5 ms·

Once again HomeKit's design proves to be prescient. https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/3/16083996/internet-of-shit-wrong-about-homekit https://www.theverge.com/20

Once again HomeKit's design proves to be prescient. https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/3/16083996/internet-of-shit-wrong-about-homekit https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/3/16083996/internet-of-shit-...

asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
Hrm. How so? HomeKit does not allow third party devs to write apps to control HomeKit devices, AFAICT. So they never added the capability that Google is removing. People can still develop devices that are triggered by Nest and Google Home. They just can no longer write apps that themselves trigger or modify Nest devices. Or are you saying it's prescient because Apple saw that such capabilities were not economically viable in the long run, and so it was prescient of them to never develop the functionality in the first place?
- Despegar 7y ago
  HomeKit doesn't require an internet connection for smart home devices to work, it doesn't require you to use the smart home maker's garbage apps or sign up for accounts with them, it gives away for free features that smart home makers try to put behind subscription paywalls, and most importantly it was designed to be secure.
- Gaelan 7y ago
  I haven’t tested this, but I believe you could use Homebridge to create a virtual “button” that got “pushed” when you hit some API endpoint, then configure HomeKit to change something when the button gets pressed.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- iknowordidthat 7y ago
  HomeBridge can control HomeKit accessories just fine.
  - icebraining 7y ago
    Can you show an example of HomeBridge controlling an HomeKit accessory? The description of the project says the opposite: it allows the control of non-HomeKit accessories from HomeKit.
driverdan 7y ago
HomeKit is not open and requires Apple devices.
- iknowordidthat 7y ago
  That is not true. The HomeKit protocol is documented. There are at least a few open source projects that implement it both as accessories and hubs. Home Bridge being the best known one. If all the accessory vendors were to go under and Apple were to stop supporting HomeKit tomorrow, HomeKit accessories and hubs would still operate just fine and alternatives could be created. Even using Alexa or Google Nest for voice control.
  - icebraining 7y ago
    Being documented is not enough. Implementing a commercial device requires including an Authentication component (before it used to be an actual chip, now it seems it can be done in software), and that can be used to prevent devices from speaking to alternative control apps. From what I can tell, Homebridge implements Homekit as a device, receiving commands. But can anyone build an app or device to send commands, outside of iOS? The fact that I can't find an Homekit control app for Android strongly indicates this is not possible.
    - iknowordidthat 7y ago
      Being fully documented means anything can work in any way.
      - icebraining 7y ago
        > Being fully documented means anything can work in any way. A protocol being fully documented does not mean you can get a device you cannot control (like an Homekit lightbulb) to connect to your server instead of the manufacturer's. If requests are signed and/or encrypted, knowing the protocol won't help if you don't have the keys. See also Tivoization. > For example, search the web for ‘homebridge alexa’ I had found it. I don't think you realize that there's no Homekit there at all. The point of Homebridge is to translate from a Homekit-speaking control app/assistant to a non-Homekit-enabled device: https://blog.theodo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/workflow.png https://blog.theodo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/workflow.... But when you use homebridge-alexa, you're replacing that first link with another protocol (specifically, MQTT+JSON, which is what it uses to connect to https://www.homebridge.ca/ https://www.homebridge.ca/). So you've actually removed all Homekit parts from your smart home system!
Retroity 7y ago
Samsung's SmartThings seems to be pretty similar. Not sure about it's security though.

Once again HomeKit's design proves to be prescient. https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/3/16083996/internet-of-shit-wrong-about-homekit https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/3/16083996/internet-of-shit-...

asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago

Hrm. How so? HomeKit does not allow third party devs to write apps to control HomeKit devices, AFAICT. So they never added the capability that Google is removing. People can still develop devices that are triggered by Nest and Google Home. They just can no longer write apps that themselves trigger or modify Nest devices. Or are you saying it's prescient because Apple saw that such capabilities were not economically viable in the long run, and so it was prescient of them to never develop the functionality in the first place?

Despegar 7y ago
HomeKit doesn't require an internet connection for smart home devices to work, it doesn't require you to use the smart home maker's garbage apps or sign up for accounts with them, it gives away for free features that smart home makers try to put behind subscription paywalls, and most importantly it was designed to be secure.
Gaelan 7y ago
I haven’t tested this, but I believe you could use Homebridge to create a virtual “button” that got “pushed” when you hit some API endpoint, then configure HomeKit to change something when the button gets pressed.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
iknowordidthat 7y ago
HomeBridge can control HomeKit accessories just fine.
- icebraining 7y ago
  Can you show an example of HomeBridge controlling an HomeKit accessory? The description of the project says the opposite: it allows the control of non-HomeKit accessories from HomeKit.

driverdan 7y ago

HomeKit is not open and requires Apple devices.

iknowordidthat 7y ago
That is not true. The HomeKit protocol is documented. There are at least a few open source projects that implement it both as accessories and hubs. Home Bridge being the best known one. If all the accessory vendors were to go under and Apple were to stop supporting HomeKit tomorrow, HomeKit accessories and hubs would still operate just fine and alternatives could be created. Even using Alexa or Google Nest for voice control.
- icebraining 7y ago
  Being documented is not enough. Implementing a commercial device requires including an Authentication component (before it used to be an actual chip, now it seems it can be done in software), and that can be used to prevent devices from speaking to alternative control apps. From what I can tell, Homebridge implements Homekit as a device, receiving commands. But can anyone build an app or device to send commands, outside of iOS? The fact that I can't find an Homekit control app for Android strongly indicates this is not possible.
  - iknowordidthat 7y ago
    Being fully documented means anything can work in any way.
    - icebraining 7y ago
      > Being fully documented means anything can work in any way. A protocol being fully documented does not mean you can get a device you cannot control (like an Homekit lightbulb) to connect to your server instead of the manufacturer's. If requests are signed and/or encrypted, knowing the protocol won't help if you don't have the keys. See also Tivoization. > For example, search the web for ‘homebridge alexa’ I had found it. I don't think you realize that there's no Homekit there at all. The point of Homebridge is to translate from a Homekit-speaking control app/assistant to a non-Homekit-enabled device: https://blog.theodo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/workflow.png https://blog.theodo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/workflow.... But when you use homebridge-alexa, you're replacing that first link with another protocol (specifically, MQTT+JSON, which is what it uses to connect to https://www.homebridge.ca/ https://www.homebridge.ca/). So you've actually removed all Homekit parts from your smart home system!

Retroity 7y ago

Samsung's SmartThings seems to be pretty similar. Not sure about it's security though.