10 ms·
IoT Market Projected to Grow 12x by 2023
- pravda 10y agoI think I am going to brand myself an "IoT Consultant". Get me a share of those Dollar$/Euroz/Renminbis. Anyone else done that? Any IoT Consultants out there?
- Heffay626 10y agoI bet we're going to start seeing a whole genre of IoT security specialists on the rise
- justinucd 10y agoInterestingly, there are already 'IoT security firms' that specialize solely on distributed device and data management
- icefox 10y agoDo iot company want to pay for that? A better question for someone in the know, what problems are they having that they would pay to have solved? Updates? Security? Plain old execution and delivery time of a new iot device?
- ktta 10y agoThat can be more difficult than one can anticipate. This isn't like a desktop or web app where there's a second layer of security, like firewalls/AV and sandboxes respectively. IoT tends to be neglected in terms of updates, and with the new version of the device coming out every couple months, I would imagine there would be devices that won't receive security updates not long after they're bought. In case of IoT they're in charge of the whole device, and the security of those things aren't looked into a lot. Sounds stupid, but it does need it's own specialists. Otherwise you're going to end up with a lot more insecure devices. Just an example: https://www.reddit.com/r/controllablewebcams/ https://www.reddit.com/r/controllablewebcams/
- icefox 10y agoI guess what I am getting at is: do companies not want to pay for security of these devices because they only sell for a few months before the next model comes out? If that is the case forming a security company doesn't seem like a very profitable venture. Has someone made the equivalent of ruby on rails for these devices? It doesn't work for everything, but for most it works well enough and gets it the job done in a fraction of the time that a complete custom job would require?
- pdimitar 10y agoThis could be a start: https://hexdocs.pm/nerves/targets.html https://hexdocs.pm/nerves/targets.html I happen to like Elixir the language a lot, but it does have legitimate advantages.
- coupdejarnac 10y agoNot a bad idea- I'm going to do that. A few years ago, it seemed like the market had dried up for engineers who wanted to do firmware for microcontrollers. I guess the tide has turned.
- blhack 10y agoMy girlfriend's company brands themselves as specialists in IoT (they're a software consultancy). http://iceddev.com/ http://iceddev.com/
- andromeda__ 10y agoYou just crashed their site :) It's rendered inaccessible.
- blhack 10y agoHm, seems to be fine for me. Maybe mine is cached? Although I'd honestly be shocked if it was being overloaded from a little HN traffic. One of the blog posts was recently on the front page here and it didn't seem to effect the site at all, ha. Btw, I should have been more clear (and it's past the edit period). These people are specialists in IoT. "Branding" was just a response to the parent's question of if anybody is highlighting that aspect of what they do. (The word "branding" feels odd to me. Probably not the word I would have chosen.)
- andromeda__ 10y agoYou're right. I seem to be facing a network issue. Some sites like HN are accessible while others aren't.
- andromeda__ 10y ago>(The word "branding" feels odd to me. Probably not the word I would have chosen.) Yes it does have that generic feel to it.
- MichaelBurge 10y agoIf you add an ethernet port to your coffee maker and it doesn't increase any sales, are these reports counting it as a growth in the IoT market and loss in the older market? Who's pushing this stuff? Is everyone trying to hitch a ride on some buzz, or are there relatively few companies hiring PR firms to trick gullible investors into giving them money? It's hard to tell, but it looks like Proctor and Gamble introduced the term. Their stock price shot up within a year of Google Trends showing increasing interest in the term. I wonder if they're the ones hiring PR firms, or if it's all organic at this point.
- cobookman 10y agoAd money, standing out from cheap Chinese stuff, analytics for upselling. For enterprise its about using technology to cut cost, or to provide new services. When you think about it. Iot is cheap compared to humans. Why have a human go read some gage for compliance, instead install a sensor.
- MichaelBurge 10y agoSure, that's the pitch. But who's paying for the buzz?
- mistermann 10y agoI would think the entire computing industry across nearly the entire spectrum would be very pleased if IOT-everything became some sort of a mania. Regardless of whether it makes sense, a sale is a sale!
