The Connected Home's Battle of the Bulbs

I'm worried there will be... by ackthpt · 2014-04-01 05:57 · Score: 3, Funny

...an app for that.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar

Re:I'm worried there will be... by aix+tom · 2014-04-01 09:47 · Score: 2

Buy the new Smart Bulb App!!
Either the free version, where you can switch your light on and off after watching just one short commercial, or the Pay-By-Switch App for those people who don't switch their light on and off that often and want to save on monthly fees, or the $5 a month Flatrate-Switching App that let's you switch on and off your lights as often as you like without any additional fees !!!!

If only.. by colin_faber · 2014-04-01 06:01 · Score: 5, Funny

There was some way to have a remote... Say attached to the wall, which would allow you to 'touch' it to have the lights turn on and off, or even possibly dim. One can dream..

Re:If only.. by Lumpy · 2014-04-01 06:14 · Score: 4, Funny

There is. Hot glue and an old iphone or old android phone.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:If only.. by mmell · 2014-04-01 06:18 · Score: 1, Funny

I think the answer he was looking for was "light switch".
Re:If only.. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:21 · Score: 0

There was some way to have a remote... Say attached to the wall, which would allow you to 'touch' it to have the lights turn on and off, or even possibly dim. One can dream..
I know you mean a light switch, but if you bothered to look at the article you'd see there's a Hue Touch, which doesn't need wires or batteries. I can't move or add a light switch very easily.
Re:If only.. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:26 · Score: 0

Nah, dimmer switch.
Re:If only.. by chispito · 2014-04-01 06:39 · Score: 3, Funny

I think the answer he was looking for was "light switch".
That's a pretty bright idea.

--
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
Re:If only.. by CanHasDIY · 2014-04-01 07:22 · Score: 3, Funny

I think the answer he was looking for was "light switch".
That's a pretty bright idea.
Especially coming from such a dim bulb.

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:If only.. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 08:17 · Score: 0

I can't move or add a light switch very easily.
Since you added the qualifier "very easily", that implies that if you wanted to, you could. IE, there is no landlord or local electrical code that forbids you from doing so.

In which case, I disagree. It really isn't that difficult a thing to do.
Re:If only.. by chihowa · 2014-04-01 09:32 · Score: 3, Interesting

That's a pretty lame reason, actually. What use case (that's big enough to support an entire industry of "smart lightbulbs") involves:
o light fixtures that don't already have switches installed,
o users who are not industrious enough to move the lightswitch themselves,
o users who are too cheap to just have an electrician move it (this is shockingly inexpensive, by the way... typically cheaper than one of these bulbs),
o users who are fine with accidentally flipping the wall switch and making the whole thing inoperative or covering the switch with tape or something cheesy like that to keep people from switching it (or are industrious enough to rewire the switch and install an ugly blank panel but can't move the switch),
o and users who can afford (or rationalize) spending $60 or up on a light bulb?
I guess the intersection of most of that is gadget-addicted renters. Is that really a very lucrative market?

--
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
Re:If only.. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 09:40 · Score: 0

That is stupid!!! It will never catch on!!
Re:If only.. by wooferhound · 2014-04-01 10:28 · Score: 1

It's really difficult to lose a Light Switch . . .

--
We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
Re:If only.. by mattack2 · 2014-04-01 10:32 · Score: 1

(Ignoring the joke...)
Doesn't even need to be attached to the wall, it can truly be 'a remote'. E.g. X10.
Re:If only.. by billstewart · 2014-04-01 11:30 · Score: 2

I've lost a light switch before. My apartment has a hallway with switches at both ends, one of which was at the natural location for a laundry-sorting table by the washing machine. Stuff gradually accumulated, hiding the switch that we didn't use much anyway. At one point, the light stopped working, and when replacing the bulb didn't help, I was getting ready to tear apart the switch box to replace that one and another that was occasionally flaky, and then I remembered the other switch - which had gotten pushed to an intermediate position between up and down.

--

Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Re:If only.. by arglebargle_xiv · 2014-04-01 14:28 · Score: 1

There was some way to have a remote... Say attached to the wall, which would allow you to 'touch' it to have the lights turn on and off, or even possibly dim. One can dream..
Exactly. The headline should have read "LG and Samsung follow Philips in adding pointless expensive gimmicks to lightbulbs in order to part consumers from their money".
Re:If only.. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 19:50 · Score: 0

Gadget-addicted renters that live alone. Remote controls are a pain in the ass. I have been tempted more than once to kit the tv remote to the wall. Phones are not helpful either. My 4 and 7 years old do not carry a phone.
Re:If only.. by aaarrrgggh · 2014-04-01 23:49 · Score: 1

They are a product before their time, but there are other good reasons to go with this type of setup. Most of them come down to the complexity of dimming control.
-Daylight Harvesting: dim lights by the window while allowing lights further away to be brighter.
-Night lighting scenarios: ever want to just have the light by the toilet be dimly lit so you don't wake the wife when you pee in the middle of the night?
-Coordinated Scenes: while a Lutron Grafik Eye (or similar products) can provide scene control for a room, they were never designed for scenes across rooms.
-Demand Response control.
-Color moods. Harder sell for most, but colder color temperatures at night with the TV on, and warmer in the morning. More reds on a cloudy day or for dark adaptation, blues for less detail.
Personally, I prefer Insteon over Hue, but when you want individual lamp control Insteon gets very clunky. Hard wiring controls is tricky as well, especially when lights may only be 2-5W, and the controls don't work as reliably at low power.
My big problem with everything on the market now is that there is a good chance it will be obsolete within 5 years, and hard wiring things gets impossible.
Re:If only.. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-02 00:08 · Score: 1

electrician... shockingly inexpensive? I like what you did there :-)
Re:If only.. by Meski · 2014-04-02 11:43 · Score: 1

Lifx is nice in that way - I tend to set apartment wide lighting to about 1% red overnight - enough to wander around. The Android app needs a bit of work, but it's progressing.

