4 ms·

It was Apple that chose to make HomeKit a nonstandard, proprietary protocol for the purpose of locking people into iOS. You simply cannot fault Google for fail

by Niten 12y ago

It was Apple that chose to make HomeKit a nonstandard, proprietary protocol for the purpose of locking people into iOS. You simply cannot fault Google for failing to fall in line with Apple's play for the market.

gravity13 12y ago
Hey can you guys tell me where I can get the jailbreak kit for my Nest?
aisenik 12y ago
Putting HomeKit behind MFi is a barrier, but hardly one that should put Nest off the platform. The majority of their installed user base uses iOS. I kind of expected my Nests to last me 10+ years, but now I'm left wondering if I'll be replacing them sooner. (It's not clear to me how Nest's API is any more standard than HomeKit.) Of course, from a business perspective this all makes sense. But as a customer, it's disappointing. It doesn't feel coincidental to me that Nest will support geofencing and native voice control on Android while doing the same with an iOS device is likely to require the Google app and a Google account. You might see that as a win against "nonstandard" proprietary protocols but I don't see any upside for me.
- cbeach 12y ago
  It's a pity Google acquired Nest. If not, it probably would have supported both Apple and Google's control solution. HomeKit is mostly just an addressing system allowing the house to be described in config. It's not a huge loss for consumers if both Apple and Google have their own flavours of this. Provided the product companies producing hardware remain independent rather than being swallowed up by Apple or Google. I'd be equally annoyed if Apple started acquiring companies like Withings.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- andybak 12y ago
  Choosing to install a Google app on an Apple device is a much lower barrier than there not even being an Apple app for a Google device. I'm no lover of walled gardens but one that allows you entry without buying a $700 smartphone is the lesser of two evils. I was discussing the cost of laser barcode scanners with someone the other day and the few models that are iOS certified are significantly more expensive due to MFi.
  - antimagic 12y ago
    One requires you "buy entry" with a $700 smartphone. The other requires that you "buy entry" by giving access to your personal data to a company that has demonstrated that it doesn't care about your privacy. Neither option is objectively "less evil", it depends on the priorities of the user. I for one will only willingly hand Google the keys to my data when hell freezes over or Apple and Microsoft go bust.
    - andybak 12y ago
      I think there's a certain amount of histrionics here what with bringing up the whole 'evil' thing and your phrase "doesn't care about your privacy'. I would have bought a more reasoned argument - getting into bed with Google demonstrably involves a tradeoff in terms of privacy - but I feel we're just a small step away from the days of 'Micro$oft' comments on Slashdot now.
      - antimagic 12y ago
        I don't think "Google doesn't care about your privacy" is histrionics. Let me remind you of a few examples: 1) http://gizmodo.com/what-the-google-street-view-wi-fi-decision-actually-mea-1332161134 http://gizmodo.com/what-the-google-street-view-wi-fi-decisio... "Google did this to enhance the accuracy and precision of its location based services. But it also captured "payload data," or the actual data transmitted through the Wi-Fi networks, including emails, usernames, passwords and more." 2) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/17/google-wifi-passwords-android_n_3936809.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/17/google-wifi-passwor... Google might have access to WiFi passwords used by every single Android user, a new report suggests. That is a whole lot of WiFi passwords -- maybe most of them in the world. “If an Android device (phone or tablet) has ever logged on to a particular Wi-Fi network, then Google probably knows the Wi-Fi password,” Computer World's Michael Horowitz wrote last week. “Considering how many Android devices there are, it is likely that Google can access most Wi-Fi passwords worldwide.” 3) https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-dismisses-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmid... Yesterday, the web was buzzing with commentary about Google CEO Eric Schmidt's dangerous, dismissive response to concerns about search engine users' privacy. When asked during an interview for CNBC's recent "Inside the Mind of Google" special about whether users should be sharing information with Google as if it were a "trusted friend," Schmidt responded, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." 4) http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/mar/06/google-glass-threat-to-our-privacy http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/mar/06/google-gla... Google doesn't want to discuss these issues. "We are not making any comment," says a company spokesperson. But other sources suggest that Google's chiefs know that this is a live issue, and they're watching it develop. That's part of the plan behind the "Glass Explorer" scheme, which aims to get the devices into the hands – or rather, on to the faces – of ordinary people (and which enabled one member of the trial to putatively auction their Glass). 5)http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/12/google-buzz-privacy/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/12/google-buzz-privacy/ "Merging something designed for public broadcasting (Buzz) with something inherently private (Gmail) was just looking for trouble." This is a long term pattern - I've got to the point where I just expect Google to not worry about my privacy as a default position, until such times as they get significant pushback, which may be too late for some users. Call that histrionic if you like, I call that learning from experience...
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

by Niten 12y ago

gravity13 12y ago

Hey can you guys tell me where I can get the jailbreak kit for my Nest?

