5 ms·

Why would they depend on the internet to allow you to control a device at your home? NFC? Bluetooth? Wifi? Ignoring the obvious security problems of these devic

Why would they depend on the internet to allow you to control a device at your home? NFC? Bluetooth? Wifi? Ignoring the obvious security problems of these devices being internet-connected, it's just a crap design from a usability standpoint. (where "usability" includes "can use it when the internet goes out")

cabaalis 8y ago
Perhaps the functionality of from-anywhere control led them to make internet the only available connectivity. If you assume the service and connection will be always available, why put multiple receivers on the device? Seems the problem here was in the assumption.
- socrates666 8y ago
  Bad design. It should only depend on local net, and then raise an interface to outside world as needed.
toomuchtodo 8y ago
Could they create a way to host a service at your home for direct connect from the app so connectivity doesn’t rely on a cloud service? Sure. Most consumers don’t care though. I certainly don’t care. This is the first major Nest outage I can remember. It would take continued intermittent outages for me to re-evaluate my Nest devices at my homes. Either a cloud app is going to go out, or my home internet is going to go out. I don’t expect 100% uptime because I’m realistic, and expecting non-cloud infra devices with no time commitment is a pipe dream.
- amluto 8y ago
  I had the impression that this capability was a hard requirement for HomeKit support. Go Apple.
- socrates666 8y ago
  How do you feel knowing that you are being watched?
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Unphased. I only have thermostats and smoke detectors.
    - reaperducer 8y ago
      Great data for getting your insurance rates raised. All it takes is for Snake Farm to pay to find out how many times your smoke detector goes off. Or even if it doesn't fully go off, how often it senses anything. With your thermostat data, it's possible to build a profile of when you're home and away. Hmmm... he seems to work an overnight shift. Better jack up his premium!
      - kevinh 8y ago
        If companies do start charging different amounts based on smart device data, it will most likely be discounts from an increased premium (which you wouldn't get without smart devices) rather than increases in fees due to usage behavior. So in your case, better buy that smart device.
        reaperducer 8y ago
        >If companies do start charging different amounts based on smart device data Companies already do: https://www.progressive.com/auto/discounts/snapshot/ https://www.progressive.com/auto/discounts/snapshot/ In this case, Progressive gives you a discount in exchange for monitoring you. But I've seen articles where other insurance companies (often in the UK for some reason) raise rates for things as seemingly innocuous as posting the wrong thing, or being "friends" with the wrong people on social media.
      - toomuchtodo 8y ago
        This is a public policy issue, not a technical issue.
- lstamour 8y ago
  ... or batteries run out. That's happened twice for me with when I'm only using a smart lock occasionally.
  - mynameisvlad 8y ago
    Not an issue with smart thermostats, their batteries are constantly charged through the wiring. Plus, if your batteries run out, then you wouldn't be able to change the temperature anyway. You have far bigger problems than the device being online only.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  >Could they create a way to host a service at your home for direct connect from the app so connectivity doesn’t rely on a cloud service? I believe that's how Apple does it. The local host device is either an AppleTV, or an iPad.
mar77i 8y ago
I guess you couldn't continuously support and update (terrorize?) people's smart stuff otherwise. It's not like open source, where you build it and are responsible when it breaks.
IBM 8y ago
A big advantage of HomeKit is that it works locally and mandates security in the ecosystem.
- steve_musk 8y ago
  Yeah as I’ve researched smart home stuff I’ve become more and more impressed with HomeKit. The HomeKit devices talk to iOS devices over the LAN and then an Apple TV acts as the “bridge” that lets you control your house over the internet. It sucks you have to buy an Apple TV to do it but I’m more comfortable having my thermostats, light switches, etc. all connect to the internet through a single (and reliably updated) device vs. relying on individual manufactures to secure their devices.
mtgx 8y ago
But then how is Google going to collect and monetize your data - after you've already purchased its product?
hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
My understanding from other posters, though, is that the devices did NOT require internet access to control them, e.g. you could walk over to the Nest thermostat to change the temp, or key in a Nest lock code to unlock it. So, for a few hours, seems like the devices just turned into "dumb" devices instead of "smart" ones. Doesn't seem as drastic a loss of functionality as is being presented here.
- peterwwillis 8y ago
  Sounds exactly like your TV's remote control no longer working.
  - Clubber 8y ago
    Essentially yes, except my TV can't be controlled without the remote. It's more like your car's unlock button doesn't work, but you still have the key.
- kodablah 8y ago
  The comment you are responding to though is asking why some of the non-physical-yet-local protocols aren't leveraged but instead you have to go all the way back out to the internet and back to do something local. Why don't these products use LAN or other local, non-cloud options? That you can physically control it doesn't answer the question.
  - vlovich123 8y ago
    For starters you don't have to worry about AP isolation & inconsistent router configurations. It also drastically simplifies the user enrolment/validation process and makes the UX of that far more consistent. It also might mean it's a lot more difficult to take over a Nest remotely if it's pinned to only communicate with Nest servers. Finally, the C&C protocols can evolve in the current model more easily as it's all server-side; the mobile & web apps just need to communicate via simple REST APIs. This drastically simplifies the maintenance of these codebases & speeds up how quickly they can address any security vulnerabilities. These choices Nest has made simplifies the SW stack, UX & provides for better security at the cost of mandating a physical fallback rather than a LAN fallback. You may see things differently but that doesn't mean these aren't valid engineering tradeoffs.
SkyPuncher 8y ago
I think it's the "most reliable" way to get them to work. When you have a centralized server, both devices know exactly how to connect to the centralized server and communicate through it. Local connectivity seems to present all sort of silly issues that make the user experience a bit inconsistent. Heck, look at Chromecast, it works great about 90-95% of the time. That 5-10% of the time it doesn't work, it becomes a complete pain.
zippitydoodah68 8y ago
I think you can figure this out. Not about design, about determining demand/profit, data collection, and control.
abiox 8y ago
i suspect it's because nest is a bit of a (niche) data play. i don't necessarily care that much about that, but i do want such a product to work perfectly fine whether there's a connection to their servers or not.
otakucode 8y ago
While it would not be technologically difficult to design most products to not require 'cloud' connectivity to provide full functionality, it would cut the companies out of data collection and they don't want that. How else will Google decide that saving the planet by manipulating everyones Nest to lie about the temperature its actually set at by a degree or two is too irresistable to pass up? One degree for an hour over 100 million people... just imagine the scale of CO2 emissions reduced, power consumption reduced, etc. Honestly surprised it hasn't happened yet.
cptskippy 8y ago
Reduced complexity and higher reliability. Instead of your apps having to detect if they're local or remote to the device and then implementing a different protocol based on locality, they instead just always call out to a cloud based location. They don't have to devote resources to maintaining 2 APIs for every product and can instead focus on reliability and robustness of the one interface. > it's just a crap design from a usability standpoint. I would argue the opposite. By having to support both cloud and local communication, you're introducing complexity and the possibility that APIs could diverge in functionality and reliability.