Here's a better idea... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:03 · Score: 0, Troll

loudness filter loudness filter loudness filterloudness filter loudness filter loudness filterloudness filter loudness filter loudness filterloudness filter loudness filter loudness filterloudness filter loudness filter loudness filterloudness filter loudness filter loudness filterloudness filter loudness filter loudness filter

Now: KEEP YOUR GODDAMNED SECURITY VULNERABILITIES AND POINTS OF FAILURE OUT OF THINGS KEPT SIMPLE BY DESIGN!

The Connected Browser's Battle of the Mute Button by CaptainStumpy · 2014-04-01 06:05 · Score: 2

Now do they really think "They're lazy! Instead of not reading the article, they will just sit back and listen. No-more bad comments, problem solved" They underestimate our power. Begin the rants!

--
It will be better to purchase from an owner who is a good farmer and a good builder.

..and we need this technology why exactly? by kheldan · 2014-04-01 06:08 · Score: 4, Insightful

Honestly, this sounds like a solution in search of a problem. Why would the average person want or even need to control each bulb in their house individually? Also, won't this make each bulb very expensive, and as others have pointed out, more of a security problem? I just want lighting that's inexpensive and efficient, and I think I represent the majority in this case. You want to remotely control your lighting? There are already products and systems to do that, you don't need the bulbs themselves to do it.

--
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!

Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by bkmoore · 2014-04-01 06:16 · Score: 4, Insightful

I also want lighting that fits in the fixtures that I have and doesn't protrude beyond the shade. Almost all of these "better lightbulbs" are just too large. Also why make intelligent light bulbs? Wouldn't it be better to put the connectivity into the light fixture, especially if it has more than one bulb?
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:17 · Score: 5, Funny

The remote gimmick is to distract you from the hidden microphone and cameras built into the bulbs. The "problem" they are addressing is that they can't hear you when you're in the bathroom with the water running.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Ravaldy · 2014-04-01 06:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

The major advantage I see of having lighting controlled is to allow automatic management of such. Does a bare bone interface to turn on individual lights make sense? IMHO, NO. But with the right software and hardware managing lighting and other devices in a home is an essential step to reduce the bill.
I can tell you that by simply putting a timer on the exhaust fan, I have managed to save at least $4.00 per month. This is based on local rates and assumes one of the 3 fans was left on for 8 hours. This used to happen all the time where I'd get home and my wife or kids left the fan on after a shower or a number 2. At 160 watt hour that's almost $4.00 per month let alone the cost of replacing the fan, the lost of heating and the list goes on. The switch was expensive (I believe it was $20) but if you think about it I've had them now for 5 years so I've paid all 3 switches many times over.
Now if we could do this for more components in our house.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by SternisheFan · 2014-04-01 06:34 · Score: 1

The remote gimmick is to distract you from the hidden microphone and cameras built into the bulbs. The "problem" they are addressing is that they can't hear you when you're in the bathroom with the water running.
Upmod either Funny or Insightful.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by CastrTroy · 2014-04-01 06:39 · Score: 2

With the advent of LED light bulbs, I don't know why things haven't been made more modular. They could easily make individual LEDs (or small groups of them) within the bulb replaceable, and allow the AC/DC converter, as well as any other circuitry replaceable without requiring that the entire bulb be replaced every time a single component dies.

--

Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by ArcadeMan · 2014-04-01 06:54 · Score: 1

Funny + Insightful + frightening = Funinsightening.

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by ArcadeMan · 2014-04-01 06:55 · Score: 1

Just searched Google. Zero results. I just invented a new word!
<Fluttershy>Yay!</Fluttershy>

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by CanHasDIY · 2014-04-01 07:25 · Score: 1

With the advent of LED light bulbs, I don't know why things haven't been made more modular. They could easily make individual LEDs (or small groups of them) within the bulb replaceable, and allow the AC/DC converter, as well as any other circuitry replaceable without requiring that the entire bulb be replaced every time a single component dies.
Devil's Advocate:
Yea, but then you could actually fix the thing (with parts you bought from someone else), instead of dropping another $X on a brand new unit. Where's the marketability of that?

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 07:28 · Score: 0

I don't know why things haven't been made more modular ... without requiring that the entire bulb be replaced every time a single component dies.
Gee, buying an entire new light vs a few components. I don't see where the manufacturers would like this to happen...
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Psykechan · 2014-04-01 07:39 · Score: 0

Someday, scholars will see the portmanteau as being even worse than the pun. There is no real wit in the creation of a portmanteau. Compressing words because you're lazy does indeed make a new word, but it's not a word that helps further the language. I would actually consider it a form of literary mumbling.
As for your Fluttershy tags, well I bet you were nervouscited about revealing your brony status on Slashdot. ...I hate myself.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by ArcadeMan · 2014-04-01 07:56 · Score: 1

I was surprised that this monster of a word had never been written on the whole of the Internet yet.
Let's see if you can find the status for this name: Pink.

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 07:57 · Score: 0

Because of the expected lifespan of these LED lights it is pretty pointless to have exchangeable parts.
By the time they need replacement there will be vastly batter and cheaper systems.
--
Teun
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Attila+Dimedici · 2014-04-01 08:09 · Score: 1

Why would I want this functionality built into the lightbulb? Wouldn't it make more sense to build it into the fixture itself?

--
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 08:23 · Score: 0

And most people don't want a Ferrari, that doesn't mean the market isn't there for it. And I'm guessing the market for these is a hell of a lot larger than for Ferraris. No one is forcing it on you to use it. Crazy thought: not every product appeals to every human being. Weird concept, I know.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 08:28 · Score: 0

Wouldn't it make more sense to build it into the fixture itself?
Perhaps in one respect, it might. But as someone who has been in the market for new lighting fixtures, it's been difficult enough to find dumb lighting fixtures that I like the look of.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by overshoot · 2014-04-01 08:52 · Score: 1

Wouldn't it be better to put the connectivity into the light fixture, especially if it has more than one bulb?
If we work really, really hard at it and spend enough money on the electronics in each bulb, we can give you that by making them imitate a 19th century lamp.

--
Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by m2 · 2014-04-01 08:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

You are looking at it from a engineer's point of view. Look at it from a marketing department's point of view: to change a lightbulb you need no tools. Unscrew, screw, done. To change a fixture you need tools, and need to fiddle with wires and screws, and things that can go wrong.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Attila+Dimedici · 2014-04-01 09:28 · Score: 1

Actually, I am looking at it from the consumer's point of view. If I wanted this technology, I would want to be able to configure it once and not HAVE to reconfigure it every time my light bulbs needed to be replaced (It's not that I might not reconfigure it more often, I just don't want to have to)..

