are wired into the network - specifically smart plugs which use powerline networking, and some HVAC stuff like Tado. It's not an insurmountable problem, but requires careful configuration and accepting some loss of functionality.
- Klathmon 11y ago
  That's why i'd like to see a separate network for IOT. Think z-wave and friends. Then have an interchangeable controller which can be firewalled to all hell if you want and can run locally if you want as well.
- CaptSpify 11y ago
  This is how I have it set up. I have a separate network for IoT, with a home-built webpage to reach all of the devices using their API. No Net access for them. It works pretty well for me, but I'm guessing your average-joe doesn't want to write a webpage for every new gadget he gets. It's ridiculous that I've had to do this
notalaser 11y ago
I have interesting tales from the trenches to tell. I used to work for a company that did home automation devices. This was quite a few years ago, when the whole craze was in its incipient stages, but I didn't lose contact with it. I could fill a small book with reasons why IoT products are so bad, but the top reasons would have to be: 1. There is an intense pressure of delivering simply because everyone thinks the market is ripe for the taking and being first offers some kind of guarantee of winning it. Truth is, there is a very significant overlap between people who are interested in this whole IoT crap and people who involved in its development. Most products are so embarrassingly bad that no one in their right mind would want them. 2. Products could be better, but most of them are... 2a) ...developed without any kind of vision, because the management and product design teams don't really understand these things. The vision behind developing most smart home appliances is "we'll make a <insert company's top selling appliance here>, BUT ONLINE". 2b) ...developed by bad engineering teams, because projects are perceived to be too high-risk to be worth investing much into, so they're outsourced somewhere cheap (before you start yelling racism at me, please realize I was one of the cheap guys these were being outsourced to.) 2c) ...seen as little more than platforms for service and/or ads delivery. They see little investment, because management teams completely unfamiliar with hardware design believe the vehicle through which services and/or ads are delivered is pretty much irrelevant and/or can be easily fixed. They treat hardware platforms for delivering ads and services much like they treat web platforms, because that's all they ever built. 3. Standardization in this field is... exaggerated, at best. Even platforms that standardize things at the application layer (e.g. Z-Wave) routinely get it wrong. 90% of the "ground-breaking" gadgets that "open up the exciting world of <whatever> to everyone" only work with five or six phones, at best. 4. The main challenge of every marketing department in this field is coming up with reasons why someone would buy these things. Oftentimes that's done ad-hoc: a device already exists because someone with C in its title had a "strategic vision" and the device is already in beta, and now someone has to figure out how to sell it because the money have already been spent. 5. A lot of big names are in this game pro-actively, in case it actually turns out to be of some value. This is why you see big companies that should know better demoing embarrassing things (like LG's drunken robot). They need to be sure they have a foot in the door in case this actually takes off, but aren't willing to invest the funds needed to provide a serious, integrated system. 6. Testing is virtually non-existent and safety standards are embarrassingly lax. Half of the things that plug into a socket and do fancy Internet things are fire hazards. 7. Virtually every device that does fancy Internet things is a privacy and security hazard. Companies either lack management and development teams that realize how important these things are and know how to build them, or are actively disinterested in fixing them because it's detrimental to their business model. The true "smart home" won't come until all these funky devices will be integrated in a single system. With everyone competing and raising walled gardens because they don't want to share profits from ads, that won't happen until a big enough player decides to invest the huge amount of money that's needed to create a comprehensive line of devices, that can cover everything from thermostats to sound system. Until that happens, "smart" homes will be so incessantly dumb and annoying that no one who isn't paid to say they're awesome or build "smart" devices will want one.
talles 11y ago
Software is an inconsistent thing, it takes years of effort to make it right. With IoT we are, literally, spreading inconsistency all over the place. I usually see industry tendencies (such as "big data" or "machine learning") skeptically, but this one I'm just plain pessimistic. I hope I'm wrong.
FussyZeus 11y ago
Remember the good old days when software was designed from the assumption that Internet wouldn't be available, and then if it happened to be, it would do some other interesting things? I get that these are connected "smart" devices, but is it that difficult to tell the NEST thermostat that when the service is unavailable to simply keep running whatever settings were last used and just wait for it to come back? I cannot imagine sitting through a features meeting where we decided if our support smart thermostat has no internet connection, it just shuts everything the hell off. My beefs with smart devices are numerous, but I think their most offensive component is software that seems to have been all designed by the same kind of moron.
- pbhjpbhj 11y ago
  It's a failsafe to shut things off. If it fails on then there are disastrous possibilities, failing off leaves more annoyances, no?
  - FussyZeus 11y ago
    Losing power is a disaster, a ruptured gas line is a disaster, and both of those things are required to have an operating furnace. Losing Internet is not a disaster, it's in fact a pretty much daily occurrence for I would argue the majority of Internet users (at least here the States, where Internet sucks). Losing the Internet shouldn't break my thermostat, much like having a clogged toilet shouldn't cut my power. They're two entirely different systems in the home.
    - pbhjpbhj 11y ago
      If your toilet clogs and literally floods the house then it's safer that the power gets cut, hence circuit breakers and the like. When you connect your thermostat to the Internet then they're no longer entirely separate systems.
  - Someone 11y ago
    That depends on what the automated process is. If you live in Alaska, you don't want your heater to switch off if something goes wrong. If you are on holiday, you don't want the software watering your garden to "failsafe" by stopping doing anything at all a week before your return.