- Jaepa 10y agoOh god, no. I think that would make companies happy, and cynically I'd say it give them a new tool for obsoleting hardware as standards change. But most people I know are more scared IoT then excited by it's potential. Most the people I know with IoT stuff installed are more often copy writers or repairs.
- 10y ago
- einrealist 10y agoI want that chrystal ball!
- pfarnsworth 10y agoWhy? It's clearly broken.
- jjoonathan 10y agoThe EE hype sphere is leaking.
- thedailymail 10y agoDoes anyone who doesn't stand to profit from high-ball guesstimates believe in "the market in [A] will grow from [B] billion to [C] billion in just [D] years" projections?
- fizixer 10y agoI do in this specific case. (Haven't read the article. Don't stand to profit.) Here's a simple argument for only one aspect of IoT: Take all the electric equipment you use in your household, office, and so on. Lights, fixtures, fans, kitchen appliances, security systems, on, and on. What the size of that industry you think is at the moment? Just know that about 2/3rd of that industry would "die" and be replaced by exact equivalent devices that communicate wirelessly/remotely with your smart-phones and tablets. Here's the slightly depressing news: likely majority of that market size would be retaken by giants like GE, Philips, etc, that are already the pre-IoT monopolies. But not too depressing because that still leaves quite a room for new players and acquisitions/aquihires. But again, this is just one aspect of IoT. I haven't even mentioned new devices, appliances, because it's a little harder to quantify, much less the coming robotic revolution.
- tonyedgecombe 10y agoSadly I think you are probably right.
- goatlover 10y agoSo that means GE, Phillips, etc get to join Google, FB, etc (not to mention the NSA) in tracking us in ever greater detail? And then your coffee machine, fridge, etc can push advertisements to you. Not sure I see the value in this as a consumer. My dumb, unconnected appliances work just fine.
- pravda 10y agoYou can purchase someone's IoT guesstimates for $4,200! The article references this: http://www.reportsnreports.com/reports/944711-internet-of-things-iot-market-shares-strategies-and-forecasts-worldwide-2017-to-2023.html http://www.reportsnreports.com/reports/944711-internet-of-th... Which is this: http://wintergreenresearch.com/internet-of-things http://wintergreenresearch.com/internet-of-things Here's a handy PDF summary: http://wintergreenresearch.com/reports/Internet%20of%20Things%20(IoT)%202017%20press%20release.pdf http://wintergreenresearch.com/reports/Internet%20of%20Thing... I don't think that report is worth 4.2 cents.
- frik 10y agoIoT has it's place. But but the current bread of "Smart(TM) devices" is all but smart, and in many cases security and privacy threat. A toaster doesn't need WiFi. Not all IoT devices need a internet connection and phone home by default. In the end IoT is something which is around for decades. Industry devices are connected over Ethernet at least for one decade, that's normal. But the are usually firewalled off the internet, and can only be accessed in an internal LAN. So it will be interesting if Smart devices as one area of IoT keep staying in the current phase or will evolve in 1) more LAN centric, more open industry standard or 2) sending even more things home and analyse the data in a datacenter.
- skynode 10y agoSoftware be eating up the world. :) Next iteration: smart nano-agents capable of healing virus infected networks without need for traditional human programming.
- TeMPOraL 10y agoHow that next iteration will look like in reality: "smart" firewalls that deep-scan every packet looking for keywords to sell to advertisers, while incidentally sometimes protecting you from malicious traffic.
- rdtsc 10y agoAlso remember: The "S" in IoT stands for Security. (Not my line, but applies here). So security, or rather the usual lack thereof, will be a thing to keep an eye on.
- bdamm 10y agoIt's a great time to be in IoT security.
- vertex-four 10y agoIs it? Are IoT companies actually hiring security engineers and taking their advice onboard? Maybe in a few years' time it will be.