--
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by David_W · 2014-04-01 09:35 · Score: 1

To change a fixture you need tools, and need to fiddle with wires and screws, and things that can go wrong.
Also add in the fact that 35% of people rent (in the US, according to these guys). Many of them may not be in a situation where they can reasonably change out the fixture, even if they possess the needed skills.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by az1324 · 2014-04-01 10:26 · Score: 2

Dimming/hueing individual bulbs may be a luxury but there are situations when it comes in handy (leave one overhead light on for reading, leave lights at the back of the room dimmed for movies, light only every other bulb in a long hallway). The costs of a smart (white) bulb will fall to within a few dollars of a standard LED bulb. The additional complexity & components will improve the overall build quality of the bulb. There are lots of problems with cheap LED bulbs now, especially dimmable ones (flickering, humming, power supply failures). It isn't very ideal to use a dimmer to adjust the voltage waveform of a device that has to then rectify it and use PWM to do its own dimming. So smart bulbs do solve some very annoying problems in that area. The fact that switches will also need to be replaced with smart versions for best results and the additional "vampire" power consumption of smart bulbs when not illuminated are drawbacks.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by LF11 · 2014-04-01 10:28 · Score: 1

Frankly, I want a pretty decent collection of these bulbs for security purposes. I want the lighting in the house to show evidence of activity regardless of whether people are present. The current solution -- using cheap wall timers -- is fraught with mechanical problems, clock synchronization issues, and general dysfunction. Centralized digital control may be more expensive but will be a lot more reliable.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by jshazen · 2014-04-01 11:38 · Score: 2

There are studies showing declining sleep quality with blue light after sunset. I want my lights to cycle into the ambers and reds after dark, but to be bright and white in the middle of the day (the same way my computer does with f.lux). For now, I get around by wearing dorky orange safety glasses after 9pm, but would prefer my home not expose me to the blue parts of the spectrum. I'm still not sure HUE is the solution, because the wall switches are useless. But it at least gives me the possibility of having the spectrum shift with time via IFTT.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by evilviper · 2014-04-01 14:38 · Score: 1

The major advantage I see of having lighting controlled is to allow automatic management of such. Does a bare bone interface to turn on individual lights make sense? IMHO, NO. But with the right software and hardware managing lighting and other devices in a home is an essential step to reduce the bill.
That's nonsense... Motion-sensors and power-on timers have been around for a long time, they cost far, FAR less than these expensive bulbs, they don't need a computer program written and running around the clock, and they don't need to be replaced when the bulb eventually burns out.
What's more... LED bulbs are so power-frugal, that you'd literally have to accidentally leave a light turned-on for YEARS to pay off the up-front purchase cost of smarter equipment.
Back of the envelope figures for a 60-watt equivalent LED:
9.5watts * 24hrs * 365days / 1,000 * $0.11 = $9.15 per YEAR of power-on time.
That's right, with an LED in your porch light, it'll take YEARS to pay off the cost of a dusk-to-dawn sensor, versus just leaving it turned-on around-the-clock.
A motion-sensor is still a good investment in big rooms, where you're going to wire multiple bulbs to one sensor...
But for closets, bed rooms, bathrooms, dens, attics, etc.? You're better off just spending $3.40 up-front for a 30watt equivalent LED, and not bothering with anything more advanced than a light switch for it:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AN...

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by drkim · 2014-04-01 18:19 · Score: 1

Why would I want this functionality built into the lightbulb? Wouldn't it make more sense to build it into the fixture itself?
Exactly. Like X-10:
http://www.smarthomediscounts....
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by GNious · 2014-04-01 19:20 · Score: 1

I'm just curious (no, didn't read your link)...
Does this X-10 thing require special bulbs for setting colouration (RGB, light-temperature etc), or can it do that with regular off-the-shelf bulbs?
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Neil+Boekend · 2014-04-01 20:33 · Score: 1

Then you would be locked in by the fixture manufacturer. You wouldn't be able to screw in any bulb in that fixture.

--
Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Attila+Dimedici · 2014-04-01 22:59 · Score: 1

Why would I buy a fixture that does not use industry standard bulbs? You are suggesting that if I do not choose to buy one bad implementation of this idea, I will buy another bad implementation of this idea. Perhaps you might consider that most consumers will not buy any implementation of this idea until manufacturers do so in a manner which makes sense.

--
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Agripa · 2014-04-01 23:11 · Score: 1

The lifespan of the LEDs is great. The ballasts on the other hand last about 6 months where I am.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by stub667 · 2014-04-02 05:04 · Score: 1

My landlord owns the fixtures. I own the lightbulbs.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Ravaldy · 2014-04-02 06:21 · Score: 1

Ok then. Lets not start looking for long term solutions. Your thinking will change when you start paying 50 cents per KW. You think I'm crazy. Currently peak hours which is considered to be 7am to 8pm is 15 cents per KW. Just 3 years ago I paid a flat rate of 6 cents per KW. You also didn't consider the high cost of these LED bulbs. The cost of replacement should also be added to the equation as these bulbs do not last as long as their claims. I consider myself lucky when a CFL lasts more than 2 years (And yes, I take proper precautions when installing them).
This kind of thinking is the same thinking car companies and consumers had in the 70s. Ahh, gas is cheap, who cares about using less.
Fact is that there is no harm in developing home automation systems like this as they serve multiple purposes outside just saving energy. If saving energy in the process is a possibility, then why not?
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by uninformedLuddite · 2014-04-02 12:55 · Score: 1

We went off grid solar 13 years ago and haven't looked back.

--
The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by drkim · 2014-04-02 15:57 · Score: 1

I'm just curious (no, didn't read your link)...
Does this X-10 thing require special bulbs for setting colouration (RGB, light-temperature etc), or can it do that with regular off-the-shelf bulbs?
No - it's a remote on-off, dimming, relay control, thermostats, PTZ camera control, etc. Sends its signals over the power lines, but can do bi-directional signaling.
You can do timers with it, macros, random lights, alarm sensing and activation.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by evilviper · 2014-04-02 16:05 · Score: 1

Ok then. Lets not start looking for long term solutions.
Buying expensive bulbs isn't a long-term solution... It's just an irrational delusion. Furthermore, you've failed to explain why your ridiculously expensive choice of high-tech bulbs is any better than the cheaper and low-tech options of timers and motion-sensors...