Malic 11y ago
I worked for a short stint at a product development company that was getting into IoT. I came to the realization that IoT products are going to be just like the WWW in the early days - we are going to have a lot of dumb ideas before we have some really smart ideas. We will have to endure the Internet of Stupid Things first, sigh.
- kelvin0 11y ago
  As you mentioned the problem is IoT 'gone wild', not necessarily with home automation specifically. It's great to see companies in that space doing interesting research and coming out with useful products ... but this whole things seems more like a 'gold rush' for now. Maturity of this market will eventually come.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- petra 11y ago
  One thing i wonder about - why does it take so much hardware and sales to try out a new consumer product concept ? Isn't there a process to aim the products better and a simpler way to verify them ? What is it, and why aren't more companies using it ?
  - tsumnia 11y ago
    I think its to ensure that they are in the 'first to market' group with Internet of Things. Right now, like Malic mentioned, its a gold rush of throwing money at anyone that can hook up bluetooth to a 'dumb' device. Its the same reason that after the Pebble was created, every consumer electronics company started spitting out smart watches as well. We need the IoT bubble to happen so people realize you don't need everything controlled from a single device. I think its more of an uncanny valley of what is wanted and what is excessive. The Roomba, for example; doesn't need to be a wifi-enabled device, but can still have a computer inside it driving. People are adding wifi to it, but does it was successful without it. I think as we mature in the IoT market, the sales and hardware will drop, but as of right now, we don't know what works and what doesn't, so we are trying everything.
restlessmedia 11y ago
Am I right in thinking televisions need to be 'smart' in order to run an OS, televisions need to run an OS to run apps therefore we need 'smart' TVs in order to rid ourselves of these 'set top' boxes?
- dsr_ 11y ago
  Sure. Or, alternatively, you can buy a big reliable dumb TV and upgrade the set top boxes (TiVo, Roku, AppleTV, Android-whatever) cheaply every couple of years.
  - patrickk 11y ago
    Even better, have the set top box as a device you control, such as raspberry pi running Kodi, so the software is flexible and less likely to become horribly obsolete. Not a solution for the mass market however, due to the setup work involved.
- ghaff 11y ago
  Or use the TV as a dumb monitor connected to something like a Chromecast. I understand why the TV manufacturers probably hate this model, but as a user, sending content from a tablet to a TV seems just about ideal.
- tremon 11y ago
  I don't think so. Even a dumb TV can have an OS controlling the program and channel settings, or respond to commands from the remote. Set-top boxes generally aren't any smarter than a dumb TV, so you don't need it for that either. What we call "smart" are simply TVs that have a general-purpose OS, indeed to run apps. That doesn't have anything to do with TV viewing, but with fragmentation of the delivery landscape: with the current appification, every video outlet considers your TV to be part of their "user experience" and wants to control and monetize your TV.
upofadown 11y ago
You can improve the reliability of stuff like this by minimizing programmability and by using reliable parts. I have a mercury thermostat in the basement set to 12C connected directly across the heat demand leads. So my house is pretty much not going to freeze down no matter what the software does. I have a mercury thermostat upstairs set to my normal indoor temperature. It is connected across the heat demand leads through a software controlled switch. So no matter what the software does, the house can not get too hot or two cold. This means that I only have two set temperatures, but in practice that is enough. Setback occurs whenever the system detects that the alarm is set or when I set it before I go to bed. The alarm panel is a traditional system in a box with a separate backup battery. It tells the automation when it is armed. It can be disarmed from the automation with a code, which the automation has to generate as a hash from an electronic key.
kazinator 11y ago
> My Nest thermostat, which after some early teething problems I’ve come to like, falls flat on its face when my broadband connection goes down. No wifi, no heating in the house. Could this be due to relying on the broadband provider's box for Wi-Fi instead of your own Wi-Fi router for running your local network? I can still reach my webserver or printer when broadband is down. Gee, why is that?
- mikelward 11y ago
  You don't need any Wi-Fi to turn the dial up or down. :)
  - kazinator 11y ago
    Though that may be true of that unit, my point is that you don't need broadband to be up to have Wi-Fi. The whole Wi-Fi based control should be contained within your LAN, which has no reason to be down, other than a power outage or equipment failure. If someone's local Wi-Fi LAN dies when the broadband connection isn't up, they should buy their own Wi-Fi router and then get some fifth grader to set it up for them.
ape4 11y ago
So much possible downside to these smart things and very little upside.
kbart 11y ago
Following "smart" trends and countless problems it causes, I guess it's not long before "dumb" will be the hot marketing slogan.
Loic 11y ago
You can also use component following the KNX standard and build a smart home based on a standard (with about 400 providers of appliances, switches, etc.) and control it fully using open source software[1]. Note that the components can be programmed to work without any cloud or centralized control system. So, your heater will work even if your "app" to control it is not working because of a faulty update as everything can work in "standalone" mode. [0]: http://knx.org/ http://knx.org/ [1]: http://www.openhab.org/ http://www.openhab.org/
Zigurd 11y ago
The thing to realize is that outside of very simple cases like connecting your Echo to your lighting, the smart home is a high-end product. If you can't afford a custom installation and hands-on support, you're not a real customer of the smart home. That means, for the 97%, it isn't a usable product. People who can afford it can get a well-integrated smart home that works and continues to work and isn't spying on them (to the extent that anyone with a home security system isn't being spied on). Just don't try to do it yourself. Sure, some people can, but it's in the same category as home-built airplanes. For every one that flies, there are 500 sitting partially assembled in teh garage.
ghaff 11y ago
