19 ms·

Why Is My Smart Home So Dumb?

146 points by mparramon 12y ago

maxerickson 12y ago
I think a big part of the problem is that integration is hard, and that the companies more or less resist it (I guess because they think keeping people in their garden is a good strategy). It's also easy to oversell (to yourself) the value of a room having a movie mode. Most smart home features are 'nice to have', not worth a lot of messing around and cash.
- Radim 12y ago
  My new home came with "smart features", like heaters controlled by a smart central hub with remote sensors, remote light dimming etc. Took more than 3 months to have all the annoying gadgets replaced by dependable, manual solutions. For me this stuff is not even "nice to have". It's more like "dear god, why would I want an extra layer of complexity?". The fewer moving pieces, the better. But then again, I'm a developer, so dependable simplicity is my modus operandi. Different people seek different things.
  - maxerickson 12y ago
    Sure, the complexity and fragility aren't nice to have, that wasn't what I meant. I meant that something like a movie mode isn't worth much (it's merely nice to have), so it better not cost a lot or be fiddly.
- glesica 12y ago
  > It's also easy to oversell (to yourself) the value of a room having a movie mode. Most smart home features are 'nice to have', not worth a lot of messing around and cash. My girlfriend used to occasionally watch a show about house-buying (House Hunters). In general the show wasn't terribly interesting, but the real estate agents featured sometimes had some interesting tips. One of those tips was to carefully consider not just how you will use a feature of a house (like a pool, or guest bedroom), but how often you will use it. Apparently people spring for expensive extras like pools and outdoor living spaces because they imagine how great it will be to have family and friends over for picnics, etc. But then they do it once, and never again because it is a huge inconvenience. Same goes for "mother-in-law suites" and spare bedrooms. People tell themselves it will be wonderful to have family stay with them, but the family members only visit once a year (if that), so a hotel is actually more economical (or just have someone sleep on the couch). I tend to think of "smart house" features in this way. Every once in awhile I would appreciate having my living space adapt to my needs or respond to remote commands, but 99.99% of the time, it just doesn't matter. The light switch is right next to the door, I can stand up to close the shades, and thermostats have been programmable for decades now. Eventually we'll probably come up with something that works even better (just like the programmable thermostats were a strict improvement upon their predecessors). But things like converting the light switch to an "app" or controlling the AC with a rudimentary geo-fence aren't it.
  - Silhouette 12y ago
    I tend to think of "smart house" features in this way. Every once in awhile I would appreciate having my living space adapt to my needs or respond to remote commands, but 99.99% of the time, it just doesn't matter. I find there is only a tiny overlap between the many modern technologies I would like to have in a new home and the many so-called smart home features that are aggressively advertised. There are plenty of new systems I think I would find valuable, and quite a few of them distribute some function throughout the house but could usefully be controlled from a single location, but I've never seen much advantage in controlling everything together. That just seems to create one more point of failure, not to mention glaring security/privacy issues if any of the control systems are remotely accessible, which almost all of the major suppliers of home automation control systems proudly claim to be.
  - theorique 12y ago
    This makes a lot of sense. I've heard that the best ROI comes from upgrading (1) kitchens and (2) bathrooms. Why? These are the rooms where people spend a lot of time. The trend for many years has been for big, open kitchens because they are used day to day, and during special occasions (parties, etc) everyone gravitates toward the kitchen anyway.
gambiting 12y ago
I have a similar problem with Chromecast and Youtube. My friends literally cannot understand why I would rather use the YouTube client built into the TV and control it with the TV remote, rather than cast to chromecast and control with my phone. Controlling the TV with my phone is cumbersome. It takes time to unlock it,to find the app, to send the command and have chromecast react. What if someone rings and I want to pause the video before answering the call? Doable,but more complex than it needs to be. What if I leave the room but someone else wants to pause, skip or whatever, but their phone is not connected to my chromecast? In comparison, TV remote is always in front of my TV. Using it is dead simple,doesn't require pairing,and it's instantaneous. It doesn't leave the room when I go to the kitchen, and I can use it while I am on my phone. I feel like controlling lights with your phone is a similar gimmick. It doesn't make it easier or faster - it's just gimmicky, that's all.
- pluma 12y ago
  This isn't as much of a problem if you use Chromecast with a tablet. Also, you can actually connect multiple devices with a Chromecast. I think it's better to think of Chromecast as a wireless display device for your {smartphone,tablet,browser} than a displayless smart-TV. It's just a tool to turn your TV into a dumb client for your smart device of choice. If you want something that extends your TV rather than something that lets you use your TV to extend other devices, you're better off with an Amazon Fire box or equivalent.
- kissickas 12y ago
  I assume you have a keyboard for your TV? That's my main gripe with "smart" TVs. I avoid using a D-pad to type at all costs.
Shivetya 12y ago
Having each light bulb intelligent seems like overkill, I can see a per circuit setup where you replace the light switch. First off its not going to go bad like a bulb which will be replaced eventually; even LEDs which still die too soon. Really, who came up with this light bulb idea...its just daft. Security motion detectors can be used to double effect here as well, you would naturally have them facing doors so they could activate wireless or through signals across existing wires. All sorts of options.
- tonylemesmer 12y ago
  At the very least they could have separated the intelligence and the bulb so the bulb could be replaced independently. But yes the intelligence should really go in the circuit.
- viccuad 12y ago
  that being said, the intelligent light bulb approach has its advantages: I can take a handful of lightbulbs with me to other room/apartment in a heartbeat. And the problem of getting dimmable LEDs out of an AC source is not easy, you are going to end with electronics in each led bulb anyways.
- joosters 12y ago
  Well it's all definitely overkill. But on the plus side, you can sell these bulbs to people who can plug them in without needing to re-wire their house.
- mseebach 12y ago
  Current circuit layouts are wasteful, you have to run enormous amounts of wire between the outlets and the switches, just to be able to control the lights. Much better to just run power directly to the outlets. The control logic should ideally go into the socket, but with 50k hour lifetimes of LED bulbs, the lost efficiently of putting it in one over the other place is trivial. Also remember that putting the controls on the bulb makes it a trivially user-serviceable part, where putting it in the socket technically requires a electrician to install it (you and I are probably comfortable servicing domestic electrical installations, the average consumer isn't, and shouldn't be) - especially in these early days, when neither standards, features or protocols are anywhere near finalised, investing a couple of hundred dollars in bulbs is much better than investing thousands in electricians fees.
tormeh 12y ago
There are house-integrated things that are cool, but they rarely require integration. CO2 and humidity-controlled ventilation is really nice, as is whole-house sound systems. But why should they be connected to each other? Maybe if you used some machine learning algorithms and made the house actually intelligent, so it could anticipate what you wanted. Other than that I don't really see the use.
- maxerickson 12y ago
  A possible application would be to have different temperature regulation for occupied rooms (With some smart scheduling that anticipates occupancy). So there's a reason to integrate the HVAC system with awareness sensors (which will probably be integrated with the sound system). Not an interesting feature for an apartment or smaller house, but it's a reason to try to build the systems so that they can talk to each other.
ekianjo 12y ago
Ouch, don't use GIF clips if the quality is so horrible.
viccuad 12y ago
I really don't grok why I should want to use my smartphone to move up and down my wifi connected blinders. Yet that's all I see when all of this is pictured: gimmicks. I want to see a demo of a room alarm clock: with rising light (in brightness and temperature), birds chirping, room getting warmer, music/radio a while later.. and the same for going to bed.
- davidbanham 12y ago
  Well yeah, but we can't do any of that stuff until we've figured out how to make the lights turn on and off reliably.
  - kalleboo 12y ago
    And some of the first computer peripherals were printers and we still haven't gotten those to work reliably.
    - GotAnyMegadeth 12y ago
      We will have self aware AI before we have reliable printers.
      - arethuza 12y ago
        As long as self aware AIs don't evolve from printer software - can you imagine how evil they would be?
        linker3000 12y ago
        All your base are PC LOAD LETTER
        rhino369 12y ago
        Hackernews: Our Overloard Printers are still using US Letter sized death blades, do they hate math!?!
lylebarrere 12y ago
What is the power limit of POE? I don't see a reason to try to dim LEDs on AC or a reason to keep converting DC/AC/DC/AC so often. Wouldn't POE or a similar standard be better?
- unwind 12y ago