Your thinking will change when you start paying 50 cents per KW.
No, my thinking won't change one bit... In the future, like now, I'll be comparing the up-front cost of the device, against the ongoing cost of electricity, and I won't waste my money on options which cost more than they save.
But more importantly, I'll have far more money to spend on whatever option is practical, because I'll be earning interest on the thousands of dollars I didn't spend on WiFi bulbs, which didn't offer any savings over $4 LEDs, anyhow.

You also didn't consider the high cost of these LED bulbs.
Of course I did... What the hell were you reading? I linked to a generic $3.40 LED bulb on Amazon, and the calculations I made for energy usage were for a $10 Cree 60W LED equivalent.
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Cre...

The cost of replacement should also be added to the equation as these bulbs do not last as long as their claims.
1) You're thinking of CFLs, not LEDs. LEDs will last an extremely long time.
2) LEDs can handle being cycled on/off many, many times more than any other type of light.
3) The $10 Cree 60watt equivalents, which I ran the numbers for, come with a 10-year warranty from the manufacturer.

I consider myself lucky when a CFL lasts more than 2 years (And yes, I take proper precautions when installing them).
You're buying cheap crap CFLs, most likely from Walmart. I've got a set of 9W Ecosmart (Home Depot) CFLs I've been taking with me from apartment to apartment, for just shy of a decade now. Not ONE of them has burnt out yet.
I finally gave them away to family members when I found dirt-cheap LEDs, which use 50% less power than CFLs, and so will pay for themselves within a couple years. Not to mention that they work great in refrigerators, and unconditioned spaces like outdoor lights, where CFLs just don't work right.

This kind of thinking is the same thinking car companies and consumers had in the 70s. Ahh, gas is cheap, who cares about using less.
There's no comparison. If car buyers in the 70s were comparing the up-front cost of a more efficient car, against the gasoline savings, then you'd have a point. In reality, the more efficient cars were CHEAPER, but simply not fashionable. That's a lot like your position... You want fancy, high-tech blinking lights, and really aren't concerned with how much they cost, or how you can best save energy.
Instead, my position is vastly more like someone, today, deciding whether or not a hybrid car is actually a good purchase, based on fuel savings, versus extra up-front cost.

Fact is that there is no harm in developing home automation systems like this as they serve multiple purposes outside just saving energy.
The harm is wasting money that could be put to better use.
And I fail to see why home "automation" is even desirable for saving energy. Motion sensors are far and away the better method, which will automatically save MORE energy, while being cheaper up-front. Notice that offices (which may otherwise have LOTS of building automation, already) use them, and not WiFi-controlled bulbs.
Instead, you WANT high-tech lights, because you think they are fashionable, and are only using energy efficiency as a smokescreen to justify wasting all that money.

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-03 02:40 · Score: 0

The lifespan of the LEDs is great. The ballasts on the other hand last about 6 months where I am.
You really have no clue what a ballast is.

Perhaps I can educate you. A ballast is for FLUORESCENT lighting. See a fluoresent tube contains what is basically a mercury vapor. Like air this vapor on its own is a poor conductor of electricity. It takes a sudden surge of electrical current to ionize the vapor to form a plasma. Now that it's a plasma, it's a great conductor of electricity and will begin to emit ultraviolet light. The UV light hits the phosphor coating on the inside of the tube and blamo, you got white light.

A ballast does two things. It provides that initial surge current, then when that is no longer needed, it backs it off to the normal operating current. That's one thing it does. Now, an ionized plasma has NEGATIVE resistance. The more electricity you put through it, the more ionized the plasma becomes, which makes its electrical resistance LOWER, causing even MORE electricity to go through it. This would quickly draw all the electricity the mains can supply, overloading some part of the circuit, tripping circuit breakers, creating a fire hazard, etc. The second thing a ballast does is provide the needed electrical resistance to counteract this tendency so you don't get the runaway chain reaction.

An LED is a solid state device that does not need to ionize a plasma. It has no ballast because it needs no ballast. It certainly has some kind of transformer to apply the correct voltage. As far as I know they would all have some kind of rectifier to supply DC current as most semiconductors don't really like AC (and it would flicker if it did handle AC). But whoever told you that was a "ballast" was talking down to you.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Ravaldy · 2014-04-03 04:52 · Score: 1

I apologize for not covering the motion detector topic earlier. They don't work well. I know there are many different types but the more common ones have a limited life so expect to have to replace them or deal with their degraded return.
Forget about the degradation of their function over time. Positioning them properly is key and can be a heck of a job. I have rooms where using the switch based sensors would be no good because the lights aren't all in view of the sensor which means it won't detect movement (e.g. shower). Maybe I could spend a lot more money and get a more configurable sensor that allows increased delay but how much do I have to spend and where do I find these solutions?
Also, don't take me wrong. I'm no fan of the expensive bulb with built-in wifi. I'm more a fan of home automation because it can achieve more than just lighting and it can be centralized into one system.
Re:..and we need this technology why exactly? by Neil+Boekend · 2014-04-03 22:24 · Score: 1

Because there is no screw-base industry standard for color changing bulbs. Hell there is no industry standard for dimming led bulbs. If you buy a dimmable one and happen to have the wrong kind of dimmer there are bound to be lines in the EULA that remove liability from the manufacturer.

--
Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.

Illuminating by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:12 · Score: 1

Oh wait! Maybe you could clap your hands and the smart lights would turn on/off! Yeah, that's it. Now off to patent my invention. Buhahahahah!

Re:Illuminating by Russ1642 · 2014-04-01 07:16 · Score: 1

As long as it's done "over the internet" you can get a new patent.