The fundamental issue is that, if I were to put down a list of things I wish were easier/automated around the house, there's very little that overlaps smart home or home automation products. - Heat control. OK but I have a non-network connected programmable thermostat that's really pretty effective. - Vacuuming. OK. Roombas are a start in this direction although how effective they are depends a lot on your house layout. - Clean up dirty dishes, wipe down counters, etc. Nope, unless you count my dishwasher. - General food prep. Cutting/chopping. Nope, unless you count things like my food processor. - Smarter light control. Eh. A few dimmers work pretty well. - General dusting, bathroom cleaning, etc. Nope. - Laundry. Nope (other than my dumb washer & dryer). - Lawn cutting, general yard maintenance. Nope. - Water plants. One can setup complicated systems but you still need to get water from a water source to individual pots without leaks. The list goes on. The bottom line is that the tasks I'd like to eliminate or streamline are largely not things that I can buy devices to help with.
- gherkin0 11y ago
  > Clean up dirty dishes, wipe down counters, etc. Nope, unless you count my dishwasher. A dishwasher is a very specialized robot. I think it counts as home automation. > Lawn cutting, general yard maintenance. Nope. That's wrong. Robot lawnmowers exist, and they're made by several different companies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robotic_lawn_mower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robotic_lawn_mower
  - ghaff 11y ago
    A dishwasher is home automation, which is why I listed it. But it's not a "smart home" and it only automates part of the process. Most of us have a variety of dedicated appliances in our house. Washers and dryers certainly count as well. But that's sort of my point. We automated a lot of the obvious pain points around the house a long time ago. Most of this new stuff doesn't really incrementally help. >>Robot lawnmowers exist They're expensive and limited. You generally need to setup a wire for the boundary. I looked into them a bit. They might make sense for a small fenced in yard but they certainly didn't make any sense in my case.
- 11y ago
hydrogen18 11y ago
The reason why the smart home is such a failure is because even the "smarter" home is a total failure. I had a programmable thermostat in my residence. I always used it in "hold" mode and just turned it off when I left for the day. This thermostat also had the option for the power company to disable the AC during peak load. I could care less about this as the interruption was brief. The problem was after they re-enabled the AC, the thermostat always returned to "program" mode. Twice this turned on the heat with a setting of 85 F in the middle of the summer. Needless to say, that thermostat is now sitting in a cupboard.
Gnarl 11y ago
Air travel is safe now because people died, died and then died. IoT companies will probably have to kill a sizeable bunch before understanding what responsibility means.
jkot 11y ago
Hire a maid, much smarter than all those devices :-)
bitwarrior 11y ago
Its an interesting point in the article about the indignity of smart TVs. I was contemplating getting a new TV, but I felt I was getting ripped off. I have a ton of external devices which handle providing Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Instant, whatever. I don't want to pay a huge premium on a TV because the manufacture thinks this is a novelty to me. As is evidenced in the article, I also don't want my TV to have a complicated OS that can literally crash when I attempt to change the channel. Fundamentally, I just want my TV to be a display - an amazing display. I don't even want or need it to have those shitty speakers TVs necessarily have - I already have a fantastic sound system. I want as close to 100% of my money going into the quality of the picture, not huge feature lists I have no need for.
- BrianEatWorld 11y ago
  What did you end up finding? I was given advice when shopping for a new screen to find the highest model range, as in the highest leading numbers, and then get the lowest number within that range as that usually trims out the "features". However, looking at LG's range of OLEDs, everything comes with "features", even the lowest model in the highest model range.
- gthtjtkt 11y ago
  I've been shopping for the same thing for the past 2 years. All I want is a decent picture with low input lag (for gaming) at a reasonable price. That's it. But it doesn't exist anymore. Every TV comes with enough bloatware to bring Watson to its knees. And the ones that manage to display a picture quickly despite that all extra processing start at $1,500, which is twice the price you would've paid 10 years ago.
  - fl0wenol 11y ago
    Buy a large format monitor or business-focused/commercial display panel. Unfortunately you will almost always have to pay freight to wherever; you can't pick them up at a local store. If you find a model # you like, you could always try your luck searching for it in auctions on Craigslist or EBay, as you would for office furniture.
- 11y ago
CaptSpify 11y ago
IMO, part of this is the current "simple" systems-design that's been happening everywhere. Instead of giving users good defaults, with the ability to override almost any setting, we've designed things so it's "manufacturers choice, or none at all". This used to be just web-pages, and then it started leaking to browsers, then phones, etc. There are a lot of other issues (security, phoning home, etc), but a lot of these wouldn't be as noticeable if they didn't follow the "simple" design.
reedlaw 11y ago
This is a software problem at its root. It seems software of all kinds is struggling to keep up with the exponential gains in hardware. CPUs are cheaper and smaller with more cores than ever before. But there is no Moore's law of software engineering. Software quality is a more abstract metric than number of transistors on a die.
chflags 11y ago
http://money.usnews.com/money/business-economy/articles/1997/11/23/xanadu-20 http://money.usnews.com/money/business-economy/articles/1997... Keep in mind that in the 1990's it was rare for Windows uptime to exceed 24hrs and Microsoft demos of new features barely worked if at all. Not to mention that "security" was not yet on the PR agenda. Gates' home, replete with low quality software a la Microsoft, sounded silly if not scary back then. But what do I know? Maybe it was all very stable and reliable.
kluck 11y ago
Do not automate your home itself, but let an autonomous robot automate it for you. That way you have a hardware "fallback" that is robust, cannot be hacked externally and can be adjusted manually. Think of R2D2 moving around the house and taking care of adjusting the lights and temperature and stuff. Additionally the robot can be equipped with sensors and such. Beware: the robot should not be controllable via WLAN!