  PoE (that's Power over Ethernet, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_over_Ethernet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_over_Ethernet) maxes out at 25.5 W at the powered device. Not a lot general purpose domestic electricity, although of course lighting is being pushed down towards lower power these days.
- theandrewbailey 12y ago
  USB might be a good alternative if the data bandwidth of Ethernet isn't required. 60W limit for 12 volts, 100W at 20 volts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus#USB_Power_Delivery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus#USB_Power...
jennings223 12y ago
If you have to set options or even program to get it started, it's definitely not so smart.
amirmc 12y ago
I feel like there's some kind of rush to become the box/service that runs your smart home. None of these vertically integrated solutions is going to cover all of the use-cases or user desires, yet it seems that everyone want to be the one that sells you their proprietary (and bug-ridden) box. It would be much easier if most of this stuff could be shipped as software that you can install (somehow) into a box of your choosing and pull together components for your home as you see fit. This field isn't ready for consumers per se but those with a more hacky mindset would probably uncover the useful bits, which could later be picked up as integrated solutions. The only thing I've come across that's like this is openHAB (http://www.openhab.org http://www.openhab.org)
- nodata 12y ago
  Is openHAB still WebKit only?
- semi-extrinsic 12y ago
  You really should check out Telldus (http://www.telldus.se http://www.telldus.se). Their Tellstick Net is simple enough that my father installed his own setup at the summer house, where he has a thermo sensor and two heaters plugged in to remote socket receivers. So when my parents are going there for the weekend, he checks the app on his phone before leaving to see how cold it is, turns on one or both heaters from the app, and the place is warm when they arrive. All of this is available in brick-and-mortar stores in Europe, total cost is something like $200.
pbnjay 12y ago
My main issue with my wink is that it has to go all the way across the internet to connect to the box 10ft away from me. A much "smarter" system would simply connect directly over my home wifi and avoid most of the lag and connectivity issues. I understand WHY they did it this way (because they don't want to support an open device/protocol for interacting with the hub...) but it seems really short-sighted in terms of the user experience. I've already rooted my wink hub and fully intend to implement this myself just to reduce the annoyance.
jmuguy 12y ago
Sounds like my experience with Nest last summer. Got the thermostat, can't get it connected to my wireless. Support basically tells me to get bent until I go into full IT guy mode and prove its an issue with the unit. Replacement unit comes, doesn't work at all (first one was at least a nice looking thermostat with no connected features). Third unit comes and it's been fine ever since. For some reason I thought it would be a good idea to get their smoke detector. One day it randomly detects smoke and will not shut the hell up about it even after resetting, replacing batteries, etc. Nest offered to replace it - I just put my old "dumb" detector back up. I will say it's pretty damn embarrassing to buy this stuff and have it fail so spectacularly, at least my roommate wasn't here to see me seriously losing my mind trying to shut up the Protect.
- lentil_soup 12y ago
  That smoke detector story makes me think it could even be dangerous, no?. Could opposite happen and the device fail to detect smoke?
  - ssharp 12y ago
    Maybe I'm becoming more of a luddite or cranky old-man, approaching my mid-30's, but I don't see any benefit at all to using the Nest smoke alarm. I'm replacing tried and true, simple, technologies, with a new device that seems way more complicated than it needs to be.
    - jmuguy 12y ago
      No, there really isn't a reason to use it. It looks pretty, and I have to admit that's basically why I bought it in the first place.
      - jsabo 12y ago
        I like the theory of it integrating with the thermostat's auto away feature, so it can detect you even if you're not in the same room as the tstat for a while. It needs to be connected to mains for it to work in real time though, so that combined with all of the problems it has working as a smoke detector convinced me to not get one.
spiritplumber 12y ago
I have had auto blinders, lights, and day alarm (courtesy of an old projector) for years. It's all controlled by some random netbook I got for $30, picaxe micros, and xbees (the xbees are admittedly overkill). This is the sort of thing you build, rather than buy, since it will only ever fit the person who designed it.
- patrickk 12y ago
  I'd love to read a blog post about this. Some dream features I'd like personally in a smart home: * TV-aware lights - lights dim/turn off according to a preset pattern when the tv comes on * Voice control - saying "Bed time" would turn off all lights & heating, other commands off the top of my head- "I'm home" (turn on hall lights & heating if its below a certain temperature) or "leaving home"- turn off everything * Low power screen in the hall, like e-ink, where I can have an electronic To Do list easily available, or warnings to bring an umbrella/coat today, or reminders for today from my smartphone calendar Something like this Raspberry pi project looks promising for voice: https://jasperproject.github.io/ https://jasperproject.github.io/ For me, having to whip out a phone to do stuff like turn off lights is pointless. A smart home should be context-aware, e.g. home temperature, time of day, doing an activity like TV, or needing cold bedroom for sleep (open window, turn off heating). If a smart home system isn't more convenient than the low tech version, then there is no point.
  - spiritplumber 12y ago
    Agreed on convenience! The way it works is, it's all xbee based (largely because I had a bunch of short-range xbees around when Serious Business decided to get longer range ones). There's a remote that's a picaxe 28 (remember those?), plus a xbee, plus buttons. There's an old netbook that also runs my projector, mostly netflix/youtube. It has a xbee and a few lines of python. There's the light controllers which are just a USB charger, a relay, a picaxe 8, and a xbee. The blinds have a tamiya motor and a L298 instead of the relay. Both the remote and the laptop get to send commands to the other nodes, the remote also turns the projector on and off (by serial port). Nothing to write home about really. It mostly got done because there was an excess of xbees. The "serial protocol" is just sending two characters (0-9 digits) to address the picaxe, and then a one-letter command. Doesn't seem to bother wifi any.
mrweasel 12y ago
Maybe I'm just not getting it, but why would I want a "Smart Home"? It seems to be a little like a Smart TV, everyone wants more features, but really they're newer going to use the built in voice control or install any apps. We need a few basic feature and the rest just sits their, unused, contributing to the complexity of the device. I have yet to see an intelligent house feature I would like. I understand that some want a better climate control interface, like the Nest. But I have yet to see a house that have central climate/heating control, and I don't miss it in my own home. Is it really such an inconvenience to get up to turn on the light or turn the blinders?
- icebraining 12y ago
  Is it really such an inconvenience to get up to turn on the light or turn the blinders? It can be; if you're incapacitated, for example. But automated lights and blinders also offer other possibilities besides remote interfaces, like waking you up with sunlight instead of an alarm clock. In any case, I agree with you, for now; I do want a smart home, but the current implementations provide very little utility for me. I want a smart home if it can do actual work, like cleaning itself.
- vonmoltke 12y ago
  There are potential security applications for things like that. For instance, a randomized on-off pattern for lights in your house to help throw off casual thieves. Or, tying the system to the burglar alarm so that all the lights come on and the blinds open when the alarm goes off in order to bring more unwanted attention to the thieves. As others have mentioned, there is also the light-sensitive timer use case.
- aetherson 12y ago
  Turning on your lights with a phone app (routinely) is obviously terrible. But I would like to be able to turn on my outdoor front door light from outside when I get home after dark. And I'd like to be able to grant access to people remotely. We have a Nest. It was a gift. Is it useful? Sure, it's way better than our old thermostat, and it's nice that usually it sets the temperature to what we want without our explicit intervention. Is it worth the price? Well, no. But it will presumably get cheaper.
bojo 12y ago
I know our generation is the one longing for the concept of a smart-home that we see in sci-fi movies, but until we reach a stage where we can actually give contextual voice commands that our "home" can understand I'm not convinced this is worth spending a dime on. Not even in the "to promote research in that direction" kind of way, because all I am seeing now are people taking advantage of our high dollar whims and are missing hard.
brudgers 12y ago
Automated building systems are hard to get right even in the commercial space where the specifiers, installers, and operators are professionals and end users are given dummy thermostats to make them feel better or just outright locked out of controls and windows are inoperable. Even then it all depends on dedicated circuitry: webs of low voltage wires for power and signaling snaking from control panels in closets. Sure Wifi is capturing some corner cases, but NFPA isn't going to allow its use for fire alarms any time soon. Those systems need to be reliable. Or people die. The smart home won't be based on a wireless bus. Wall warts show that we're already at the point where a standard low voltage power bus makes sense. More wires and a case for surface mounting is the way electrification goes historically. The current approach to smart homes is equivalent to configuring a new network, hooking up a dozen different 80's dot matrix printers, and then writing drivers for them...using a smartphone touchscreen keyboard. Except instead of technical support you get consumer services. Adding a touch screen and 802.11 doesn't make getting a system working or geewhiz configured easier than X10. It just makes it look simpler and cleaner and more likely that the end user will blame themselves for not being able to use a smartphone.