What a waste by Virtucon · 2014-04-01 06:16 · Score: 1

Billions of electronic bits gave their lives to produce this article. It's sad really since we'll never see their likes again.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"

Re:What a waste by mmell · 2014-04-01 06:19 · Score: 1

Nonsense. There are trillions more electronic bits just like those, all waiting to be wasted.
Re:What a waste by CycleFreak · 2014-04-01 06:26 · Score: 2

You can still see their likes on Facebook.
Re:What a waste by Virtucon · 2014-04-01 06:52 · Score: 1

So your into electronic bit genocide!?!?! Save the bits!

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Re:What a waste by Virtucon · 2014-04-01 06:52 · Score: 1

Those are spying, prying bits, I don't want any part of those.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Re:What a waste by Bing+Tsher+E · 2014-04-01 13:28 · Score: 1

If you mean electrons, they never die. They just do work for us when we get them excited.
Re:What a waste by Neil+Boekend · 2014-04-01 20:44 · Score: 1

as in: tickle them with sexy magnetic fields.

--
Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.

Re:I'm worried there will be...DINGLEBERRIES! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:17 · Score: 0

Dafuq did i just read?

seizure bulbs? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:17 · Score: 0

I wonder when the lulz crowd are going to try to match houses with these to kids with epileptics living there, and do a whole-house giant seizure robots.

Some reasons by SuperKendall · 2014-04-01 06:18 · Score: 2

The original Hue was nice, because as the name implied you could change the bulb to be any color.

Or at least, as nice as the need to have bulbs of different colors. I never found that need pressing so I didn't ever get one.

If one was single I could see possibly using them for mood lighting for "guests".

The ability to control bulbs individually does have some practical use though - you could simulate being home when away by running a program that would turn on bulbs in different rooms in different times.

Or, if you think you have burglars, turn on all the lights in the house at once to try and scare them off.

Or better yet (back to color) you could color the lights red and strobe them while sounding an emergency siren... :-)

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:Some reasons by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:35 · Score: 0

1) you could buy a timer that could simulate you being home when you were away for $19.95 in 1975. You could buy one with a photocell that would do the same thing for $24.95 in 1979. God knows how cheap they are now.
2) if you have burglars in your house at night and turn on all the lights, they can see where you are too. What you do is turn on all the lights for 2 seconds and then turn them all off. Next, blink the lights in the room that the burglar is. That way, you know where he/she is AND blinking the lights will blind him/her so he/she couldn't see you even if you were standing in the door way. X-10 alarm systems have been able to do that since 1992.
3) the Chinese have a stranglehold on colored LED's and are incredibly cheap... http://www.everbuying.com/product35971.html Just one as an example. There are 1000's of more examples, Google is your friend.
Re:Some reasons by SuperKendall · 2014-04-01 06:56 · Score: 1

1) you could buy a timer that could simulate you being home when you were away for $19.95 in 1975.
I have a few outlet timers already that I use that way. But it's a pain to set those up compared to just being able to do that on the fly.
X-10 alarm systems have been able to do that since 1992.
Now that's something I didn't know, although I've played around with some X10 devices. The thing is, for most people setting up a whole X10 system like tha is a tall order (although arguably not much taller than getting a bunch of internet bulbs and making use of them in the same way).
3) the Chinese have a stranglehold on colored LED's and are incredibly cheap...
I have bought that very bulb in the past, or one so like it I cannot tell the difference. Yes they are incredibly cheap. You actually do get some value in the more expensive bulbs, at least in connectivity (note the remote in the picture of that cheap bulb, that's the only way to change it - and who needs another remote to lose?)
Basically all of what you say is true but the newer connected bulbs just make every point easier to manage (well except for the X10 alarm room blinking, that's damn nice)

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Re:Some reasons by AmiMoJo · 2014-04-01 11:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

Take a look at some Japanese lighting from companies like Panasonic and Sharp for an idea of what real smart lighting is about.
I bought a Panasonic smart ceiling light. It can change between daylight (6000k) and warm white (2700k), depending on what task I am doing. It also has dimming of course. The output is up to 5000lm but it is diffuse so you don't get a blinding point of light or shadows everywhere. It can direct light behind the TV too to give it some backlighting while keeping the rest of the room a bit dimmer. Naturally it comes with a remote control.
It also has a constant illumination mode. This mode adjusts the brightness automatically to keep the light level constant as the more or less light comes in through the windows. There is a more advanced version available for offices where the angle of window blinds are adjusted too so that more light comes in without being blinding. The multiple lights in the office can adjust independently so that those at the back of the room supply more illumination to keep the whole place evenly lit during the day.
Of course it is all 100% LED, low energy. Sharp also built in their Plasmacluster air cleaning technology, and I believe Panasonic are going to do the same with theirs. Sharp have some kind of anti-insect thing as well that somehow deters moths and the like.
Japanese lighting is awesome. Even some toilets have little night lights in the bowl so you can see when you need to get up in the middle of the night but don't want to be fully woken by 800lm. The whole smart home thing has been around for a while here. Air conditioners sense not only when you are in the room, but where in it you are so that they don't blow cold air directly at you. Remote smart-phone control is becoming quite common so you can have the room cooled just before you get home. Sharp make a robot vacuum cleaner that takes photos of stuff it finds under the sofa and sends them to your phone, just in case you lost them.
Meanwhile UK lighting is shit and the US is still pissing itself over the phase out of incandescents. I knew there was a reason I moved.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Some reasons by drkim · 2014-04-01 18:12 · Score: 1

...for most people setting up a whole X10 system like tha is a tall order
X-10 is fairly easy to set up and much cheaper.
You set one letter for the house control [A-P] and set each socket, switch or outlet to the same letter, and then one unique number [1-16].
The problem with smart bulbs is, if they fail, you have to pay for a new $30-$60 bulb.
With X-10 you just replace the bulb with another cheap, dumb bulb. No additional programming.

Re:This article is a load of shit by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:20 · Score: 0

Welcome to April 1st...

As one-way as X10 by Animats · 2014-04-01 06:21 · Score: 3, Insightful

When you shut off a lamp manually, Hue may not know what state the light is in. Turn it off with the Tap, and it knows the lights are off.

They've replicated the one-way communication of X10, then. That seems rather lame.

Meanwhile, Cree's nice LED replacements for 60W incandescent bulbs are now below $10 at Home Depot. 10 year warranty. They draw 9 watts. Dimmable with existing external dimmers. Just buy a case of those and replace anything that burns out with one.

