3 ms·
Your argument only shows how wide the field of "IoT" is. For embedded sensor networks, your arguments apply without restriction. However, for things like "smar
by ge0rg 10y ago
Your argument only shows how wide the field of "IoT" is. For embedded sensor networks, your arguments apply without restriction.
However, for things like "smart lightbulbs" or other devices connected to the cloud (not that I would endorse such things), where you need a scalable infrastructure for secure bidirectional communication between nodes deployed somewhere and your frontend application, XMPP provides a solid base.
Besides, embedded nodes are getting more and more powerful (consider the ESP8266, which runs IPv4 and TLS and could easily handle XMPP), and it provides huge benefits to have a common end-to-end protocol that is not based on periodic polling like HTTP.
- KaiserPro 10y agoThe ESP* sucks power, which means bigger PSU, or in the case of lightbulbs, no config support when the light switch is off. Making a PSU that is both small and efficient for both low current draw and high is rather hard. Protocol design is trivial for something like a light bulb, compared to the cost of designing the device, and making the scalable backend (and no XMPP is no shortcut for that. I know how wide the IoT field is. I also know the sheer volume of shite that is being produced. Most of the Wifi products will die a horrid death. replaced by something better and more suitable to low power usage. Failing that something more secure, after a rash of home fires caused by a terribly insecure system that was able to be turned off and on again repeatedly until it caught fire.
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 10y agoWould you suppose it will be something like bluetooth keyboards getting replaced by a usb dongle that talks to your keyboard using some other radio protocol that isn't bluetooth?
- KaiserPro 10y agoThere is nothing inherently wrong with bluetooth. So long as you are prepared to put work in over the top to handle security. Bluetooth LE has a reasonable power profile, and the advantage of being about to interop with lots of other things.
- nitrogen 10y agoAs someone who started a company around IoT before people were really calling it that, I agree with you that the IoT market is being polluted with crap. But I think there is room for multiple service tiers for IoT devices. For example, some systems and devices need frequent, low-latency updates (such as lights that quickly and smoothly change colors in response to events), others need low latency but only a few packets per second (a light that only switches on and off), etc. So unless there is a low-power protocol that meets all those needs, I don't think we'll eliminate all of them but one.
- jeremiep 10y agoI wouldn't touch XMPP with a 10' pole even on desktop PCs. That's considering the fact that parsing XML is at least two orders of magnitude faster on PC than anything else, simply because of larger CPU caches. XML has to be the heaviest data format I know of to parse for CPUs, and the most cumbersome to read for humans. Its the worst of both worlds. Its not because we bloated our desktop PCs and our mobile phones' software that we need to do the same for IoT devices.
- ashark 10y agoGlad mine wasn't the only "oh hell no!" reaction. Anyone who's ever dug into XMPP ought to know it doesn't belong anywhere near low-power, possibly battery-dependent devices.
- azinman2 10y agoIt's a terrible protocol in general. Has all the hallmarks of old thinking, a million people on the panel with a million needs, no consolidation, and no clean minimal implementation that gets you 99% of what you want.