- ocdtrekkie 12y ago
  The obsession over Bluetooth-this and WiFi-that continually drives me crazy. Home automation companies aren't investing in the sort of technologies we NEED because they're more focused on the sort of technologies they can SELL.
antris 12y ago
There's a lot of cheap crap on the market but there's also some great designs out there. For example, I've got this light control system installed in my home: http://houm.io/ http://houm.io/ Wireless, battery-free buttons that you can put anywhere you like. I keep one of them on my night stand. Rest of the switches look and work just like regular light switches. Except the switches are connected to the system, so I can activate pre-defined scenes with one click of a button. No need to use a smartphone. The scenes are configured through a multi-platform web client. The client, by the way, uses a regular REST API so I can control my lights with cURL too. Over the internet :) It's more expensive, but it just works.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
linker3000 12y ago
There's a few 'handy' things I'd like to do - for example, I am considering replacing my basic central heating/hot water controller with a Raspberry Pi and having features such as a low-heat, vacation mode where the system knows I am 'x' miles away from coming home (tied to my phone's location) and it will fire up everything again. Although I'd consider doing more (ESP8266 modules with MQTT looks interesting, albeit in its infancy), the proliferation of 'standards' (properitary and otherwise) is offputting. Then there's the standards designed to interface between all the different standards...rinse...repeat. Edit: Spelling - I have a dodgy laptop keyboard with melted keys due to a motherboard failure!! Waiting for Dell to come back again and change it!
- herf 12y ago
  Water heaters use a lot of household energy--automating them is a great idea. One smartthings customer did it here: http://community.smartthings.com/t/water-heater-automation/1904 http://community.smartthings.com/t/water-heater-automation/1...
  - modoc 12y ago
    My understanding is that modern tank water heaters are extremely efficient, 96%+ so I don't think they use that much energy these days?
    - joezydeco 12y ago
      Switching a water heater completely off (or below Vacation setpoint) is an invitation to grow nasty things in your tank, like Leigionaire's Disease.
      - DanBC 12y ago
        To kill legionella you need to water at 140 F (60 C) or over, for more than 30 minutes. That temperature will cause a full thickness ("3rd degree") burn in less than a second in children and old people, and less than 5 seconds in adults. It's best to set the water temperature to no more than 50 C. This is still potentially harmful, but takes a bit longer. Or set the tank temperature high and have some safety feature at the point of delivery. Scalds hospitalise many people, killing some of them. Legionella, not so many. EDIT: It's hard to get legionnaire's disease. The "attack rate" is less than 5%. http://www.cdc.gov/legionella/clinicians.html http://www.cdc.gov/legionella/clinicians.html
ocdtrekkie 12y ago
A lot of this is bad technology choice. The new hipster smart bulbs are a doomed technology, they were a bad idea from the start. Try INSTEON, buddy.
- fixermark 12y ago
  Do you have any suggestions on debugging INSTEON? I have a setup at my house, but the light switches stopped talking to the SmartLinc and I can't get them to re-pair. And without any debugging options, I'm feeling a bit sunk.
upofadown 12y ago
I've been into the home automation thing since before forever. There have been many periods of excitement over the years. They come and go. As a result I have to admit to a high level of skepticism about the current period. The companies that generate and are influenced by this excitement tend to make two main errors. 1. They don't understand that without an open standard for controls and sensors they are just fooling themselves. No one is going to permanently install something in their house that is sure to be useless in 10 years. 2. They don't understand that people don't want to control everything ... they instead want to not have to control everything. Being able to control a light from your phone is not really any better than being able to do it from the light switch. People instead want the light to just do the right thing without having to think about it. They don't want a thermostat controllable from a phone. They want a thermostat that makes it so they are comfortable and not paying any extra money they don't have to. As a result, the home automation people actually want is a much harder problem than what everyone always seems to assume.
- prottmann 12y ago
  The problem is, that they want sell you something that you have to pay again and again -> vendor lock, you must use their tools / services / clouds / whatever. Things that just work for 10 or more years, omg! ;) But you are absolutely right!. I did not automate anything at home with separate hard/software, because currently it solves no problem for me. We need not a smart home, we need an intelligent home without controlling or programming everything. A house/appartment has to recognize if nobody is at home and turn off the light or heating. I dont wanna do that with my smartphone and i dont want controll everything.
- romaniv 12y ago
  Open standards are a real issues in the industry. I find it ridiculous that you often have to pay thousands of dollars for software that simply understands those protocols. Not only that, it requires you to jump through ridiculous hoops to do stuff that you could easily do with a reasonably simple Python script. (Look up Niagara AX as an example.) Another problem is APIs and connectivity. Tuning a light on or off should be doable with a simple POST call to a RESTful service somewhere. Instead, we are sold dubious phone apps for everything.
normloman 12y ago
Flicking a switch when I enter or leave the room sounds easier than taking out my phone and fiddling with some app. And it's way cheaper.
- Someone1234 12y ago
  True. But having it turn on while you're on holiday is a nice perk. Plus it isn't an OR choice, you often get both a switch and an app. So you can have the lights turn on as you drive into the garage.
natch 12y ago
Homeboy cameras are the one thing in my setup that work perfectly. I wish more products could be so well integrated with the cloud and the phone. I have them set up to send pictures to Dropbox via IFTT, and it all works perfectly, recording only when there's motion, and only when we are not home (it uses your cell phone location). Tried a Quirky Spotter, and it does detect things like motion, but it doesn't know to send just one push notification; instead it sends a continuous stream of them while motion is happening, which is irksome.
thret 12y ago
When you use a smart phone as a remote control, it's just a slow and inconvenient remote control device. If the lights don't dim by voice command, it should be by your regular smart remote or the switch. "I unlocked my phone. I found the right home screen. I opened the Wink app. I navigated to the Lights section. I toggled over to the sets of light bulbs that I'd painstakingly grouped and labeled. I tapped "Living Room"—this was it—and the icon went from bright to dark. (Okay, so that was like six taps.)"
TACIXAT 12y ago
Home security too. Finding an HD, outdoor camera system that has smartphone and web functionality is very difficult. All the NVRs are horribly insecure. It's strange that a (physical) security product completely neglects software security. The more modern companies seem focused on indoor cameras with only one or two variants and not much by ways of optical zoom lenses.
soylentcola 12y ago
So-called "smart home" devices are certainly new and imperfect but the story told at the beginning of the article is also not necessarily representative. He describes months of setup, unlocking his phone, scrolling through apps, finding the right screen, drilling through menus, and then not having it work. In my limited experience with similar setups (a few Philips Hue bulbs, IP camera, and a Nest thermostat) I haven't really run into anything that obnoxious. When I want to kick on the "mood lighting" for a movie or a party or whatever, I just wake my phone and tap one of several presets on the homescreen widget. Setting up those presets took maybe 10 minutes and I can always mess with the lamps manually or create more if I feel like it. Otherwise the handful of IFTTT recipes I set up and geofencing keeps the lights under control the majority of the time without any input from me. Nest is similar. It's reasonably good at learning my patterns and if I want to tweak the temp or change something, I just open an app and the image on the screen matches the display of the physical thermostat. These are certainly early implementations of connected/smart devices but compared to the state of "professional" integrated systems, they're just fine with me. Just read up on Crestron programming if you want to learn how complicated the enterprise solutions can be. And if you don't want to spend months learning their wacky programming tools and procedures you can spend thousands on hiring certified techs to do it for you. The thing I'm most excited about is for more standardized and interoperable devices to start overtaking the pricey "pro" options for at least the lower level stuff in enterprise and education. As it stands now, a lot of the Crestron stuff is not much more than a glorified universal remote. The faster the consumer/DIY stuff improves, the sooner it will be able to replace the ridiculous "pro" stuff that's been the only option for years.
noobiemcfoob 12y ago