Re:As one-way as X10 by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:28 · Score: 1

Yeah, except for the whole color changing thing... and the web-enabled light controller. Not very similar, actually.
Re:As one-way as X10 by Tridus · 2014-04-01 06:32 · Score: 3, Interesting

Hackers controlling my lights is a feature I can live without.

--
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
Re:As one-way as X10 by sjbe · 2014-04-01 06:36 · Score: 1

Just buy a case of those and replace anything that burns out with one.
If you're going to go ahead and buy them then you might as well replace the old inefficient bulb. Otherwise you're just wasting power since the LED bulb is a sunk cost at that point.
Re:As one-way as X10 by Animats · 2014-04-01 06:49 · Score: 1

At this point I'm mostly replacing CFLs.
Re:As one-way as X10 by NewWorldDan · 2014-04-01 06:52 · Score: 1

If they're Bluetooth based, I wouldn't be worried about random hackers. I'd be worried about my asshole friends drunkenly screwing with my house. Or that I'd get a new phone and have to reprogram all my lights. To hell with that nonsense. Either I want the lights on or off. I can hit a switch as I enter or leave a room.
Re:As one-way as X10 by CanHasDIY · 2014-04-01 07:32 · Score: 1

If they're Bluetooth based, I wouldn't be worried about random hackers.
No, you just have to worry about the targeted hackers who are taking over your WiFi enabled appliances as they prepare to storm your house.

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:As one-way as X10 by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 10:03 · Score: 0

Just wait for those Christmas card colors lighting up your living room.
Re:As one-way as X10 by R3d+M3rcury · 2014-04-01 10:11 · Score: 1

I can hit a switch as I enter or leave a room.
And I'll also bet you're not so lazy that you can't get up off the couch to change the channel, either.
Re:As one-way as X10 by az1324 · 2014-04-01 10:35 · Score: 2

If you cut the power to a bulb, it's obviously not going to know what you are doing with the app. The tap allows you to never cut power to the bulb. Yes the tap itself is one way but it is only intended to toggle on/off and select a few presets. It does not interfere with the two-way nature of the rest of the system including the bridge, apps, api clients, etc...
Re:As one-way as X10 by WindBourne · 2014-04-01 11:40 · Score: 1

Actually, the cree's 60W soft white A19 -at your local home depots are $5.
The cree 65 BW BR-30 soft white can light are 10.
Cree is also offering a number of other bulbs, but, they are in the high teens range.
Regardless, at 5/bulb, with 9 watts, it will pay for itself at just about every single regular bulb that you replace (save maybe ones in a crawlspace) within 6 months to 2 years.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:As one-way as X10 by WindBourne · 2014-04-01 11:41 · Score: 1

same here. I do not like how long they take to warm up, nor their light. The crees are fairly decent.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:As one-way as X10 by Trogre · 2014-04-01 12:07 · Score: 1

The current cheap chinese-made LED lights are amazingly efficient and put out a very good light, but suffer from capacitor plague.
The bathtub failure curve for these is rather steep; I have purchased not fewer than fourteen LED lights to replace halogens in a kitchen installation and had half fail within two weeks. A couple of those exploded when first switched on. The remaining ones have been going solidly for more than a year now.
Upon inspection, there is always a large electrolytic capacitor that has failed. I see them in other places too. Practically anywhere in town that has LED lighting (mostly restaurants for some reason) at least one fixture has the tell-tale dim flickering sign of a failing capacitor.
Put better caps in them, or find a way to do without them entirely, and you would have a very viable Incandescant/CFL replacement.

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Re:As one-way as X10 by Trogre · 2014-04-01 12:18 · Score: 1

Okay, let me ask you a couple of questions:
How often does one desire to change the channel or volume of a television when sitting on a couch?
Now, how often does one desire to change the light levels in a room when sitting on a couch?
I got "Often" and "Hardly ever". What did you get?

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Re:As one-way as X10 by hazydave · 2014-04-01 14:36 · Score: 1

The Cree 40W equivalent bulbs are $5. Cree has a special deal with Home Depot. They're great LED bubs, too. Cree is actually the semiconductor company, an early leader in GaN transistors and the related high power white LEDs. They barely get warm, a big improvement over earlier LED bulbs. Most of my fairly lar G e house is LED lit now. In the past four years, I've had one bulb die, an infant mortality.
And now they want me to replace these with wifi or zigbee bulbs? Maybe in ten years, once they work out some real standards. Ok, more like 20 years...

--
-Dave Haynie
Re:As one-way as X10 by R3d+M3rcury · 2014-04-01 14:37 · Score: 1

Well, I was attempting to be somewhat humorous, as a, "You kids today are so lazy. We used to have to walk over to the TV, up hill, both ways, just to change the channel!"
But I'll give it a somewhat serious answer, because it's an entertaining point.
Growing up, we had one of those TVs. We also got our TV via an antenna on the roof. This antenna picked up two networks--ABC and CBS. It also picked up a local PBS station. That was it.
So how often did we desire to change the channel? Not often. Back in those days, if you had two 30-minute sitcoms on CBS, say, ABC might counter-program with an hour-long drama. So changing the channel would put you in the middle of something. You might as well sit and watch the other sitcom. So in the evenings, you might change the channel once an hour.
Even when we stayed at Grandma's house--she had a Community Antenna so she could get NBC--the formula was still pretty much the same. You might change it once an hour.
So, if I had to get my lazy ass off the couch to change the channel, I probably wouldn't change it very often.
That was sort of the point. You're right--I don't often desire to change the light level in my room. But part of the reason for that may be that I have to interrupt what I'm doing, get up, walk across the room, adjust the level, walk back to the couch, decide it's still a little too bright, go back over, adjust it a bit more, go back to the couch, etc.
Even the direct On/Off can be a nuisance. My TV sits at one end up of the living room. My computer on the opposite end. There's a ceiling light that sits about three-quarters of the way back from the TV. When I'm watching TV, it's nice to have that light off. When I'm using the computer, it's nice to have that light on. So do I turn the light off and back on again whenever I move from the TV to the computer? Nope. I usually just leave the light on. I've adjusted the brightness of the TV to deal with it.
Now, imagine an automated system that could optimize the lighting in the room based on what I'm doing. If I'm watching TV, it might turn down the surrounding lights so the backlight on the TV doesn't have to be so bright. Saves energy. When I get up to grab a snack, if detects this and flips on more lights. If I walk over to the computer, it will optimize for that. Heck, even forgetting the whole automation thing--just having settings for "TV", "Computer", and "Other" might save some energy right there.
Re:As one-way as X10 by TheSeatOfMyPants · 2014-04-01 22:47 · Score: 1

Or just put a lamp near the computer, so you can have enough light to work comfortably there without affecting the TV or anyone sitting nearby watching it. At least, that's what my family did with our new L-shaped living room when Iwas a teen in the early 90s; whoever wanted to use the desk turned its little lamp (maybe 450 lumens) on when they got there and off when they left.

