3 ms·

It's not that there are no benefits, but there's not a driving need that these products you describe solve that makes up for the additional cost and complexity

by exelius 12y ago

It's not that there are no benefits, but there's not a driving need that these products you describe solve that makes up for the additional cost and complexity that implementing them provides. What's the value proposition? If it's "just cool", then there probably isn't one. 1) There are real benefits with Nest since it can reduce energy consumption. Also, Nest isn't really a whole lot more expensive than other thermostats, and there's very little additional complexity. 2) There are lots of problems with locks: you're taking a $15 item, adding some wireless gear and servos to it, and adding significant installation cost and complexity (since you have to somehow power the thing). The alternative is you spend a few bucks getting keys cut to give your friends temporary access. Also there are security concerns here. 3) This one is pretty low effort (since there is already a lot of radio equipment in a garage door opener) but also pretty low benefit: 90% of the time you open the garage door you're in your car, where the opener is within easy reach. I don't think the value of this feature is very high. 4) They have these today. Less useful than you might think, and like anything mechanical, they break. Also, since blinds are typically not powered, this adds cost and complexity since you have to run electricity to your windows. These are a niche product in my mind; if you couldn't justify them 10 years ago, you won't when they're connected to an IoT platform either. 5) While cool, it's still hard to justify the additional cost and complexity. There's not really a driving need other than "oh that's cool". Until the cost comes down significantly, it's still a niche product for people who want to geek out their home. At today's prices, you're looking at $40 for a single light switch compared to $5 for a non-connected switch, plus you have to configure it to do what you want. I'm all for building cool new products, but consumers want products that reduce cost and complexity, not ones that increase them.

Spooky23 12y ago
The other thing about #5 is that you can use a $15 motion switch and skip all of the drama of networking, etc.
knz 12y ago
Re automated lights and the garage door. I have a SmartThings hub and a number of associated motion sensors and z-wave power outlets. I also have young kids so am often up at odd hours. Being able to automate turning on and off certain lights based upon motion is fantastic when you are stumbling around a house half asleep. I've also got my garage door hooked up to it and love being able to let someone in if I am not home or not having to take keys if I go out for a bike ride or walk. Yes there is a cost and configuration can be a hassle, but there is benefit beyond being "cool". My next project is connecting OpenSprinkler to the external z-wave motion sensors to deal with deer raiding a vegetable garden and kids trying to get into a hot tub....
- exelius 12y ago
  Oh I never said these things aren't useful; but there is still not a market need for them. In your case, you had a specific problem that you wanted to solve, and you solved it. Another solution could have been to install a few night lights around your house. Until IoT solutions are simpler and cheaper than their analog alternatives, I think IoT is going to have a hard time gaining traction. I also suspect you enjoy configuring this stuff, which isn't a surprise considering this is HN :)
wpietri 12y ago
I agree with you in general; right now we're in this phase of "WiFi all the things!" that is suspect. Which ones stick and which ones don't is going to be hard to say. But I suspect a lot of things will soon seem like those 70s-era whole-home audio systems: quaint in a why-did-they-do-that way. But I think lighting will be different. My personal bet is that for lights, the driving benefit is health. I automated my lights this fall [1] and I've been very happy with it. I have a substantially more regular sleep schedule, and bad sleep has a number of bad health impacts. We're now seeing more research on how screens are disruptive, too. My basic conclusion is that humans aren't really responsible light-switch users. Now instead of my controlling my lights, thelighting is controlling me. Which is how it worked for most of human history. I don't think many people will retrofit lighting systems right away; it's painful and expensive. But I can certainly see high-end homes selling smart lighting as an add-on. $40/switch seems like a lot, but $275k vs $276k seems pretty small. I expect that plus the 5% of people crazy enough to do it themselves will be enough to keep companies like Philips producing and experimenting. [1] https://github.com/wpietri/sunrise https://github.com/wpietri/sunrise
clarky07 12y ago
Just because you don't think it's useful enough or worth the cost doesn't mean nobody does. 1. Nest is a lot more expensive 2. Not worried about the security. If someone wants in its just not that hard. Locks can be picked, doors can be broken down. Adding hackers to the list isn't meaningfully different. 3. I'm not talking about opening it for me, I'm talking about opening it for other people like they showed in the apple watch keynote. 4. All the things on this list can be done, and obviously they cost more money. For the most part, these are luxury things. Whether they are "worth" it depends on how much money you have to spend. As someone else noted, it might sound expensive, but 275k vs 276k isn't a big deal. 575k vs 580k is even less important. 5.see #4 There are clearly lots of tech products that have nothing to do with reducing cost. They exist only to delight users. With more work in this area the complexity will come down as people make better products.