Am I the only confused by the crazy delay mentioned in the article from the "Robots"? The processing can't be all that intensive, and I can't imagine a setup where communicating simple on/off commands to specific devices should be so costly as tens of seconds. I would understand a general delay from sensing the triggering event (i.e. opening the door), but that hardly explains the delay in between all the lights as shown in the gif.
- nitrogen 12y ago
  Any time there's a significant buzz around home automation, opportunists with marketing skills and no appreciation for latency and UX flock to the scene, drowning out the technically superior but underfunded and poorly represented. This stuff doesn't have to be slow: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L7jeJSdJPpk http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L7jeJSdJPpk
dswiese 12y ago
One comparison to this is the big push to get in car navigation and smarts developed by the tech sector. There is a reason radios and stuff work year after year through heat and cold and the like. they may not be pretty, but it (usually) does what its suppose to even after years of use.
ufmace 12y ago
This article made me think about these idea for a bit. I thought of something that may not be very practical right now, but could be a way forward for these things. I think what a really good home automation system ought to do is a bigger version of what the Nest does. All of the light switches, blinds, alarms, climate control, music, TVs, etc could be manually controlled at first, but there's a system that watches how you change all of them and coordinates it with your location and the time. It could look for patterns of doing several things in a row or doing them at the same time, and either offer to or just start doing them all together for you. Like you normally turn on lights 1, 2, and 3 when you walk in the door from work, so it notices and starts turning them on for you just from opening the door. Or you normally turn off lights 2 and 3 and turn on the DVD player within 5 minutes of each other, so it starts just turning off those lights when you turn on the DVD player. Basically, something that notices what you already do and tries to do it for you, without you having to program things in with a smartphone or something. I bet normal people would love that. As long as it wasn't laggy and buggy, of course, which could be easier said than done.
djekels 12y ago
I am now on my 4 controller "Smartthings (ST)" after dumping Nexia my 1st and for many reasons such as compatibility and monthly costs et cetera, then Micasa Verde whcih was okay but not the creates their tech support sucks and more incompatibility issues, then Indigo6 which was okay for a year but they drove me nuts refusing to speak to my doors locks (schlarge) and had to use vera bridge which couldn't keep proper track of the state of the doors. All the while I was researching a stand alone controller backed by a big company like google, apple or samsung. Then I found ST backed by Samsung. So here we are. migrated and all. Learning how to deal with MODES OMG. No variables I can set to do things.
djekels 12y ago
I am now on my 4 controller "Smartthings (ST)" after dumping Nexia my 1st and for many reasons such as compatibility and monthly costs et cetera, then Micasa Verde whcih was okay but not the creates their tech support sucks and more incompatibility issues, then Indigo6 which was okay for a year but they drove me nuts refusing to speak to my doors locks (schlarge) and had to use vera bridge which couldn't keep proper track of the state of the doors. All the while I was researching a stand alone controller backed by a big company like google, apple or samsung. Then I found ST backed by Samsung. So here we are. migrated and all. Learning how to deal with MODES OMG. No variables I can set to do things.
thebiglebrewski 12y ago
Not sure I agree with the article's title. He's basically bad mouthing the entire smart home industry when this really seems like more of a Quirky/GE/Wink mess up. Literally every single product he tested is by them. I actually LOVE all of the stuff in my smart home! All I have is 6 hue bulbs, a Nest, and an Amazon Echo that I've programmed to control everything with my voice with the help of a Raspberry Pi. Nothing feels better than walking in after a long day and saying: "Alexa, turn on all the lights, color blue, brightness 9" "Alexa set nest to 72" Then sitting down on the couch and saying: "Alexa play some jazz music" pours bourbon If you're interested in this, check out my Alexa Home project alexaho.me or the YouTube video below) . I'm turning Amazon Echo into a smart home controller and people seem to be pretty jazzed about it. Frankly, if we can get stuff to work like this where it doesn't rely on your smartphone, people will use it a lot more. I also have a small switch next to my bed that turns on and off the overhead light and desk lamp in my room for when I don't have my phone on me. I think success in the home automation biz is going to be all about untying it from your smartphone... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AmxiGVBekE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AmxiGVBekE
- smackfu 12y ago
  Are you the only one using the system? That seems to be the big barrier to greater acceptance. Convincing everyone who lives in a house to not use the wall light switches is pretty hard. Heck, we basically leave our AV receiver on all the time because requiring someone to turn it on to watch TV is too big a step.
  - thebiglebrewski 12y ago
    Yes, my roommate uses it too! But he's also in tech. I completely agree with you. We need more really cheap IoT light switches so everyone can easily get on board!
mikeytown2 12y ago
It seems like the vast majority of the issues with the current generation of products on the market has to do with speed & reliability; thus hardwired is the only way to guarantee those 2 work all the time. Also by going the hardwired route, the sensors and controls will be vendor neutral; thus ensuring that it will be future proof. After doing a bunch of research the conclusion I came to was Opto-isolated relays [1] are the way to go for lighting control [2]. This allows for simple logic boards to control line voltage things without the risk of the line voltage killing your logic board. Best way to do this style of home automation would be in new construction, as retrofitting it would be hard to do if the house is more than 1 story tall as you need access above and below. Would be labor intensive as well. Will also allow for manual control because you'd put a current sensor on the wire so the hardware can tell when the circuit is on/off. I would also want to put in some thermal cameras, as motion sensors are not as useful when your sitting on the couch, to tell when you enter/exit a room for auto lighting control. Put temperature sensors in every room and have motorized dampers & air flow sensor allowing for the control of the temperature in every room. Now your lighting and hvac can be manually or automatically controlled. Wire all the sensors and controls to a hardware/software brain that can be upgraded at any time. If that hardware/software brain is disconnected, all the light switches will still work and the normal hvac system will still work; just less efficiently. Have the thermostat be controllable from the panel when the house is occupied (thermal camera) and auto controllable when vacant. All of the above is possible right now; it just would cost a lot of money. Every relay/current sensor is $80 bucks; every damper control is $100; every thermal camera is $500; add it all together and you got one very expensive home automation system. But it will work right now without a lot of user frustration. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opto-isolator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opto-isolator [2] http://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/46601/home-light-automation-emulate-4-way-switch-with-relay/46610#46610 http://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/46601/home-light-auto...
pbreit 12y ago
I think part of the problem is that frequently/mostly, I want a dedicated input device like a switch or a dial, not my iPhone to control stuff like lights. Nest has an app but primary interaction is with dedicated UI widgets.
supergeek133 12y ago
The best 'consumer facing' demos of these involve the "I'm leaving home" or "I'm coming home" activities. Aggregate functions, think IFTTT. For much of these devices today, the experience is so fragmented that only a tech savvy customer can figure them out. Also, yes, it's not helpful when I have to take out my phone, put in the password, open the app, and click 'off' when I could just get up and press the switch much faster.
z3t4 12y ago
Home automation is not something you can install yourself, unless you are a full stack programmer, and with full stack I mean also PCB's and micro-controllers. Surprisingly there's a lot of cheap consumer stuff out there, witch can easily be modified to do what you want. Some of them are "unhackable" though. The trick is to make everything automated. And use a high level language like JS to make it smart. Yes, I write my home automation in JavaScript :P
cxseven 12y ago
There's a general pattern of trying to dumb things down to a simple, inflexible interface, too often with half-baked "AI" bolted on. Good products still need attentive human supervision. I installed Insteon motion detectors and webcams after a robbery, but the included software was such undependable and inflexible garbage that I replaced it all with a simple Misterhouse-based Perl script that sends texts via email. If I see another tech product ad aimed at millenials featuring bright easter colors and indiepop music pitched by Steve Jobs wannabes who are unable to get any angry nerds to make their products actually work, I might snap. By the way, the other HN article about malfunctioning Nest smoke detectors is a hilarious accompaniment to this. ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9048110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9048110 )
dayone 12y ago
my learning is to approach "fads" with some skepticism and wait for market to give a thumbs up before you try.