--
Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
Re:As one-way as X10 by WindBourne · 2014-04-02 01:15 · Score: 1

no. The cree 60 watt is $5.
And yeah, I am bummed out because I replaced a number of our bulbs when they were 9.97. But, at $5, I am now replacing the CFLs as well and then will give those to my in-laws or battered womens shelter.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.

No Winners by jklovanc · 2014-04-01 06:29 · Score: 2

But which company will win the battle to illuminate the connected home?"

They all will lose as competing standards will decrease adoption. In the end there will probably be a standard that is not backward compatible and early adopters will have to buy new equipment. Maybe all companies win after all.

Timers and motion sensors by sjbe · 2014-04-01 06:34 · Score: 1

Now if we could do this for more components in our house.

I put a timer switch on a closet light my wife and I tend to forget to turn off. Automatically shuts off after 5 minutes as it is just a pantry/storage closet. I've got another spot with motion sensors. I have to turn the lights on but then a motion sensor turns them off if there is no motion in the room for X number of minutes. Good for locations like kitchens.

Re:Timers and motion sensors by Ravaldy · 2014-04-01 06:56 · Score: 1

Very nice.
Good thing is most current devices have a sleep mode which is nice. Home power monitoring could also be very nice as it would allow you to notice higher than normal usage through trending. I know this kind of hardware exists already. I should probably get my hands on it.
Re:Timers and motion sensors by evilviper · 2014-04-02 16:54 · Score: 1

I put a timer switch on a closet light my wife and I tend to forget to turn off. Automatically shuts off after 5 minutes as it is just a pantry/storage closet. I've got another spot with motion sensors. I have to turn the lights on but then a motion sensor turns them off if there is no motion in the room for X number of minutes. Good for locations like kitchens.
I hope those devices were cheap. With the efficiency (and low cost) of LEDs, it might take YEARS of energy usage to pay off those (also reasonably inexpensive) timers and motion sensors:
http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Re:Timers and motion sensors by sjbe · 2014-04-02 23:27 · Score: 1

I hope those devices were cheap.
Not as cheap as I expect they will be in a few years. I'll be somewhat surprised if I do better than break even but felt like it was the right thing to do. We had a tendency to leave the light on overnight as well as for hours at a time. More than a little wasteful

With the efficiency (and low cost) of LEDs, it might take YEARS of energy usage to pay off those (also reasonably inexpensive) timers and motion sensors:
Actually I have them connected to LED bulbs so I'm hitting it from both ends. I'm on record as disliking incandescent bulbs. Even with LED bulbs being relatively efficient I see no point in leaving them turned on unnecessarily.
Re:Timers and motion sensors by evilviper · 2014-04-03 01:21 · Score: 1

Even with LED bulbs being relatively efficient I see no point in leaving them turned on unnecessarily.
No reason for it, but there's the question of the cost of devices to automatically shut them off...
For your pantry/storage closet, I'd probably use an old $1 refrigerator door switch, or maybe a magnetic alarm switch like so:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GU...

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Re:Timers and motion sensors by sjbe · 2014-04-03 02:31 · Score: 1

For your pantry/storage closet, I'd probably use an old $1 refrigerator door switch, or maybe a magnetic alarm switch like so:
Wouldn't work for this particular situation. I'd have to punch holes in the wall and I really don't want to do that. I just found a drop in replacement switch for a few bucks at Lowes. Works fine and accomplishes what I intended. At the price I paid I my math says I'll breakeven in about 8 years if I keep the house that long.
Re:Timers and motion sensors by evilviper · 2014-04-03 18:22 · Score: 1

I'd have to punch holes in the wall and I really don't want to do that.
Not sure what you mean... You just run wires from the reed switch up to the fixture, or down to the switch/electrical box. No holes in the walls needed. If you're talking about screw holes, you could opt for double-sided tape.

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Re:Timers and motion sensors by sjbe · 2014-04-03 23:28 · Score: 1

Not sure what you mean...
The lights I'm controlling are actually on a circuit that lights two closets when you throw the switch so the wiring is more complicated that your typical broom closet. All the installation options realistically would involve punching a hole in a wall somewhere and/or running wires in places where I don't want to see wires. I would have wires going across the wall and ceiling if I go to either fixture without punching holes in walls which is something I don't want to do here for aesthetic reasons if nothing else. It simply would end up looking sloppy even if I did a very tidy job of it. Basically it's a lot more work to get a result that doesn't work any better in this case than the result I got by replacing the switch.
Your suggestion is a good one for the right circumstances but it just wouldn't work in this specific circumstance. I have a closet in our basement I'm strongly considering doing something very much like your suggestion.
Re:Timers and motion sensors by evilviper · 2014-04-04 00:33 · Score: 1

That certainly sheds some more light on your reservations.

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant

Re:The Connected Browser's Battle of the Mute Butt by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 06:41 · Score: 0

Worst "enhancement" ever - coupled with the beta fiasco it seems like they are doing everything possible to alienate their users.....

Re:The Connected Browser's Battle of the Mute Butt by ArcadeMan · 2014-04-01 06:53 · Score: 2

Even worst: the damn thing auto-plays so you can't open a bunch of tabs at once and they're making me download something I'm not going to use.

Waste of bandwidth is what it is. Let's hope it's part of the stupid april first pranks. Then again it appears that beta is real, so who knows.

