5 ms·

Is it weird that the more tech becomes like this the more I feel checked out? I don’t want smart devices, nor do I want to be online 24/7. However it’s hard to

Is it weird that the more tech becomes like this the more I feel checked out? I don’t want smart devices, nor do I want to be online 24/7. However it’s hard to escape this reality. My thermostat (in apartment) recently reset due to a power issue and I had to have maintenance over to do its configuration again. They had to come twice because after setting it up they have to figure out how to connect it to Wi-Fi for a software update. Before this apartment I lived in one where all the appliances were straight out of 1950/60. They were retro af but they worked without any issues for the time I lived there. Here I’ve had issues every month.

rootusrootus 5y ago
The problem isn't tech per se, it is the many poor implementations and the push by manufacturers to get you to subscribe to their cloud service. You can have your cake and eat it too, but you do have to do some work to get there. I can control every light switch, thermostat, garage doors, deadbolts, and a few other random things. All from my phone. Automate things, get notified if I want, when the door is unlocked/opened/whatever. But critically, if my Home Assistant goes down, it all fails back to 1950s style. E.g. the deadbolts still have a physical key and a twist knob on the inside (though the keypad functionality is not Internet-dependent). This does mean I don't use any devices that become unusable when the HA server or Internet disappears (for example, Hue bulbs). For devices that don't have local control as an option, I just refuse to buy them. I won't buy things that require a 'net connection to function.
- EricE 5y ago
  "You can have your cake and eat it too, but you do have to do some work to get there." Yup! It used to be a lot harder, but with Homekit and Home Assistant it's more accessible with less tinkering than ever before. I hope Matter (the Amazon/Google/Apple consortium based on Homekit) doesn't blow out the cloud-free options - hopefully Apple can reign in the others.
moonshinefe 5y ago
It's not weird to me or a lot of people I know. I don't want to be online 24/7 (don't bring my phone with me most places, etc.) and I avoid smart devices for the most part in my house. I think people in general prefer simple and reliable, but sometimes it doesn't seem like it since people who buy smart devices talk about them a lot (not a criticism aimed at those people specifically, people like to talk up their purchases in general).
Vrondi 5y ago
No, it isn't weird. Some things should be simple, just work, and not require wifi.
digitalsankhara 5y ago
As much as I love technology, I have my personal limits and can relate to your post. Whenever this subject comes up, I'm reminded of this (Red Dwarf); https://youtu.be/LRq_SAuQDec https://youtu.be/LRq_SAuQDec
cactus2093 5y ago
It's funny that you picked a thermostat as an example, because in my experience the old pre-wifi Honeywell thermostats that many new apartment buildings had for the last 10-20 years (and most hotels still have today) were the pinnacle of horrible UX. The most popular consumer smart home brands today, like Ring and Nest, are mostly a huge step up from the early-2000's precursors to smart devices. And the worst smart devices I have used in recent years are from the brands like GE that just threw wi-fi into these old clumsy confusing interfaces, which it sounds like is what your thermostat is. The genius of Nest in my opinion was the UX improvement of having one big number in the middle showing the set temperature, you can always see what it's set at and just turn left or right to change it. Basically going back to the same UX of those 1960's era thermostats that you're talking about, but with extra options like remote access available if you want them. In terms of thermostat UX I now have the best of both worlds, I love the simplicity and I also love being able to change the temp without getting up from the couch, plus the "eco mode when away from home" feature has generally been rock solid for me and saves money while reducing emissions.

rootusrootus 5y ago

The problem isn't tech per se, it is the many poor implementations and the push by manufacturers to get you to subscribe to their cloud service. You can have your cake and eat it too, but you do have to do some work to get there. I can control every light switch, thermostat, garage doors, deadbolts, and a few other random things. All from my phone. Automate things, get notified if I want, when the door is unlocked/opened/whatever. But critically, if my Home Assistant goes down, it all fails back to 1950s style. E.g. the deadbolts still have a physical key and a twist knob on the inside (though the keypad functionality is not Internet-dependent). This does mean I don't use any devices that become unusable when the HA server or Internet disappears (for example, Hue bulbs). For devices that don't have local control as an option, I just refuse to buy them. I won't buy things that require a 'net connection to function.

EricE 5y ago
"You can have your cake and eat it too, but you do have to do some work to get there." Yup! It used to be a lot harder, but with Homekit and Home Assistant it's more accessible with less tinkering than ever before. I hope Matter (the Amazon/Google/Apple consortium based on Homekit) doesn't blow out the cloud-free options - hopefully Apple can reign in the others.

moonshinefe 5y ago

It's not weird to me or a lot of people I know. I don't want to be online 24/7 (don't bring my phone with me most places, etc.) and I avoid smart devices for the most part in my house. I think people in general prefer simple and reliable, but sometimes it doesn't seem like it since people who buy smart devices talk about them a lot (not a criticism aimed at those people specifically, people like to talk up their purchases in general).

Vrondi 5y ago

No, it isn't weird. Some things should be simple, just work, and not require wifi.

digitalsankhara 5y ago

As much as I love technology, I have my personal limits and can relate to your post. Whenever this subject comes up, I'm reminded of this (Red Dwarf); https://youtu.be/LRq_SAuQDec https://youtu.be/LRq_SAuQDec

cactus2093 5y ago

It's funny that you picked a thermostat as an example, because in my experience the old pre-wifi Honeywell thermostats that many new apartment buildings had for the last 10-20 years (and most hotels still have today) were the pinnacle of horrible UX. The most popular consumer smart home brands today, like Ring and Nest, are mostly a huge step up from the early-2000's precursors to smart devices. And the worst smart devices I have used in recent years are from the brands like GE that just threw wi-fi into these old clumsy confusing interfaces, which it sounds like is what your thermostat is. The genius of Nest in my opinion was the UX improvement of having one big number in the middle showing the set temperature, you can always see what it's set at and just turn left or right to change it. Basically going back to the same UX of those 1960's era thermostats that you're talking about, but with extra options like remote access available if you want them. In terms of thermostat UX I now have the best of both worlds, I love the simplicity and I also love being able to change the temp without getting up from the couch, plus the "eco mode when away from home" feature has generally been rock solid for me and saves money while reducing emissions.