It's the surveillance home for marketing and ads. Actual smart homes need a lot more dumb and existing technology first. If it were really smart, I'd have a toilet and shower that uses 1/4 of the amount water, my gas stove would not have a pilot light, and "dumb" motion sensors for light have been around quite a while - but not ubiquitous (more common the EU). Commercial buildings have had computers driving heating and cooling systems for a couple of decades (without thermostats but with temp sensors) so you don't need internet for that either. And I've never seen a house with VAV's installed in the ducts to actively heat/cool only the occupied portions of the home. And the easiest of all before construction - just "rotate" the foundation towards the sun to take better advantage of passive heating and cooling, that's an easy 15% energy bill savings.

prawn 11y ago
Or a bathroom that can be cleaned with a pressure hose rather than scrubbed by hand every couple of weeks, yet still look attractive.
- lucaspiller 11y ago
  I lived in Asia last year, and the whole bathroom was tiled and waterproof, with a small drain in the floor next to the bathtub (where water usually drops after you get out). There was also one in the kitchen, I assume they were intended for draining excess water after mopping. As well as that the bathroom had a bidet sprayer [0], so that's what I used for cleaning the floor and tub - it which was pretty much the same as using pressure washer. After I was done I just left it to dry which took an hour or so. [0] http://brondell.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/500x500/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/c/l/cleanspa_luxury_bidet_installed_shot.jpg http://brondell.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/500x...
  - witty_username 11y ago
    Yep, most homes in India are like this.
  - dsfyu404ed 11y ago
    So You want a typical state university dorm bathroom with more upscale furnishings?
  - artmageddon 11y ago
    > There was also one in the kitchen, I assume they were intended for draining excess water after mopping. My wife's family, in Iran, has a drain in the middle of the floor for this reason. She think it's very strange that this isn't common here in the US.
    - prawn 11y ago
      My bathrooms in Australia have central drains but painted ceiling, cabinetry that isn't entirely waterproofed, etc. I wonder if you could automate the cleaning and drying (blasting hot air) like some new public toilets or a dishwasher. Put away towels and trinkets, walk out, close the door and press a button. Hell, even just self-cleaning toilets and basins would be a start.
- techdragon 11y ago
  Oh my god yes. I've been describing this as a feature of my dream home for years.
jahnu 11y ago
Well put. I was even surprised that most US homes don't have an electric kettle for boiling water but put a 'dumb' kettle on a stove!
- cguess 11y ago
  To be honest, most US homes don't really need one. We're not a tea country and most boiling of water is done in a pot to cook with. It's changing, and I personally love the things (Alton Brown suggests cooking hard boiled eggs in them), but my parents don't even own a kettle I think...
  - jahnu 11y ago
    Fair enough :)
  - nmrm2 11y ago
    Or, more accurately, most US homes do have one -- it's in the coffee maker :-)
    - kazinator 11y ago
      I have used a coffee maker just to make hot water. In a hotel room. :)
  - jmspring 11y ago
    We own a kettle here in California, for tea and press coffee. In the morning, they are quick and work well. Only problems are arguments over too little or too much water. Despite a nice gas stove, the electric kettle is quicker to use. It also has some "brains" in that it shuts down after awhile if not turned off (say 3-5 minutes at desired temp). I don't know how many times I've had things cooking on the stove and forgot about them due to work, etc.
  - skrause 11y ago
    The main use of my electric kettle is parallel processing for my cooking water. I put one fourth of the cooking water into the pot and turn on the stove, then I put the other three quarters of the water into my electric kettle and turn that on as well. The kettle is usually done right before pot and then I pour all the water from the kettle into the pot. This greatly reduced the time to get boiling water for cooking.
mschuster91 11y ago
> my gas stove would not have a pilot light A gas water heater usually has an always on pilot light to avoid leaking unburned gas in case the main valve is stuck-open (or not fully closed). It's a failsafe, not a bug. (Which is why many heating systems refuse to turn back on automatically if they detect the pilot light goes off) > Commercial buildings have had computers driving heating and cooling systems for a couple of decades And they're expensive as fuck, and even today companies manage to mess up their setup (Berlin Airport cough).
- officialchicken 11y ago
  Always-on systems constantly burning petrofuels are an engineering failure. Solar radiators acting as heat exchangers have no pilot light. Neither do "instahots" or on-demand water heating systems that waste energy keeping 50+ gallons at 82+ degrees F. As for your stove, well, let's just say that there are other options for lighting them, including a bic or more "exotic" electric heat. They're only expensive "as fuck" because they're more like an overpriced SCADA system with multiple fail-overs and backups than the 12-20v system you have in your home. But that happens when you have 10 - 250 tons of heating and cooling for 500 - 30,000 people in a building. For every over-engineered Berlin Airport (Siemens runs there, right? Arup won't make that make mistake) I can show you 10,000 buildings, factories, and warehouses done right. Or one Viipuri library (1935).
  - mschuster91 11y ago
    > Solar radiators acting as heat exchangers have no pilot light Depending on the technology used, not entirely true. If molten salt is used as heat exchange medium, it must be kept above its melting temperature at all times or you can scrap all the pipework.
agumonkey 11y ago
Let me exagerate a bit, there are videos of people living in woods on youtube, I feel their 'home' is smarter than mine. Everything is crafted from almost nothing, full of nice geometry tricks (baskets, fire pump).