by exelius 12y ago

Spooky23 12y ago

The other thing about #5 is that you can use a $15 motion switch and skip all of the drama of networking, etc.

knz 12y ago

Re automated lights and the garage door. I have a SmartThings hub and a number of associated motion sensors and z-wave power outlets. I also have young kids so am often up at odd hours. Being able to automate turning on and off certain lights based upon motion is fantastic when you are stumbling around a house half asleep. I've also got my garage door hooked up to it and love being able to let someone in if I am not home or not having to take keys if I go out for a bike ride or walk. Yes there is a cost and configuration can be a hassle, but there is benefit beyond being "cool". My next project is connecting OpenSprinkler to the external z-wave motion sensors to deal with deer raiding a vegetable garden and kids trying to get into a hot tub....

exelius 12y ago
Oh I never said these things aren't useful; but there is still not a market need for them. In your case, you had a specific problem that you wanted to solve, and you solved it. Another solution could have been to install a few night lights around your house. Until IoT solutions are simpler and cheaper than their analog alternatives, I think IoT is going to have a hard time gaining traction. I also suspect you enjoy configuring this stuff, which isn't a surprise considering this is HN :)

wpietri 12y ago

I agree with you in general; right now we're in this phase of "WiFi all the things!" that is suspect. Which ones stick and which ones don't is going to be hard to say. But I suspect a lot of things will soon seem like those 70s-era whole-home audio systems: quaint in a why-did-they-do-that way. But I think lighting will be different. My personal bet is that for lights, the driving benefit is health. I automated my lights this fall [1] and I've been very happy with it. I have a substantially more regular sleep schedule, and bad sleep has a number of bad health impacts. We're now seeing more research on how screens are disruptive, too. My basic conclusion is that humans aren't really responsible light-switch users. Now instead of my controlling my lights, thelighting is controlling me. Which is how it worked for most of human history. I don't think many people will retrofit lighting systems right away; it's painful and expensive. But I can certainly see high-end homes selling smart lighting as an add-on. $40/switch seems like a lot, but $275k vs $276k seems pretty small. I expect that plus the 5% of people crazy enough to do it themselves will be enough to keep companies like Philips producing and experimenting. [1] https://github.com/wpietri/sunrise https://github.com/wpietri/sunrise

clarky07 12y ago

Just because you don't think it's useful enough or worth the cost doesn't mean nobody does. 1. Nest is a lot more expensive 2. Not worried about the security. If someone wants in its just not that hard. Locks can be picked, doors can be broken down. Adding hackers to the list isn't meaningfully different. 3. I'm not talking about opening it for me, I'm talking about opening it for other people like they showed in the apple watch keynote. 4. All the things on this list can be done, and obviously they cost more money. For the most part, these are luxury things. Whether they are "worth" it depends on how much money you have to spend. As someone else noted, it might sound expensive, but 275k vs 276k isn't a big deal. 575k vs 580k is even less important. 5.see #4 There are clearly lots of tech products that have nothing to do with reducing cost. They exist only to delight users. With more work in this area the complexity will come down as people make better products.