146 points by mparramon 12y ago

I think a big part of the problem is that integration is hard, and that the companies more or less resist it (I guess because they think keeping people in their garden is a good strategy). It's also easy to oversell (to yourself) the value of a room having a movie mode. Most smart home features are 'nice to have', not worth a lot of messing around and cash.

Radim 12y ago
My new home came with "smart features", like heaters controlled by a smart central hub with remote sensors, remote light dimming etc. Took more than 3 months to have all the annoying gadgets replaced by dependable, manual solutions. For me this stuff is not even "nice to have". It's more like "dear god, why would I want an extra layer of complexity?". The fewer moving pieces, the better. But then again, I'm a developer, so dependable simplicity is my modus operandi. Different people seek different things.
- maxerickson 12y ago
  Sure, the complexity and fragility aren't nice to have, that wasn't what I meant. I meant that something like a movie mode isn't worth much (it's merely nice to have), so it better not cost a lot or be fiddly.
glesica 12y ago
> It's also easy to oversell (to yourself) the value of a room having a movie mode. Most smart home features are 'nice to have', not worth a lot of messing around and cash. My girlfriend used to occasionally watch a show about house-buying (House Hunters). In general the show wasn't terribly interesting, but the real estate agents featured sometimes had some interesting tips. One of those tips was to carefully consider not just how you will use a feature of a house (like a pool, or guest bedroom), but how often you will use it. Apparently people spring for expensive extras like pools and outdoor living spaces because they imagine how great it will be to have family and friends over for picnics, etc. But then they do it once, and never again because it is a huge inconvenience. Same goes for "mother-in-law suites" and spare bedrooms. People tell themselves it will be wonderful to have family stay with them, but the family members only visit once a year (if that), so a hotel is actually more economical (or just have someone sleep on the couch). I tend to think of "smart house" features in this way. Every once in awhile I would appreciate having my living space adapt to my needs or respond to remote commands, but 99.99% of the time, it just doesn't matter. The light switch is right next to the door, I can stand up to close the shades, and thermostats have been programmable for decades now. Eventually we'll probably come up with something that works even better (just like the programmable thermostats were a strict improvement upon their predecessors). But things like converting the light switch to an "app" or controlling the AC with a rudimentary geo-fence aren't it.
- Silhouette 12y ago
  I tend to think of "smart house" features in this way. Every once in awhile I would appreciate having my living space adapt to my needs or respond to remote commands, but 99.99% of the time, it just doesn't matter. I find there is only a tiny overlap between the many modern technologies I would like to have in a new home and the many so-called smart home features that are aggressively advertised. There are plenty of new systems I think I would find valuable, and quite a few of them distribute some function throughout the house but could usefully be controlled from a single location, but I've never seen much advantage in controlling everything together. That just seems to create one more point of failure, not to mention glaring security/privacy issues if any of the control systems are remotely accessible, which almost all of the major suppliers of home automation control systems proudly claim to be.
- theorique 12y ago
  This makes a lot of sense. I've heard that the best ROI comes from upgrading (1) kitchens and (2) bathrooms. Why? These are the rooms where people spend a lot of time. The trend for many years has been for big, open kitchens because they are used day to day, and during special occasions (parties, etc) everyone gravitates toward the kitchen anyway.

gambiting 12y ago

I have a similar problem with Chromecast and Youtube. My friends literally cannot understand why I would rather use the YouTube client built into the TV and control it with the TV remote, rather than cast to chromecast and control with my phone. Controlling the TV with my phone is cumbersome. It takes time to unlock it,to find the app, to send the command and have chromecast react. What if someone rings and I want to pause the video before answering the call? Doable,but more complex than it needs to be. What if I leave the room but someone else wants to pause, skip or whatever, but their phone is not connected to my chromecast? In comparison, TV remote is always in front of my TV. Using it is dead simple,doesn't require pairing,and it's instantaneous. It doesn't leave the room when I go to the kitchen, and I can use it while I am on my phone. I feel like controlling lights with your phone is a similar gimmick. It doesn't make it easier or faster - it's just gimmicky, that's all.

pluma 12y ago
This isn't as much of a problem if you use Chromecast with a tablet. Also, you can actually connect multiple devices with a Chromecast. I think it's better to think of Chromecast as a wireless display device for your {smartphone,tablet,browser} than a displayless smart-TV. It's just a tool to turn your TV into a dumb client for your smart device of choice. If you want something that extends your TV rather than something that lets you use your TV to extend other devices, you're better off with an Amazon Fire box or equivalent.
kissickas 12y ago
I assume you have a keyboard for your TV? That's my main gripe with "smart" TVs. I avoid using a D-pad to type at all costs.

Shivetya 12y ago

Having each light bulb intelligent seems like overkill, I can see a per circuit setup where you replace the light switch. First off its not going to go bad like a bulb which will be replaced eventually; even LEDs which still die too soon. Really, who came up with this light bulb idea...its just daft. Security motion detectors can be used to double effect here as well, you would naturally have them facing doors so they could activate wireless or through signals across existing wires. All sorts of options.

tonylemesmer 12y ago
At the very least they could have separated the intelligence and the bulb so the bulb could be replaced independently. But yes the intelligence should really go in the circuit.
viccuad 12y ago
that being said, the intelligent light bulb approach has its advantages: I can take a handful of lightbulbs with me to other room/apartment in a heartbeat. And the problem of getting dimmable LEDs out of an AC source is not easy, you are going to end with electronics in each led bulb anyways.
joosters 12y ago
Well it's all definitely overkill. But on the plus side, you can sell these bulbs to people who can plug them in without needing to re-wire their house.
mseebach 12y ago
Current circuit layouts are wasteful, you have to run enormous amounts of wire between the outlets and the switches, just to be able to control the lights. Much better to just run power directly to the outlets. The control logic should ideally go into the socket, but with 50k hour lifetimes of LED bulbs, the lost efficiently of putting it in one over the other place is trivial. Also remember that putting the controls on the bulb makes it a trivially user-serviceable part, where putting it in the socket technically requires a electrician to install it (you and I are probably comfortable servicing domestic electrical installations, the average consumer isn't, and shouldn't be) - especially in these early days, when neither standards, features or protocols are anywhere near finalised, investing a couple of hundred dollars in bulbs is much better than investing thousands in electricians fees.

tormeh 12y ago

There are house-integrated things that are cool, but they rarely require integration. CO2 and humidity-controlled ventilation is really nice, as is whole-house sound systems. But why should they be connected to each other? Maybe if you used some machine learning algorithms and made the house actually intelligent, so it could anticipate what you wanted. Other than that I don't really see the use.

maxerickson 12y ago
A possible application would be to have different temperature regulation for occupied rooms (With some smart scheduling that anticipates occupancy). So there's a reason to integrate the HVAC system with awareness sensors (which will probably be integrated with the sound system). Not an interesting feature for an apartment or smaller house, but it's a reason to try to build the systems so that they can talk to each other.

ekianjo 12y ago

Ouch, don't use GIF clips if the quality is so horrible.

viccuad 12y ago

I really don't grok why I should want to use my smartphone to move up and down my wifi connected blinders. Yet that's all I see when all of this is pictured: gimmicks. I want to see a demo of a room alarm clock: with rising light (in brightness and temperature), birds chirping, room getting warmer, music/radio a while later.. and the same for going to bed.

davidbanham 12y ago
Well yeah, but we can't do any of that stuff until we've figured out how to make the lights turn on and off reliably.
- kalleboo 12y ago
  And some of the first computer peripherals were printers and we still haven't gotten those to work reliably.
  - GotAnyMegadeth 12y ago
    We will have self aware AI before we have reliable printers.
    - arethuza 12y ago
      As long as self aware AIs don't evolve from printer software - can you imagine how evil they would be?
      - linker3000 12y ago
        All your base are PC LOAD LETTER
        rhino369 12y ago
        Hackernews: Our Overloard Printers are still using US Letter sized death blades, do they hate math!?!