cabaalis 8y ago

Perhaps the functionality of from-anywhere control led them to make internet the only available connectivity. If you assume the service and connection will be always available, why put multiple receivers on the device? Seems the problem here was in the assumption.

socrates666 8y ago
Bad design. It should only depend on local net, and then raise an interface to outside world as needed.

toomuchtodo 8y ago

Could they create a way to host a service at your home for direct connect from the app so connectivity doesn’t rely on a cloud service? Sure. Most consumers don’t care though. I certainly don’t care. This is the first major Nest outage I can remember. It would take continued intermittent outages for me to re-evaluate my Nest devices at my homes. Either a cloud app is going to go out, or my home internet is going to go out. I don’t expect 100% uptime because I’m realistic, and expecting non-cloud infra devices with no time commitment is a pipe dream.

amluto 8y ago
I had the impression that this capability was a hard requirement for HomeKit support. Go Apple.
socrates666 8y ago
How do you feel knowing that you are being watched?
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Unphased. I only have thermostats and smoke detectors.
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    Great data for getting your insurance rates raised. All it takes is for Snake Farm to pay to find out how many times your smoke detector goes off. Or even if it doesn't fully go off, how often it senses anything. With your thermostat data, it's possible to build a profile of when you're home and away. Hmmm... he seems to work an overnight shift. Better jack up his premium!
    - kevinh 8y ago
      If companies do start charging different amounts based on smart device data, it will most likely be discounts from an increased premium (which you wouldn't get without smart devices) rather than increases in fees due to usage behavior. So in your case, better buy that smart device.
      - reaperducer 8y ago
        >If companies do start charging different amounts based on smart device data Companies already do: https://www.progressive.com/auto/discounts/snapshot/ https://www.progressive.com/auto/discounts/snapshot/ In this case, Progressive gives you a discount in exchange for monitoring you. But I've seen articles where other insurance companies (often in the UK for some reason) raise rates for things as seemingly innocuous as posting the wrong thing, or being "friends" with the wrong people on social media.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      This is a public policy issue, not a technical issue.
lstamour 8y ago
... or batteries run out. That's happened twice for me with when I'm only using a smart lock occasionally.
- mynameisvlad 8y ago
  Not an issue with smart thermostats, their batteries are constantly charged through the wiring. Plus, if your batteries run out, then you wouldn't be able to change the temperature anyway. You have far bigger problems than the device being online only.
reaperducer 8y ago
>Could they create a way to host a service at your home for direct connect from the app so connectivity doesn’t rely on a cloud service? I believe that's how Apple does it. The local host device is either an AppleTV, or an iPad.