- freehunter 10y agoI've seen an increasing number of job postings for IoT pen-testers pop up within the last year, so it's on the rise. Still far outshadowed by traditional security job posting though.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- pferde 10y agoAnd now I know what I want on a t-shirt. Thanks! :)
- petra 10y agoAssuming your IOT device only connects to your server on the cloud, isn't it possible for amazon(or someone else),to just to sell you the communication module that gives you a secure link to the cloud , including updates etc - meaning you, as the embedded developer need only very little to none security expertise ? And you as the purchaser of an IOT product, know that security is handled by some serious player, and is probably handled quite well ? Seem this could be valuable for the industrial IOT, at least.
- debt 10y agoIt's just things. Everything will be connected in the near future.
- _1009 10y agoWhat's a good way of getting into IoT? Is there a "TensorFlow Hello World" to get started with things? What basics should I definitely not miss and what hot areas are out there?
- franciscop 10y agoArduino and Raspberry Pi are definitely two of the big learning platforms and communities. Arduino is more skewed towards the Things part and Raspberry Pi to the Internet part. For projects and "Hello world" examples you have Instructables: https://www.instructables.com/ https://www.instructables.com/ Which actually maps pretty well to the two main developers of IoT in my experience, Electronic focused people to Arduino and Sofware focused people to Raspberry Pi.
- coupdejarnac 10y agoLooks like Coursera might have a few applicable classes. I found this: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/iot https://www.coursera.org/specializations/iot IoT is basically the convergence of EE, software, and a bit of mechanical engineering. Since there are so many pre-made hardware platforms out there (Arduino, Pi, etc), you can get by only knowing circuit basics.
- patrickg_zill 10y agoESP8266, buy a couple of them, learn how to make the light blink, connect using builtin Wifi, send data, etc. $3 from China to $10 in USA. Get the NodeMCU form factor, add usb cable. Check the YouTube videos on this device, many projects and cool hacks. Or the ESP32, which is more money but has more RAM and a little more power, as well as adding Bluetooth. SparkFun has their ESP32 Thing for $20.
- pjmlp 10y agoThe ESP32 is specially cool, given that is powerful enough to run any kind of development environment from the 16 bit days (MS-DOS, Amiga, Atari ST, ...).
- 10y ago
- Underqualified 10y agoI believe in IoT. What I don't really believe in are 'smart devices' as they are currently being sold. The major benefit of IoT is for the people able to harvest the data, there is generally little added value for the end consumer. I see the first major growth area in industry, and I see this happening now. Major manufacturers are adding data acquisition to all their processes. The second major growth area might be the public sector. Smart Cities are building up hype and I'll think we'll hear a lot more about these kinds of initiatives in the near future. As for the consumer sector, I don't see major benefits for the consumers, but from a producer's viewpoint, adding telemetry to their devices might give them valuable information. So I think we'll see everything becoming 'smart', but not for our own benefit (and hopefully not on our bill).
- TheGRS 10y agoThe thing that I'm not super clear on is how IoT will benefit many of us when the data will likely be owned and kept close to the various companies that are harvesting all of it. I see why it would be advantageous of a smart Mr. Coffee sending data off to its servers so they can collect usage data, then they can improve their product and marketing. But the real breakthroughs would be in sharing this data openly. Maybe people can make connections between coffee consumption and say...obesity, car accidents, productivity, family spending habits, etc, etc, etc. Like we might be able to put massive data to a lot of the experiments we hear about all the time that use a tiny case study of maybe 20 students at some university. And not only that but people could begin to act on the data and develop new products, solutions and services to our benefit and continue to get more data about them in real time. That's the advantage I see to IoT, but I don't see it doing much for us in its current stage as companies have no real incentive to share all that data. Maybe some sort of open IoT is what we need to get things moving the right direction. But then we all know security is still a major pitfall of IoT to begin with.
- deathhand 10y agoI feel the same way about open data and genetics but people(hn) have privacy fears.
- 10y ago
- LeicaLatte 10y agoTextbook bubble.
- quintes 10y agoI tell people as a joke that back when I did device / integration work we didn't call it IOT we called it TCP. Really. Discrete values over wonderware sql or modems transmitting level readings. If course it wasn't internet scale but it worked. Just a new take on it.