lylebarrere 12y ago

What is the power limit of POE? I don't see a reason to try to dim LEDs on AC or a reason to keep converting DC/AC/DC/AC so often. Wouldn't POE or a similar standard be better?

unwind 12y ago
PoE (that's Power over Ethernet, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_over_Ethernet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_over_Ethernet) maxes out at 25.5 W at the powered device. Not a lot general purpose domestic electricity, although of course lighting is being pushed down towards lower power these days.
theandrewbailey 12y ago
USB might be a good alternative if the data bandwidth of Ethernet isn't required. 60W limit for 12 volts, 100W at 20 volts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus#USB_Power_Delivery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus#USB_Power...

jennings223 12y ago

If you have to set options or even program to get it started, it's definitely not so smart.

amirmc 12y ago

I feel like there's some kind of rush to become the box/service that runs your smart home. None of these vertically integrated solutions is going to cover all of the use-cases or user desires, yet it seems that everyone want to be the one that sells you their proprietary (and bug-ridden) box. It would be much easier if most of this stuff could be shipped as software that you can install (somehow) into a box of your choosing and pull together components for your home as you see fit. This field isn't ready for consumers per se but those with a more hacky mindset would probably uncover the useful bits, which could later be picked up as integrated solutions. The only thing I've come across that's like this is openHAB (http://www.openhab.org http://www.openhab.org)

nodata 12y ago
Is openHAB still WebKit only?
semi-extrinsic 12y ago
You really should check out Telldus (http://www.telldus.se http://www.telldus.se). Their Tellstick Net is simple enough that my father installed his own setup at the summer house, where he has a thermo sensor and two heaters plugged in to remote socket receivers. So when my parents are going there for the weekend, he checks the app on his phone before leaving to see how cold it is, turns on one or both heaters from the app, and the place is warm when they arrive. All of this is available in brick-and-mortar stores in Europe, total cost is something like $200.

pbnjay 12y ago

My main issue with my wink is that it has to go all the way across the internet to connect to the box 10ft away from me. A much "smarter" system would simply connect directly over my home wifi and avoid most of the lag and connectivity issues. I understand WHY they did it this way (because they don't want to support an open device/protocol for interacting with the hub...) but it seems really short-sighted in terms of the user experience. I've already rooted my wink hub and fully intend to implement this myself just to reduce the annoyance.

jmuguy 12y ago

Sounds like my experience with Nest last summer. Got the thermostat, can't get it connected to my wireless. Support basically tells me to get bent until I go into full IT guy mode and prove its an issue with the unit. Replacement unit comes, doesn't work at all (first one was at least a nice looking thermostat with no connected features). Third unit comes and it's been fine ever since. For some reason I thought it would be a good idea to get their smoke detector. One day it randomly detects smoke and will not shut the hell up about it even after resetting, replacing batteries, etc. Nest offered to replace it - I just put my old "dumb" detector back up. I will say it's pretty damn embarrassing to buy this stuff and have it fail so spectacularly, at least my roommate wasn't here to see me seriously losing my mind trying to shut up the Protect.

lentil_soup 12y ago
That smoke detector story makes me think it could even be dangerous, no?. Could opposite happen and the device fail to detect smoke?
- ssharp 12y ago
  Maybe I'm becoming more of a luddite or cranky old-man, approaching my mid-30's, but I don't see any benefit at all to using the Nest smoke alarm. I'm replacing tried and true, simple, technologies, with a new device that seems way more complicated than it needs to be.
  - jmuguy 12y ago
    No, there really isn't a reason to use it. It looks pretty, and I have to admit that's basically why I bought it in the first place.
    - jsabo 12y ago
      I like the theory of it integrating with the thermostat's auto away feature, so it can detect you even if you're not in the same room as the tstat for a while. It needs to be connected to mains for it to work in real time though, so that combined with all of the problems it has working as a smoke detector convinced me to not get one.

spiritplumber 12y ago

I have had auto blinders, lights, and day alarm (courtesy of an old projector) for years. It's all controlled by some random netbook I got for $30, picaxe micros, and xbees (the xbees are admittedly overkill). This is the sort of thing you build, rather than buy, since it will only ever fit the person who designed it.

patrickk 12y ago
I'd love to read a blog post about this. Some dream features I'd like personally in a smart home: * TV-aware lights - lights dim/turn off according to a preset pattern when the tv comes on * Voice control - saying "Bed time" would turn off all lights & heating, other commands off the top of my head- "I'm home" (turn on hall lights & heating if its below a certain temperature) or "leaving home"- turn off everything * Low power screen in the hall, like e-ink, where I can have an electronic To Do list easily available, or warnings to bring an umbrella/coat today, or reminders for today from my smartphone calendar Something like this Raspberry pi project looks promising for voice: https://jasperproject.github.io/ https://jasperproject.github.io/ For me, having to whip out a phone to do stuff like turn off lights is pointless. A smart home should be context-aware, e.g. home temperature, time of day, doing an activity like TV, or needing cold bedroom for sleep (open window, turn off heating). If a smart home system isn't more convenient than the low tech version, then there is no point.
- spiritplumber 12y ago
  Agreed on convenience! The way it works is, it's all xbee based (largely because I had a bunch of short-range xbees around when Serious Business decided to get longer range ones). There's a remote that's a picaxe 28 (remember those?), plus a xbee, plus buttons. There's an old netbook that also runs my projector, mostly netflix/youtube. It has a xbee and a few lines of python. There's the light controllers which are just a USB charger, a relay, a picaxe 8, and a xbee. The blinds have a tamiya motor and a L298 instead of the relay. Both the remote and the laptop get to send commands to the other nodes, the remote also turns the projector on and off (by serial port). Nothing to write home about really. It mostly got done because there was an excess of xbees. The "serial protocol" is just sending two characters (0-9 digits) to address the picaxe, and then a one-letter command. Doesn't seem to bother wifi any.

mrweasel 12y ago

Maybe I'm just not getting it, but why would I want a "Smart Home"? It seems to be a little like a Smart TV, everyone wants more features, but really they're newer going to use the built in voice control or install any apps. We need a few basic feature and the rest just sits their, unused, contributing to the complexity of the device. I have yet to see an intelligent house feature I would like. I understand that some want a better climate control interface, like the Nest. But I have yet to see a house that have central climate/heating control, and I don't miss it in my own home. Is it really such an inconvenience to get up to turn on the light or turn the blinders?

icebraining 12y ago
Is it really such an inconvenience to get up to turn on the light or turn the blinders? It can be; if you're incapacitated, for example. But automated lights and blinders also offer other possibilities besides remote interfaces, like waking you up with sunlight instead of an alarm clock. In any case, I agree with you, for now; I do want a smart home, but the current implementations provide very little utility for me. I want a smart home if it can do actual work, like cleaning itself.
vonmoltke 12y ago
There are potential security applications for things like that. For instance, a randomized on-off pattern for lights in your house to help throw off casual thieves. Or, tying the system to the burglar alarm so that all the lights come on and the blinds open when the alarm goes off in order to bring more unwanted attention to the thieves. As others have mentioned, there is also the light-sensitive timer use case.
aetherson 12y ago
Turning on your lights with a phone app (routinely) is obviously terrible. But I would like to be able to turn on my outdoor front door light from outside when I get home after dark. And I'd like to be able to grant access to people remotely. We have a Nest. It was a gift. Is it useful? Sure, it's way better than our old thermostat, and it's nice that usually it sets the temperature to what we want without our explicit intervention. Is it worth the price? Well, no. But it will presumably get cheaper.

bojo 12y ago

I know our generation is the one longing for the concept of a smart-home that we see in sci-fi movies, but until we reach a stage where we can actually give contextual voice commands that our "home" can understand I'm not convinced this is worth spending a dime on. Not even in the "to promote research in that direction" kind of way, because all I am seeing now are people taking advantage of our high dollar whims and are missing hard.