mar77i 8y ago

I guess you couldn't continuously support and update (terrorize?) people's smart stuff otherwise. It's not like open source, where you build it and are responsible when it breaks.

IBM 8y ago

A big advantage of HomeKit is that it works locally and mandates security in the ecosystem.

steve_musk 8y ago
Yeah as I’ve researched smart home stuff I’ve become more and more impressed with HomeKit. The HomeKit devices talk to iOS devices over the LAN and then an Apple TV acts as the “bridge” that lets you control your house over the internet. It sucks you have to buy an Apple TV to do it but I’m more comfortable having my thermostats, light switches, etc. all connect to the internet through a single (and reliably updated) device vs. relying on individual manufactures to secure their devices.

mtgx 8y ago

But then how is Google going to collect and monetize your data - after you've already purchased its product?

hn_throwaway_99 8y ago

My understanding from other posters, though, is that the devices did NOT require internet access to control them, e.g. you could walk over to the Nest thermostat to change the temp, or key in a Nest lock code to unlock it. So, for a few hours, seems like the devices just turned into "dumb" devices instead of "smart" ones. Doesn't seem as drastic a loss of functionality as is being presented here.

peterwwillis 8y ago
Sounds exactly like your TV's remote control no longer working.
- Clubber 8y ago
  Essentially yes, except my TV can't be controlled without the remote. It's more like your car's unlock button doesn't work, but you still have the key.
kodablah 8y ago
The comment you are responding to though is asking why some of the non-physical-yet-local protocols aren't leveraged but instead you have to go all the way back out to the internet and back to do something local. Why don't these products use LAN or other local, non-cloud options? That you can physically control it doesn't answer the question.
- vlovich123 8y ago
  For starters you don't have to worry about AP isolation & inconsistent router configurations. It also drastically simplifies the user enrolment/validation process and makes the UX of that far more consistent. It also might mean it's a lot more difficult to take over a Nest remotely if it's pinned to only communicate with Nest servers. Finally, the C&C protocols can evolve in the current model more easily as it's all server-side; the mobile & web apps just need to communicate via simple REST APIs. This drastically simplifies the maintenance of these codebases & speeds up how quickly they can address any security vulnerabilities. These choices Nest has made simplifies the SW stack, UX & provides for better security at the cost of mandating a physical fallback rather than a LAN fallback. You may see things differently but that doesn't mean these aren't valid engineering tradeoffs.

SkyPuncher 8y ago

I think it's the "most reliable" way to get them to work. When you have a centralized server, both devices know exactly how to connect to the centralized server and communicate through it. Local connectivity seems to present all sort of silly issues that make the user experience a bit inconsistent. Heck, look at Chromecast, it works great about 90-95% of the time. That 5-10% of the time it doesn't work, it becomes a complete pain.

zippitydoodah68 8y ago

I think you can figure this out. Not about design, about determining demand/profit, data collection, and control.

abiox 8y ago

i suspect it's because nest is a bit of a (niche) data play. i don't necessarily care that much about that, but i do want such a product to work perfectly fine whether there's a connection to their servers or not.

otakucode 8y ago

While it would not be technologically difficult to design most products to not require 'cloud' connectivity to provide full functionality, it would cut the companies out of data collection and they don't want that. How else will Google decide that saving the planet by manipulating everyones Nest to lie about the temperature its actually set at by a degree or two is too irresistable to pass up? One degree for an hour over 100 million people... just imagine the scale of CO2 emissions reduced, power consumption reduced, etc. Honestly surprised it hasn't happened yet.

cptskippy 8y ago

Reduced complexity and higher reliability. Instead of your apps having to detect if they're local or remote to the device and then implementing a different protocol based on locality, they instead just always call out to a cloud based location. They don't have to devote resources to maintaining 2 APIs for every product and can instead focus on reliability and robustness of the one interface. > it's just a crap design from a usability standpoint. I would argue the opposite. By having to support both cloud and local communication, you're introducing complexity and the possibility that APIs could diverge in functionality and reliability.