riffraff 11y ago

I remember some years back an interview (maybe Bill Gates?) mentioning that software have a long way to go compared to other technologies. E.g. If you turn on the oven and it doesn't work it's baffling, while for any program to just fail is expected. Great to see we are fixing the gap by going in the opposite direction :)

Pxtl 11y ago
> I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out how to use my telephone. - Bjarne Stroustrup
- colordrops 11y ago
  Says the inventor of the language used to write most of the complicated unstable software he was probably rethinking of.
  - Pxtl 11y ago
    I still think C++ is the best possible language that could have come out of the constraints they'd given themselves - near-complete backwards-compatibility with C, while adding OOP features in a style that maintains the C ideology of being as close to assembler as possible.
pbhjpbhj 11y ago
Ovens are pretty simple machines, there's a gradation surely. People are not so surprised when a digital oven timer fails as when an analogue thermostat dial. fails.
- riffraff 11y ago
  Of course, the original text mentioned how "chairs" were probably considered technology at some point, but now we take them for granted. The same went for light switches, fridges, VCRs and whatever, each "new technology" had to mature, and so should computing but it hasn't yet.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

clockwerx 11y ago

If you went on holiday the cat would more likely starve than roast. Australian and many other cats also regularly endure high heat - 32 degrees C plus. The author really should have left that out or thought it through a little more, detracts from the argument

bengale 11y ago

If the WIFI goes down on the nest you just go poke the heatlink and it starts the heating. Then sort your WIFI out.

rconti 11y ago
I don't know what a heatlink is, but if I have to be physically present, that's a non-starter for vacation homes.
- _JamesA_ 11y ago
  So it's a non-starter that you can't remotely control a Nest when the broadband connection to your vacation home is down? If it's that critical maybe you need to design in some network redundancy. That's not really a Nest issue.

monitron 11y ago

"No Wi-Fi, no heating" -- this makes no sense to me. I had a Nest and when the wireless network went away, it did the sensible thing and maintained its current schedule. The only thing it lost was remote control/monitoring and the ability to talk to Nest Protects. This is not to say that Nest doesn't have problems, but there's no way I'd have allowed it in my home if an Internet outage meant freezing my family.

jmspring 11y ago
Just from January - for some reason it was unable to call home, temperatures plummeted. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/fashion/nest-thermostat-glitch-battery-dies-software-freeze.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/fashion/nest-thermostat-gl...
- Klathmon 11y ago
  That wasn't because it couldn't "call home", that was because an update caused a bug on the nest to lock up. It might not be any "better" of an excuse, but it's not the same thing as "not being able to call home"
zippergz 11y ago
Agreed. There are lots of legitimate problems with smart home devices. These arguments are weakened by throwing out things that are completely false.

cptskippy 11y ago

"My Nest thermostat, which after some early teething problems I’ve come to like, falls flat on its face when my broadband connection goes down." The implication here is that like the other thermostat mentioned, it doesn't work. That's simply not true, the Nest still works albeit only from the device itself like a traditional thermostat.

Udo 11y ago

There have to be open protocols and control needs to happen locally (as in: on the home network). The good news is, you can absolutely have that, today. The bad news is, it's not as easy to set up as a Nest. People have to understand this tradeoff.

rietta 11y ago

For my home, I fully believe that if things continue this way, I will need to have three networks at home. The household network and wifi for my wife and our family to use, the work network (hardwired Cat6 because that's how I like it) for my multiple work computers and NAS, and a third network with its own wifi just if IoT. IoT devices need not have access to the other two networks. It would be nice if this level of segmentation were to be built into the higher end home routers. Personally, I enjoy setting my house up "like a data center". But that is far beyond most home owners' abilities or desires for their network.

Pxtl 11y ago
Don't many wifi routers offer a "guest network" feature?
- rietta 11y ago
  Yes, my router does have this. Which we use to have a simpler wifi password just to give to guests. It can only access the Internet and nothing on the LAN.
edent 11y ago
I tried doing this - but there are two complications. Firstly, how do you get your phone/server to talk to the IoT network? Some devices - like the Lifx - expect you to be in the same IP range in order to work properly. Secondly, some IoT devices are wired into the network - specifically smart plugs which use powerline networking, and some HVAC stuff like Tado. It's not an insurmountable problem, but requires careful configuration and accepting some loss of functionality.
Klathmon 11y ago
That's why i'd like to see a separate network for IOT. Think z-wave and friends. Then have an interchangeable controller which can be firewalled to all hell if you want and can run locally if you want as well.
CaptSpify 11y ago
This is how I have it set up. I have a separate network for IoT, with a home-built webpage to reach all of the devices using their API. No Net access for them. It works pretty well for me, but I'm guessing your average-joe doesn't want to write a webpage for every new gadget he gets. It's ridiculous that I've had to do this