brudgers 12y ago

Automated building systems are hard to get right even in the commercial space where the specifiers, installers, and operators are professionals and end users are given dummy thermostats to make them feel better or just outright locked out of controls and windows are inoperable. Even then it all depends on dedicated circuitry: webs of low voltage wires for power and signaling snaking from control panels in closets. Sure Wifi is capturing some corner cases, but NFPA isn't going to allow its use for fire alarms any time soon. Those systems need to be reliable. Or people die. The smart home won't be based on a wireless bus. Wall warts show that we're already at the point where a standard low voltage power bus makes sense. More wires and a case for surface mounting is the way electrification goes historically. The current approach to smart homes is equivalent to configuring a new network, hooking up a dozen different 80's dot matrix printers, and then writing drivers for them...using a smartphone touchscreen keyboard. Except instead of technical support you get consumer services. Adding a touch screen and 802.11 doesn't make getting a system working or geewhiz configured easier than X10. It just makes it look simpler and cleaner and more likely that the end user will blame themselves for not being able to use a smartphone.

ocdtrekkie 12y ago
The obsession over Bluetooth-this and WiFi-that continually drives me crazy. Home automation companies aren't investing in the sort of technologies we NEED because they're more focused on the sort of technologies they can SELL.

antris 12y ago

There's a lot of cheap crap on the market but there's also some great designs out there. For example, I've got this light control system installed in my home: http://houm.io/ http://houm.io/ Wireless, battery-free buttons that you can put anywhere you like. I keep one of them on my night stand. Rest of the switches look and work just like regular light switches. Except the switches are connected to the system, so I can activate pre-defined scenes with one click of a button. No need to use a smartphone. The scenes are configured through a multi-platform web client. The client, by the way, uses a regular REST API so I can control my lights with cURL too. Over the internet :) It's more expensive, but it just works.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

linker3000 12y ago

There's a few 'handy' things I'd like to do - for example, I am considering replacing my basic central heating/hot water controller with a Raspberry Pi and having features such as a low-heat, vacation mode where the system knows I am 'x' miles away from coming home (tied to my phone's location) and it will fire up everything again. Although I'd consider doing more (ESP8266 modules with MQTT looks interesting, albeit in its infancy), the proliferation of 'standards' (properitary and otherwise) is offputting. Then there's the standards designed to interface between all the different standards...rinse...repeat. Edit: Spelling - I have a dodgy laptop keyboard with melted keys due to a motherboard failure!! Waiting for Dell to come back again and change it!

herf 12y ago
Water heaters use a lot of household energy--automating them is a great idea. One smartthings customer did it here: http://community.smartthings.com/t/water-heater-automation/1904 http://community.smartthings.com/t/water-heater-automation/1...
- modoc 12y ago
  My understanding is that modern tank water heaters are extremely efficient, 96%+ so I don't think they use that much energy these days?
  - joezydeco 12y ago
    Switching a water heater completely off (or below Vacation setpoint) is an invitation to grow nasty things in your tank, like Leigionaire's Disease.
    - DanBC 12y ago
      To kill legionella you need to water at 140 F (60 C) or over, for more than 30 minutes. That temperature will cause a full thickness ("3rd degree") burn in less than a second in children and old people, and less than 5 seconds in adults. It's best to set the water temperature to no more than 50 C. This is still potentially harmful, but takes a bit longer. Or set the tank temperature high and have some safety feature at the point of delivery. Scalds hospitalise many people, killing some of them. Legionella, not so many. EDIT: It's hard to get legionnaire's disease. The "attack rate" is less than 5%. http://www.cdc.gov/legionella/clinicians.html http://www.cdc.gov/legionella/clinicians.html

ocdtrekkie 12y ago

A lot of this is bad technology choice. The new hipster smart bulbs are a doomed technology, they were a bad idea from the start. Try INSTEON, buddy.

fixermark 12y ago
Do you have any suggestions on debugging INSTEON? I have a setup at my house, but the light switches stopped talking to the SmartLinc and I can't get them to re-pair. And without any debugging options, I'm feeling a bit sunk.

upofadown 12y ago

I've been into the home automation thing since before forever. There have been many periods of excitement over the years. They come and go. As a result I have to admit to a high level of skepticism about the current period. The companies that generate and are influenced by this excitement tend to make two main errors. 1. They don't understand that without an open standard for controls and sensors they are just fooling themselves. No one is going to permanently install something in their house that is sure to be useless in 10 years. 2. They don't understand that people don't want to control everything ... they instead want to not have to control everything. Being able to control a light from your phone is not really any better than being able to do it from the light switch. People instead want the light to just do the right thing without having to think about it. They don't want a thermostat controllable from a phone. They want a thermostat that makes it so they are comfortable and not paying any extra money they don't have to. As a result, the home automation people actually want is a much harder problem than what everyone always seems to assume.

prottmann 12y ago
The problem is, that they want sell you something that you have to pay again and again -> vendor lock, you must use their tools / services / clouds / whatever. Things that just work for 10 or more years, omg! ;) But you are absolutely right!. I did not automate anything at home with separate hard/software, because currently it solves no problem for me. We need not a smart home, we need an intelligent home without controlling or programming everything. A house/appartment has to recognize if nobody is at home and turn off the light or heating. I dont wanna do that with my smartphone and i dont want controll everything.
romaniv 12y ago
Open standards are a real issues in the industry. I find it ridiculous that you often have to pay thousands of dollars for software that simply understands those protocols. Not only that, it requires you to jump through ridiculous hoops to do stuff that you could easily do with a reasonably simple Python script. (Look up Niagara AX as an example.) Another problem is APIs and connectivity. Tuning a light on or off should be doable with a simple POST call to a RESTful service somewhere. Instead, we are sold dubious phone apps for everything.

normloman 12y ago

Flicking a switch when I enter or leave the room sounds easier than taking out my phone and fiddling with some app. And it's way cheaper.

Someone1234 12y ago
True. But having it turn on while you're on holiday is a nice perk. Plus it isn't an OR choice, you often get both a switch and an app. So you can have the lights turn on as you drive into the garage.

natch 12y ago

Homeboy cameras are the one thing in my setup that work perfectly. I wish more products could be so well integrated with the cloud and the phone. I have them set up to send pictures to Dropbox via IFTT, and it all works perfectly, recording only when there's motion, and only when we are not home (it uses your cell phone location). Tried a Quirky Spotter, and it does detect things like motion, but it doesn't know to send just one push notification; instead it sends a continuous stream of them while motion is happening, which is irksome.

thret 12y ago

When you use a smart phone as a remote control, it's just a slow and inconvenient remote control device. If the lights don't dim by voice command, it should be by your regular smart remote or the switch. "I unlocked my phone. I found the right home screen. I opened the Wink app. I navigated to the Lights section. I toggled over to the sets of light bulbs that I'd painstakingly grouped and labeled. I tapped "Living Room"—this was it—and the icon went from bright to dark. (Okay, so that was like six taps.)"

