3 ms·
The commercial side of building automation is robust, but the components are pricey, the platforms proprietary* and end-user aavailibility seems to be limited.
by tunap 10y ago
The commercial side of building automation is robust, but the components are pricey, the platforms proprietary* and end-user aavailibility seems to be limited. The beauty of the other side is every switch, sensor & controller's first objective is not to monetize the user but rather to simply do it's intended job. Look into building automation controls and you will find what you yearn for; Siemens, Johnson Controls, Honeywell/Novar, BAS... However, retail/public access, setup & end-user friendliness will still be significant hurdles outside of hiring a pricey, authorized contractor.
*The components are simple & generic, the interface & controls are mostly based on a universal framework w/ their proprietary gui/front-end locked on.
- FussyZeus 10y agoThat's what I'm getting at though, there is clearly a market for consumer ready devices that don't cost what solutions like that do and don't need a contractor to install them. I mean you can't tell me that in today's world we couldn't manufacture an outlet with electronic control of the flow of current out of it's outlets, and do it in such a way that uses proper SSL and endpoints, without having to price it so high? I don't believe it.
- tunap 10y agoI totally agree, the demand & the means exist. However, the intent of retail providers is anything but enabling simple, automated controls. Everything is about grabbing the data cash bag and, as an afterthought, let's personalize your experience. I have been pondering this and the only conclusion I can come up with is the market controllers(more than mere "forces") have much to gain by selling the perception instead of reality and their treasure troves of patents(from commercial side) allow them to maintain this position. IMO, the digital revolution of ours has transformed sharing into one way collecting and the consumers into commodities. Both of which I find quite offensive, and sometimes, outright hostile. Alas, our money is our only true vote. Vote accordingly.
- FussyZeus 10y agoI suppose but it still seems like a copout (not on you of course, on them) to play the brand lock-in game. You don't need a centralized server to personalize and operating those servers, even on something like AWS, costs money. Why not put that on the consumer instead? Many consumers I know would prefer the roll-your-own solution and it saves the manufacturer money.
- komali2 10y agoWell, we are on a something.ycombinator.com website right now... why don't you throw together a prototype, register a company, and present to ycombinator?
- FussyZeus 10y agoWell primarily because I wouldn't take VC money anyway, too much pressure to grow too fast. I'd rather have a company that lives and dies on it's own. Second because I'm not at all a hardware guy. Thirdly I'm not at a point where I feel entrepreneurial yet, I don't have enough experience. Lastly I'm incredibly lazy.
- tunap 10y agoThanks for your manners, but it is probably a copout on my part. I have the wherewithal(-money) to build something like this in my own home but I believe most of these controls are over-engineered progress for progress' sake... for anything less than a few thousand square foot structures. All I really need is a programmable thermostat, a couple timer plugs & my 'routine'. As always, YMMV. As for the providers, I have to admit, a service economy cannot sustain itself using only transactional relations. In order to ensure future revenues, a contracted service agreement &/or proprietary walled garden approach is the only sustainable model they have come up with. I am a 'break-fix' geezer stuck in my ways and don't subject my clients to lock-in, but my widely varying income from month to month can make affording life difficult at times. edit: +&/or proprietary walled garden approach
- 10y ago