- flamedoge 10y agoo great more ddos botnets
- noelwelsh 10y agoI can see how IoT is extremely useful in industrial and infrastructure applications (e.g. monitoring leaks in pipes). I can see how if I was a retail store I'd wanted to track everyone moving through my shops. But ... are there any compelling consumer applications? Lights that change color don't count. Connected thermostats---I've never understood the appeal.
- ktta 10y agoI think that's because, we tend to have a strict opinion of what IoT is. And that's apparent in industrial use, where it just collects data to relay it so that other people can make use of it. But the IoT in our homes are much more subtle. People don't just buy standalone temperature sensors. If you see carefully, the IoT wave we're expecting is coming in slowly, bundled with other things. These days most of the appliances which were dumb before, like fridges, coffee makers, security cameras, smoke detectors, washing machines, cleaners (roomba, etc.) and others are now connecting to the internet. I mean, a washing machine connecting to the internet might seem preposterous so some now, but I don't think that'll be the case when they get better. Along with Alexa, Google Home, the digital assistants that are yet to come have a chance to really change the way people use their devices at home. If they get it right, and not close off communication to their own servers (Which, I sadly see is happening now and doesn't seem like it'll go away) I think there's a real chance they might have a big market.
- bshimmin 10y agoBut what is the actual benefit to the consumer? What is the user story here? "I want my washing machine connected to the Internet so that _________"? I can't finish this sentence - I have literally no idea. As another commenter suggested, I expect the incumbent giants will add the IoT functionality to most mid-range consumer products anyway, whether anyone wants them to or not, and then it will be proclaimed a great success, while the consumer will be left utterly in the dark about why their fridge has a wifi symbol on it or what it can be used for. Perhaps it'll be less like 3D printers and more like 3D TV, which has apparently now quietly died a death (I tried it once on my TV, because I work in tech and felt some sort of weird obligation to - I'm sure many people never even tried those stupid 3D glasses that came with their TV).
- janjongboom 10y agoI think the biggest problem of IoT right now is the perception of what's possible... We've been building internet connected devices for decades, but that's still what people perceive as IoT ('we put a chip'-movement). However, I think the true opportunity for IoT lays in the combination of the cost of sensors going down, the range of sensors going up, and the advent of machine learning. With cheaper and longer-range sensors we can create vast sets of data on a scale that we haven't seen before, and with machine learning we can extract useful information from this data. With that premise it's also not hard to see why IoT in the consumer market is not such a big success, but you see big industrial players pour billions into IoT projects [1]. There's some other concerns of course too, like the impact that all this data might have on society and that the state of IoT security reflects the state of web security around 1999. If you're interested in that, I did a talk about the subject last week at the AMSxTech conference (20 minutes) [2]. [1] http://tech.newstatesman.com/iot/general-electric-billion-dollar-iot-startup http://tech.newstatesman.com/iot/general-electric-billion-do... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxwWmgbRxwU&t=7s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxwWmgbRxwU&t=7s
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dovdovdov 10y agoTrue, I'd still start with proper security.
- taherchhabra 10y agoCan anyone name good IOT sensors manufacturer.
- asavinov 10y agoBosch. For example http://bosch-sensortec.com http://bosch-sensortec.com or http://bosch-connectivity.com http://bosch-connectivity.com
- taherchhabra 10y agoThanks, I am looking to buy for some personal projects. I hope they are not just for the Enterprises.
- bshimmin 10y agoIt's 3D printers all over again!
- fmap 10y agoAs others have pointed out, the current state of the IoT market is nothing short of crazy, e.g., regarding security, device ownership, and, ironically, connectivity. I wonder if this isn't a perfect time to finally monetize the mountain of distributed OS research from the past three decades. After all, most of you "smart sensors" are actually fairly general purpose computers, and there is no reason why you shouldn't be using all of them, all the time, for computing. Additionally, distributed OSses usually came with secure, low-overhead protocols built-in, which people in the IoT sector seem to be struggling with...