notalaser 11y ago

I have interesting tales from the trenches to tell. I used to work for a company that did home automation devices. This was quite a few years ago, when the whole craze was in its incipient stages, but I didn't lose contact with it. I could fill a small book with reasons why IoT products are so bad, but the top reasons would have to be: 1. There is an intense pressure of delivering simply because everyone thinks the market is ripe for the taking and being first offers some kind of guarantee of winning it. Truth is, there is a very significant overlap between people who are interested in this whole IoT crap and people who involved in its development. Most products are so embarrassingly bad that no one in their right mind would want them. 2. Products could be better, but most of them are... 2a) ...developed without any kind of vision, because the management and product design teams don't really understand these things. The vision behind developing most smart home appliances is "we'll make a <insert company's top selling appliance here>, BUT ONLINE". 2b) ...developed by bad engineering teams, because projects are perceived to be too high-risk to be worth investing much into, so they're outsourced somewhere cheap (before you start yelling racism at me, please realize I was one of the cheap guys these were being outsourced to.) 2c) ...seen as little more than platforms for service and/or ads delivery. They see little investment, because management teams completely unfamiliar with hardware design believe the vehicle through which services and/or ads are delivered is pretty much irrelevant and/or can be easily fixed. They treat hardware platforms for delivering ads and services much like they treat web platforms, because that's all they ever built. 3. Standardization in this field is... exaggerated, at best. Even platforms that standardize things at the application layer (e.g. Z-Wave) routinely get it wrong. 90% of the "ground-breaking" gadgets that "open up the exciting world of <whatever> to everyone" only work with five or six phones, at best. 4. The main challenge of every marketing department in this field is coming up with reasons why someone would buy these things. Oftentimes that's done ad-hoc: a device already exists because someone with C in its title had a "strategic vision" and the device is already in beta, and now someone has to figure out how to sell it because the money have already been spent. 5. A lot of big names are in this game pro-actively, in case it actually turns out to be of some value. This is why you see big companies that should know better demoing embarrassing things (like LG's drunken robot). They need to be sure they have a foot in the door in case this actually takes off, but aren't willing to invest the funds needed to provide a serious, integrated system. 6. Testing is virtually non-existent and safety standards are embarrassingly lax. Half of the things that plug into a socket and do fancy Internet things are fire hazards. 7. Virtually every device that does fancy Internet things is a privacy and security hazard. Companies either lack management and development teams that realize how important these things are and know how to build them, or are actively disinterested in fixing them because it's detrimental to their business model. The true "smart home" won't come until all these funky devices will be integrated in a single system. With everyone competing and raising walled gardens because they don't want to share profits from ads, that won't happen until a big enough player decides to invest the huge amount of money that's needed to create a comprehensive line of devices, that can cover everything from thermostats to sound system. Until that happens, "smart" homes will be so incessantly dumb and annoying that no one who isn't paid to say they're awesome or build "smart" devices will want one.

talles 11y ago

Software is an inconsistent thing, it takes years of effort to make it right. With IoT we are, literally, spreading inconsistency all over the place. I usually see industry tendencies (such as "big data" or "machine learning") skeptically, but this one I'm just plain pessimistic. I hope I'm wrong.

FussyZeus 11y ago

Remember the good old days when software was designed from the assumption that Internet wouldn't be available, and then if it happened to be, it would do some other interesting things? I get that these are connected "smart" devices, but is it that difficult to tell the NEST thermostat that when the service is unavailable to simply keep running whatever settings were last used and just wait for it to come back? I cannot imagine sitting through a features meeting where we decided if our support smart thermostat has no internet connection, it just shuts everything the hell off. My beefs with smart devices are numerous, but I think their most offensive component is software that seems to have been all designed by the same kind of moron.

pbhjpbhj 11y ago
It's a failsafe to shut things off. If it fails on then there are disastrous possibilities, failing off leaves more annoyances, no?
- FussyZeus 11y ago
  Losing power is a disaster, a ruptured gas line is a disaster, and both of those things are required to have an operating furnace. Losing Internet is not a disaster, it's in fact a pretty much daily occurrence for I would argue the majority of Internet users (at least here the States, where Internet sucks). Losing the Internet shouldn't break my thermostat, much like having a clogged toilet shouldn't cut my power. They're two entirely different systems in the home.
  - pbhjpbhj 11y ago
    If your toilet clogs and literally floods the house then it's safer that the power gets cut, hence circuit breakers and the like. When you connect your thermostat to the Internet then they're no longer entirely separate systems.
- Someone 11y ago
  That depends on what the automated process is. If you live in Alaska, you don't want your heater to switch off if something goes wrong. If you are on holiday, you don't want the software watering your garden to "failsafe" by stopping doing anything at all a week before your return.