aisenik 12y ago

Putting HomeKit behind MFi is a barrier, but hardly one that should put Nest off the platform. The majority of their installed user base uses iOS. I kind of expected my Nests to last me 10+ years, but now I'm left wondering if I'll be replacing them sooner. (It's not clear to me how Nest's API is any more standard than HomeKit.) Of course, from a business perspective this all makes sense. But as a customer, it's disappointing. It doesn't feel coincidental to me that Nest will support geofencing and native voice control on Android while doing the same with an iOS device is likely to require the Google app and a Google account. You might see that as a win against "nonstandard" proprietary protocols but I don't see any upside for me.

cbeach 12y ago
It's a pity Google acquired Nest. If not, it probably would have supported both Apple and Google's control solution. HomeKit is mostly just an addressing system allowing the house to be described in config. It's not a huge loss for consumers if both Apple and Google have their own flavours of this. Provided the product companies producing hardware remain independent rather than being swallowed up by Apple or Google. I'd be equally annoyed if Apple started acquiring companies like Withings.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
andybak 12y ago
Choosing to install a Google app on an Apple device is a much lower barrier than there not even being an Apple app for a Google device. I'm no lover of walled gardens but one that allows you entry without buying a $700 smartphone is the lesser of two evils. I was discussing the cost of laser barcode scanners with someone the other day and the few models that are iOS certified are significantly more expensive due to MFi.
- antimagic 12y ago
  One requires you "buy entry" with a $700 smartphone. The other requires that you "buy entry" by giving access to your personal data to a company that has demonstrated that it doesn't care about your privacy. Neither option is objectively "less evil", it depends on the priorities of the user. I for one will only willingly hand Google the keys to my data when hell freezes over or Apple and Microsoft go bust.
  - andybak 12y ago
    I think there's a certain amount of histrionics here what with bringing up the whole 'evil' thing and your phrase "doesn't care about your privacy'. I would have bought a more reasoned argument - getting into bed with Google demonstrably involves a tradeoff in terms of privacy - but I feel we're just a small step away from the days of 'Micro$oft' comments on Slashdot now.
    - antimagic 12y ago
      I don't think "Google doesn't care about your privacy" is histrionics. Let me remind you of a few examples: 1) http://gizmodo.com/what-the-google-street-view-wi-fi-decision-actually-mea-1332161134 http://gizmodo.com/what-the-google-street-view-wi-fi-decisio... "Google did this to enhance the accuracy and precision of its location based services. But it also captured "payload data," or the actual data transmitted through the Wi-Fi networks, including emails, usernames, passwords and more." 2) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/17/google-wifi-passwords-android_n_3936809.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/17/google-wifi-passwor... Google might have access to WiFi passwords used by every single Android user, a new report suggests. That is a whole lot of WiFi passwords -- maybe most of them in the world. “If an Android device (phone or tablet) has ever logged on to a particular Wi-Fi network, then Google probably knows the Wi-Fi password,” Computer World's Michael Horowitz wrote last week. “Considering how many Android devices there are, it is likely that Google can access most Wi-Fi passwords worldwide.” 3) https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-dismisses-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmid... Yesterday, the web was buzzing with commentary about Google CEO Eric Schmidt's dangerous, dismissive response to concerns about search engine users' privacy. When asked during an interview for CNBC's recent "Inside the Mind of Google" special about whether users should be sharing information with Google as if it were a "trusted friend," Schmidt responded, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." 4) http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/mar/06/google-glass-threat-to-our-privacy http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/mar/06/google-gla... Google doesn't want to discuss these issues. "We are not making any comment," says a company spokesperson. But other sources suggest that Google's chiefs know that this is a live issue, and they're watching it develop. That's part of the plan behind the "Glass Explorer" scheme, which aims to get the devices into the hands – or rather, on to the faces – of ordinary people (and which enabled one member of the trial to putatively auction their Glass). 5)http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/12/google-buzz-privacy/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/12/google-buzz-privacy/ "Merging something designed for public broadcasting (Buzz) with something inherently private (Gmail) was just looking for trouble." This is a long term pattern - I've got to the point where I just expect Google to not worry about my privacy as a default position, until such times as they get significant pushback, which may be too late for some users. Call that histrionic if you like, I call that learning from experience...
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]