- _pdp_ 10y agoSecurity will improve as technology improves but the main challenge of IoT is that unlike traditional software running on common hardware - upgradability and configuration is difficult due to the small form factor and awkward interface, hence why many IoT providers are going cloud first which makes sense from consumer level while it does not make sense from privacy point of view. INSERT: Btw while your toaster does not need to connect to your wifi many people forget what is the true value proposition here and why these devices need internet access - software - dumb devices that use the hardware only as operating shell but uses software to provide the smarts. In other words a toaster with WiFi connection will not provide you with a better toast but a toaster on your wifi might be able to serve toasted bread with broken hardware that is mitigated through a software upgrade. The toaster example is extreme. I know! However if you look at Tesla you can apply the same principle at micro and macro level, i.e. the tesla already has the hardware for self-driving but it lacks the smarts yet - i.e. the software. Tesla converted the business of selling cars to a business of selling software - and that is way more valuable than just the car itself.
- pimterry 10y ago> upgradability and configuration is difficult due to the small form factor and awkward interface, hence why many IoT providers are going cloud first which makes sense from consumer level while it does not make sense from privacy point of view. Remotely pushing updates and configuration doesn't necessarily imply loss of privacy in practice. I think that's a red herring. I work for Resin.io - we do automated deployments and updates and configuration management for fleets of IoT devices, but that's totally independent of how the device's data is stored and shared (or not). Remote updatability does open up the _possibility_ that somebody could remote connect in to read that data out, or push an update to get to it, but that's quite a different gambit to devices that automatically scoop all your data, analyse everything you do and resell that to marketers. It's also essentially unavoidable if you want to have IoT that can accept remote updates, which given the IoT security situation to date is sadly clearly necessary. This move to cloud-focused IoT architecture isn't about upgradability at all. It's a separate decision, with sometimes (often?) dubious motives, and that's where the privacy concerns come in for me. We shouldn't let the necessity of keeping devices up to date lead us to sacrificing the privacy of all our data, they're not that closely related. Windows automatic update is not really a privacy concern, Windows 10's ad tracking and cloud integration is.
- Razengan 10y agoSo there was a nice little JRPG series by the name of Mega Man Battle Network (Rockman.EXE in Japan) [0] Aside from its obligatory antagonists, the world presented in it seemed more or less like a utopia. What I really wanted to come true from it was how every device – from doghouses to alarm clocks to ovens – had a standard interface that you could "jack in" to with the "Navi" (AI avatar) in your smartphone-like PET (Personal Terminal).. In current world terms, ideally that would be like: • Every electronic appliance will have an standardized wireless interface, with no physical controls other than maybe hard reset/power buttons. • Whenever you get a new device you'd physically tap it with your phone/wearable to register it on your Apple/Google/Microsoft/other cloud account. • You'd get different tiers of controls for each appliance based on your physical distance and the level of authentication on your primary phone/wearable. e.g. to unlock your front door you have to be standing right there (like how unlocking a MacBook with Apple Watch works) but you can turn the lights on/off from across the world if you've unlocked your phone and entered your cloud password – and only from that phone. • Personal Assistants (I hope they get to be called Navis at some point) would be interchangeable and customizable – like ringtones and wallpapers – each with its own visual avatar and personality. You could even have multiple Navis, each with its own duties; a butler-like personality for controlling your home, and a chirpy R2D2-like robot that handles everything else. We can see some of that happening with Apple's HomeKit and its integration with Siri, and of course their competitors' offerings. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega_Man_Battle_Network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega_Man_Battle_Network
- chx 10y agoEvery time some research company makes a bold prediction six years ahead I can only think of this: > In 1997 Intel was the king of the hill; in that year it first announced the Itanium or IA-64 processor. That same year, research company IDC predicted that the Itanium would take over the world, racking up $38 billion in sales in 2001. Wow! Everybody paid attention. Six years is an awfully long time in this industry.
- gjkood 10y agoA shameless plug for my recent talk at PyCaribbean 2017 on the topic of MicroPython, IoT, ESP8266 and MQTT. It covers broad topics that a beginner to IoT will find interesting. It's a 45 minute talk so it only covers what can be covered in that timeframe. Please forgive the lack of polish. I am not a natural public speaker. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ctB8VMm6RA&t=9s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ctB8VMm6RA&t=9s