Malic 11y ago

I worked for a short stint at a product development company that was getting into IoT. I came to the realization that IoT products are going to be just like the WWW in the early days - we are going to have a lot of dumb ideas before we have some really smart ideas. We will have to endure the Internet of Stupid Things first, sigh.

kelvin0 11y ago
As you mentioned the problem is IoT 'gone wild', not necessarily with home automation specifically. It's great to see companies in that space doing interesting research and coming out with useful products ... but this whole things seems more like a 'gold rush' for now. Maturity of this market will eventually come.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
petra 11y ago
One thing i wonder about - why does it take so much hardware and sales to try out a new consumer product concept ? Isn't there a process to aim the products better and a simpler way to verify them ? What is it, and why aren't more companies using it ?
- tsumnia 11y ago
  I think its to ensure that they are in the 'first to market' group with Internet of Things. Right now, like Malic mentioned, its a gold rush of throwing money at anyone that can hook up bluetooth to a 'dumb' device. Its the same reason that after the Pebble was created, every consumer electronics company started spitting out smart watches as well. We need the IoT bubble to happen so people realize you don't need everything controlled from a single device. I think its more of an uncanny valley of what is wanted and what is excessive. The Roomba, for example; doesn't need to be a wifi-enabled device, but can still have a computer inside it driving. People are adding wifi to it, but does it was successful without it. I think as we mature in the IoT market, the sales and hardware will drop, but as of right now, we don't know what works and what doesn't, so we are trying everything.

restlessmedia 11y ago

Am I right in thinking televisions need to be 'smart' in order to run an OS, televisions need to run an OS to run apps therefore we need 'smart' TVs in order to rid ourselves of these 'set top' boxes?

dsr_ 11y ago
Sure. Or, alternatively, you can buy a big reliable dumb TV and upgrade the set top boxes (TiVo, Roku, AppleTV, Android-whatever) cheaply every couple of years.
- patrickk 11y ago
  Even better, have the set top box as a device you control, such as raspberry pi running Kodi, so the software is flexible and less likely to become horribly obsolete. Not a solution for the mass market however, due to the setup work involved.
ghaff 11y ago
Or use the TV as a dumb monitor connected to something like a Chromecast. I understand why the TV manufacturers probably hate this model, but as a user, sending content from a tablet to a TV seems just about ideal.
tremon 11y ago
I don't think so. Even a dumb TV can have an OS controlling the program and channel settings, or respond to commands from the remote. Set-top boxes generally aren't any smarter than a dumb TV, so you don't need it for that either. What we call "smart" are simply TVs that have a general-purpose OS, indeed to run apps. That doesn't have anything to do with TV viewing, but with fragmentation of the delivery landscape: with the current appification, every video outlet considers your TV to be part of their "user experience" and wants to control and monetize your TV.

upofadown 11y ago

You can improve the reliability of stuff like this by minimizing programmability and by using reliable parts. I have a mercury thermostat in the basement set to 12C connected directly across the heat demand leads. So my house is pretty much not going to freeze down no matter what the software does. I have a mercury thermostat upstairs set to my normal indoor temperature. It is connected across the heat demand leads through a software controlled switch. So no matter what the software does, the house can not get too hot or two cold. This means that I only have two set temperatures, but in practice that is enough. Setback occurs whenever the system detects that the alarm is set or when I set it before I go to bed. The alarm panel is a traditional system in a box with a separate backup battery. It tells the automation when it is armed. It can be disarmed from the automation with a code, which the automation has to generate as a hash from an electronic key.

kazinator 11y ago

> My Nest thermostat, which after some early teething problems I’ve come to like, falls flat on its face when my broadband connection goes down. No wifi, no heating in the house. Could this be due to relying on the broadband provider's box for Wi-Fi instead of your own Wi-Fi router for running your local network? I can still reach my webserver or printer when broadband is down. Gee, why is that?

mikelward 11y ago
You don't need any Wi-Fi to turn the dial up or down. :)
- kazinator 11y ago
  Though that may be true of that unit, my point is that you don't need broadband to be up to have Wi-Fi. The whole Wi-Fi based control should be contained within your LAN, which has no reason to be down, other than a power outage or equipment failure. If someone's local Wi-Fi LAN dies when the broadband connection isn't up, they should buy their own Wi-Fi router and then get some fifth grader to set it up for them.

ape4 11y ago

So much possible downside to these smart things and very little upside.

kbart 11y ago

Following "smart" trends and countless problems it causes, I guess it's not long before "dumb" will be the hot marketing slogan.

Loic 11y ago

You can also use component following the KNX standard and build a smart home based on a standard (with about 400 providers of appliances, switches, etc.) and control it fully using open source software[1]. Note that the components can be programmed to work without any cloud or centralized control system. So, your heater will work even if your "app" to control it is not working because of a faulty update as everything can work in "standalone" mode. [0]: http://knx.org/ http://knx.org/ [1]: http://www.openhab.org/ http://www.openhab.org/

Zigurd 11y ago

The thing to realize is that outside of very simple cases like connecting your Echo to your lighting, the smart home is a high-end product. If you can't afford a custom installation and hands-on support, you're not a real customer of the smart home. That means, for the 97%, it isn't a usable product. People who can afford it can get a well-integrated smart home that works and continues to work and isn't spying on them (to the extent that anyone with a home security system isn't being spied on). Just don't try to do it yourself. Sure, some people can, but it's in the same category as home-built airplanes. For every one that flies, there are 500 sitting partially assembled in teh garage.