TACIXAT 12y ago

Home security too. Finding an HD, outdoor camera system that has smartphone and web functionality is very difficult. All the NVRs are horribly insecure. It's strange that a (physical) security product completely neglects software security. The more modern companies seem focused on indoor cameras with only one or two variants and not much by ways of optical zoom lenses.

soylentcola 12y ago

So-called "smart home" devices are certainly new and imperfect but the story told at the beginning of the article is also not necessarily representative. He describes months of setup, unlocking his phone, scrolling through apps, finding the right screen, drilling through menus, and then not having it work. In my limited experience with similar setups (a few Philips Hue bulbs, IP camera, and a Nest thermostat) I haven't really run into anything that obnoxious. When I want to kick on the "mood lighting" for a movie or a party or whatever, I just wake my phone and tap one of several presets on the homescreen widget. Setting up those presets took maybe 10 minutes and I can always mess with the lamps manually or create more if I feel like it. Otherwise the handful of IFTTT recipes I set up and geofencing keeps the lights under control the majority of the time without any input from me. Nest is similar. It's reasonably good at learning my patterns and if I want to tweak the temp or change something, I just open an app and the image on the screen matches the display of the physical thermostat. These are certainly early implementations of connected/smart devices but compared to the state of "professional" integrated systems, they're just fine with me. Just read up on Crestron programming if you want to learn how complicated the enterprise solutions can be. And if you don't want to spend months learning their wacky programming tools and procedures you can spend thousands on hiring certified techs to do it for you. The thing I'm most excited about is for more standardized and interoperable devices to start overtaking the pricey "pro" options for at least the lower level stuff in enterprise and education. As it stands now, a lot of the Crestron stuff is not much more than a glorified universal remote. The faster the consumer/DIY stuff improves, the sooner it will be able to replace the ridiculous "pro" stuff that's been the only option for years.

noobiemcfoob 12y ago

Am I the only confused by the crazy delay mentioned in the article from the "Robots"? The processing can't be all that intensive, and I can't imagine a setup where communicating simple on/off commands to specific devices should be so costly as tens of seconds. I would understand a general delay from sensing the triggering event (i.e. opening the door), but that hardly explains the delay in between all the lights as shown in the gif.

nitrogen 12y ago
Any time there's a significant buzz around home automation, opportunists with marketing skills and no appreciation for latency and UX flock to the scene, drowning out the technically superior but underfunded and poorly represented. This stuff doesn't have to be slow: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L7jeJSdJPpk http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L7jeJSdJPpk

dswiese 12y ago

One comparison to this is the big push to get in car navigation and smarts developed by the tech sector. There is a reason radios and stuff work year after year through heat and cold and the like. they may not be pretty, but it (usually) does what its suppose to even after years of use.

ufmace 12y ago

This article made me think about these idea for a bit. I thought of something that may not be very practical right now, but could be a way forward for these things. I think what a really good home automation system ought to do is a bigger version of what the Nest does. All of the light switches, blinds, alarms, climate control, music, TVs, etc could be manually controlled at first, but there's a system that watches how you change all of them and coordinates it with your location and the time. It could look for patterns of doing several things in a row or doing them at the same time, and either offer to or just start doing them all together for you. Like you normally turn on lights 1, 2, and 3 when you walk in the door from work, so it notices and starts turning them on for you just from opening the door. Or you normally turn off lights 2 and 3 and turn on the DVD player within 5 minutes of each other, so it starts just turning off those lights when you turn on the DVD player. Basically, something that notices what you already do and tries to do it for you, without you having to program things in with a smartphone or something. I bet normal people would love that. As long as it wasn't laggy and buggy, of course, which could be easier said than done.

djekels 12y ago

I am now on my 4 controller "Smartthings (ST)" after dumping Nexia my 1st and for many reasons such as compatibility and monthly costs et cetera, then Micasa Verde whcih was okay but not the creates their tech support sucks and more incompatibility issues, then Indigo6 which was okay for a year but they drove me nuts refusing to speak to my doors locks (schlarge) and had to use vera bridge which couldn't keep proper track of the state of the doors. All the while I was researching a stand alone controller backed by a big company like google, apple or samsung. Then I found ST backed by Samsung. So here we are. migrated and all. Learning how to deal with MODES OMG. No variables I can set to do things.

djekels 12y ago

thebiglebrewski 12y ago

Not sure I agree with the article's title. He's basically bad mouthing the entire smart home industry when this really seems like more of a Quirky/GE/Wink mess up. Literally every single product he tested is by them. I actually LOVE all of the stuff in my smart home! All I have is 6 hue bulbs, a Nest, and an Amazon Echo that I've programmed to control everything with my voice with the help of a Raspberry Pi. Nothing feels better than walking in after a long day and saying: "Alexa, turn on all the lights, color blue, brightness 9" "Alexa set nest to 72" Then sitting down on the couch and saying: "Alexa play some jazz music" pours bourbon If you're interested in this, check out my Alexa Home project alexaho.me or the YouTube video below) . I'm turning Amazon Echo into a smart home controller and people seem to be pretty jazzed about it. Frankly, if we can get stuff to work like this where it doesn't rely on your smartphone, people will use it a lot more. I also have a small switch next to my bed that turns on and off the overhead light and desk lamp in my room for when I don't have my phone on me. I think success in the home automation biz is going to be all about untying it from your smartphone... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AmxiGVBekE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AmxiGVBekE

smackfu 12y ago
Are you the only one using the system? That seems to be the big barrier to greater acceptance. Convincing everyone who lives in a house to not use the wall light switches is pretty hard. Heck, we basically leave our AV receiver on all the time because requiring someone to turn it on to watch TV is too big a step.
- thebiglebrewski 12y ago
  Yes, my roommate uses it too! But he's also in tech. I completely agree with you. We need more really cheap IoT light switches so everyone can easily get on board!

mikeytown2 12y ago

It seems like the vast majority of the issues with the current generation of products on the market has to do with speed & reliability; thus hardwired is the only way to guarantee those 2 work all the time. Also by going the hardwired route, the sensors and controls will be vendor neutral; thus ensuring that it will be future proof. After doing a bunch of research the conclusion I came to was Opto-isolated relays [1] are the way to go for lighting control [2]. This allows for simple logic boards to control line voltage things without the risk of the line voltage killing your logic board. Best way to do this style of home automation would be in new construction, as retrofitting it would be hard to do if the house is more than 1 story tall as you need access above and below. Would be labor intensive as well. Will also allow for manual control because you'd put a current sensor on the wire so the hardware can tell when the circuit is on/off. I would also want to put in some thermal cameras, as motion sensors are not as useful when your sitting on the couch, to tell when you enter/exit a room for auto lighting control. Put temperature sensors in every room and have motorized dampers & air flow sensor allowing for the control of the temperature in every room. Now your lighting and hvac can be manually or automatically controlled. Wire all the sensors and controls to a hardware/software brain that can be upgraded at any time. If that hardware/software brain is disconnected, all the light switches will still work and the normal hvac system will still work; just less efficiently. Have the thermostat be controllable from the panel when the house is occupied (thermal camera) and auto controllable when vacant. All of the above is possible right now; it just would cost a lot of money. Every relay/current sensor is $80 bucks; every damper control is $100; every thermal camera is $500; add it all together and you got one very expensive home automation system. But it will work right now without a lot of user frustration. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opto-isolator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opto-isolator [2] http://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/46601/home-light-automation-emulate-4-way-switch-with-relay/46610#46610 http://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/46601/home-light-auto...

pbreit 12y ago

I think part of the problem is that frequently/mostly, I want a dedicated input device like a switch or a dial, not my iPhone to control stuff like lights. Nest has an app but primary interaction is with dedicated UI widgets.

supergeek133 12y ago

The best 'consumer facing' demos of these involve the "I'm leaving home" or "I'm coming home" activities. Aggregate functions, think IFTTT. For much of these devices today, the experience is so fragmented that only a tech savvy customer can figure them out. Also, yes, it's not helpful when I have to take out my phone, put in the password, open the app, and click 'off' when I could just get up and press the switch much faster.

z3t4 12y ago

Home automation is not something you can install yourself, unless you are a full stack programmer, and with full stack I mean also PCB's and micro-controllers. Surprisingly there's a lot of cheap consumer stuff out there, witch can easily be modified to do what you want. Some of them are "unhackable" though. The trick is to make everything automated. And use a high level language like JS to make it smart. Yes, I write my home automation in JavaScript :P

cxseven 12y ago

There's a general pattern of trying to dumb things down to a simple, inflexible interface, too often with half-baked "AI" bolted on. Good products still need attentive human supervision. I installed Insteon motion detectors and webcams after a robbery, but the included software was such undependable and inflexible garbage that I replaced it all with a simple Misterhouse-based Perl script that sends texts via email. If I see another tech product ad aimed at millenials featuring bright easter colors and indiepop music pitched by Steve Jobs wannabes who are unable to get any angry nerds to make their products actually work, I might snap. By the way, the other HN article about malfunctioning Nest smoke detectors is a hilarious accompaniment to this. ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9048110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9048110 )

dayone 12y ago

my learning is to approach "fads" with some skepticism and wait for market to give a thumbs up before you try.