ghaff 11y ago

The fundamental issue is that, if I were to put down a list of things I wish were easier/automated around the house, there's very little that overlaps smart home or home automation products. - Heat control. OK but I have a non-network connected programmable thermostat that's really pretty effective. - Vacuuming. OK. Roombas are a start in this direction although how effective they are depends a lot on your house layout. - Clean up dirty dishes, wipe down counters, etc. Nope, unless you count my dishwasher. - General food prep. Cutting/chopping. Nope, unless you count things like my food processor. - Smarter light control. Eh. A few dimmers work pretty well. - General dusting, bathroom cleaning, etc. Nope. - Laundry. Nope (other than my dumb washer & dryer). - Lawn cutting, general yard maintenance. Nope. - Water plants. One can setup complicated systems but you still need to get water from a water source to individual pots without leaks. The list goes on. The bottom line is that the tasks I'd like to eliminate or streamline are largely not things that I can buy devices to help with.

gherkin0 11y ago
> Clean up dirty dishes, wipe down counters, etc. Nope, unless you count my dishwasher. A dishwasher is a very specialized robot. I think it counts as home automation. > Lawn cutting, general yard maintenance. Nope. That's wrong. Robot lawnmowers exist, and they're made by several different companies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robotic_lawn_mower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robotic_lawn_mower
- ghaff 11y ago
  A dishwasher is home automation, which is why I listed it. But it's not a "smart home" and it only automates part of the process. Most of us have a variety of dedicated appliances in our house. Washers and dryers certainly count as well. But that's sort of my point. We automated a lot of the obvious pain points around the house a long time ago. Most of this new stuff doesn't really incrementally help. >>Robot lawnmowers exist They're expensive and limited. You generally need to setup a wire for the boundary. I looked into them a bit. They might make sense for a small fenced in yard but they certainly didn't make any sense in my case.
11y ago

hydrogen18 11y ago

The reason why the smart home is such a failure is because even the "smarter" home is a total failure. I had a programmable thermostat in my residence. I always used it in "hold" mode and just turned it off when I left for the day. This thermostat also had the option for the power company to disable the AC during peak load. I could care less about this as the interruption was brief. The problem was after they re-enabled the AC, the thermostat always returned to "program" mode. Twice this turned on the heat with a setting of 85 F in the middle of the summer. Needless to say, that thermostat is now sitting in a cupboard.

Gnarl 11y ago

Air travel is safe now because people died, died and then died. IoT companies will probably have to kill a sizeable bunch before understanding what responsibility means.

jkot 11y ago

Hire a maid, much smarter than all those devices :-)

bitwarrior 11y ago

Its an interesting point in the article about the indignity of smart TVs. I was contemplating getting a new TV, but I felt I was getting ripped off. I have a ton of external devices which handle providing Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Instant, whatever. I don't want to pay a huge premium on a TV because the manufacture thinks this is a novelty to me. As is evidenced in the article, I also don't want my TV to have a complicated OS that can literally crash when I attempt to change the channel. Fundamentally, I just want my TV to be a display - an amazing display. I don't even want or need it to have those shitty speakers TVs necessarily have - I already have a fantastic sound system. I want as close to 100% of my money going into the quality of the picture, not huge feature lists I have no need for.

BrianEatWorld 11y ago
What did you end up finding? I was given advice when shopping for a new screen to find the highest model range, as in the highest leading numbers, and then get the lowest number within that range as that usually trims out the "features". However, looking at LG's range of OLEDs, everything comes with "features", even the lowest model in the highest model range.
gthtjtkt 11y ago
I've been shopping for the same thing for the past 2 years. All I want is a decent picture with low input lag (for gaming) at a reasonable price. That's it. But it doesn't exist anymore. Every TV comes with enough bloatware to bring Watson to its knees. And the ones that manage to display a picture quickly despite that all extra processing start at $1,500, which is twice the price you would've paid 10 years ago.
- fl0wenol 11y ago
  Buy a large format monitor or business-focused/commercial display panel. Unfortunately you will almost always have to pay freight to wherever; you can't pick them up at a local store. If you find a model # you like, you could always try your luck searching for it in auctions on Craigslist or EBay, as you would for office furniture.
11y ago

CaptSpify 11y ago

IMO, part of this is the current "simple" systems-design that's been happening everywhere. Instead of giving users good defaults, with the ability to override almost any setting, we've designed things so it's "manufacturers choice, or none at all". This used to be just web-pages, and then it started leaking to browsers, then phones, etc. There are a lot of other issues (security, phoning home, etc), but a lot of these wouldn't be as noticeable if they didn't follow the "simple" design.

reedlaw 11y ago

This is a software problem at its root. It seems software of all kinds is struggling to keep up with the exponential gains in hardware. CPUs are cheaper and smaller with more cores than ever before. But there is no Moore's law of software engineering. Software quality is a more abstract metric than number of transistors on a die.

chflags 11y ago

http://money.usnews.com/money/business-economy/articles/1997/11/23/xanadu-20 http://money.usnews.com/money/business-economy/articles/1997... Keep in mind that in the 1990's it was rare for Windows uptime to exceed 24hrs and Microsoft demos of new features barely worked if at all. Not to mention that "security" was not yet on the PR agenda. Gates' home, replete with low quality software a la Microsoft, sounded silly if not scary back then. But what do I know? Maybe it was all very stable and reliable.

kluck 11y ago

Do not automate your home itself, but let an autonomous robot automate it for you. That way you have a hardware "fallback" that is robust, cannot be hacked externally and can be adjusted manually. Think of R2D2 moving around the house and taking care of adjusting the lights and temperature and stuff. Additionally the robot can be equipped with sensors and such. Beware: the robot should not be controllable via WLAN!