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins

Should this not be a bulb's job? by dmomo · 2014-04-01 06:57 · Score: 2

But the job of the socket or outlet? I'd prefer to see some sort of USB/bluetooth-esque standard where the plugged-in device, be it a bulb in a socket, a lamp in a wall outlet, or a toaster oven could all be monitored and controlled through the same interface. A device would not even have to comply to the standard for this to be useful. We'd already be able to tell if it is on or off, and chart out power consumption. Devices in compliance could extend the functionality in the same way any number of USB devices could be controlled via the PC, so long as they have the right driver.

Re:Should this not be a bulb's job? by Chrontius · 2014-04-01 09:31 · Score: 1

Protip: Go look up ZigBee, Z-Wave, and Insteon.

The technology is out there, but it's a lot uglier than X-10 for DIYing. This was the first control system I found that offers your sort of power management, and claimed universal, vendor-agnostic compatibility.

No way, audio is sweet by SuperKendall · 2014-04-01 06:58 · Score: 1

I'm loving the new audio. If you don't understand why it is here, or how long it will last - well that's your problem.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:No way, audio is sweet by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 09:48 · Score: 0

The readers of multiple simultaneously opened tabs form a holy canon. I feel like being in the church of slashdot.

Key Feature... by PortHaven · 2014-04-01 06:58 · Score: 2

Ability to turn off light remotely, and have it stay off!!!!

With this feature I'll buy a $50 lightbulb, without out it - I'm not buying.

Why? Because as any parent knows. As soon as you put your kid to bed, the first thing they do is wait to hear your steps depart, get up, and turn on their light. Above functionality would allow parents to turn off the light. And keep it off for set time.

Presently, all these smart bulbs have a bunch of features, but if you turn them on at the switch...they come on. We need a feature to prevent that for parents the world over.

Re:Key Feature... by pubwvj · 2014-04-01 07:13 · Score: 2

There is another solution. We don't worry about it. In the morning everyone gets up early. If you stayed up late reading or something you still get up early in the morning for chores and breakfast. We also have rules of respect. Being quiet in the evening is one of those rules because other people are sleeping so they can get up in the morning to work. If kids are raised this way it rather solves the issue.
Back to the smart bulbs - too much technology. Wasteful. Expensive.
Re:Key Feature... by geekoid · 2014-04-01 10:09 · Score: 2

Ww, you solved the problem for everyone, becaqsue no one has a child with asleep disorder!
Thanks for you one size fits all. I'm amazed the world functioned at all before you started spitting pearls.
And then you solve that light issue with a simple statement with not argument.
Wow.

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Re:Key Feature... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 12:45 · Score: 0

Ability to turn off light remotely, and have it stay off!!!!
With this feature I'll buy a $50 lightbulb, without out it - I'm not buying.
Why? Because as any parent knows. As soon as you put your kid to bed, the first thing they do is wait to hear your steps depart, get up, and turn on their light. Above functionality would allow parents to turn off the light. And keep it off for set time.
Presently, all these smart bulbs have a bunch of features, but if you turn them on at the switch...they come on. We need a feature to prevent that for parents the world over.
Sounds dangerous. Sometimes everybody needs access to lights if something bad happens. Imagine you needing an ambulance and only you can turn on the lights. No it doesn't happen every day, but the day it happens, you didn't plan it.
Parents have used several methods to keep children in bed without thinking though what could happen. There is one truly horrible story is a mother, who didn't want her son to get up and drink water several times during the night. She locked the door and solved the problem. The next morning he had died of thirst due to a medical condition where the body needed unusual large quantities of water. Other death with locked doors were due to open windows during winter. Being forceful can seem like a decent solution, but it often backfires eventually. If nothing else, it hurts the parent/child relationship.
Having said this, I have had my share of problems regarding bedtime. Teenager seems worse than preteens in that regard (at least in this house). I have tried locking the router at bedtime, but modern day teachers can give assignments as late as 8 PM and sometimes assignments have to be uploaded before midnight. This totally ruins any concept of timed blocks. It then falls back to parenting and trust, which can be tricky at times, but kind of works.
Re:Key Feature... by dbIII · 2014-04-01 13:30 · Score: 1

You see your key feature in some old houses - light switch outside the door and the door only lockable from the outside.
Re:Key Feature... by evilviper · 2014-04-01 15:06 · Score: 1

In the morning everyone gets up early. If you stayed up late reading or something you still get up early in the morning
Teenagers are biologically wired to stay up late and sleep-in late. Forcing them to wake-up very early is tantamount to forcing everyone else to switch to 3rd shift, waking everyone up at 10pm, no matter how much sleep they did or didn't get.

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Re:Key Feature... by TheSeatOfMyPants · 2014-04-01 23:34 · Score: 1

That's only if you shut your kid in a dark room. *shudder* My parents left the hall light on with my/my brother's doors open; since we weren't trapped in the dark, we felt safe enough to relax in bed. After they went to bed several hours later, they usually turned the hall light off and put a strong night-light on in the hall bathroom to add to the ones we had in our bedrooms. As pre-teens, we each lost our fear of the dark, gained an interest in privacy (or reading under the covers)and thus began closing our doors on our own.
FWIW,I did/do have a serious sleep disorder from a brain abnormality -- I naturally "sleep" at a light doze for 4-5 hours, and wake up whenever my body wants to move. As a kid, being able to see the light helped me feel safe enough to relax in bed with my eyes closed when awake; I eventually also was given a clock-radio tuned to a local classical station I could listen to softly, then was taught to enjoy the time by imagining a dream. As an adult, I take medication (gabapentin), though I know parents of kids with the same condition that swear by giving the child a melatonin supplement before bed.

--
Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
Re:Key Feature... by PortHaven · 2014-04-03 03:46 · Score: 1

Yup....and when we re-wire, we might just do that.
Our current solution - remove all the lightbulbs.

Another Korean Copy...err I mean innovation?? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 07:02 · Score: 0

Say it isn't so...

There is a problem... by PortHaven · 2014-04-01 07:03 · Score: 1

Sadly, most of these smart bulbs have failed (despite all their whiz bang feature set) to offer a solution to the problem.

PROBLEM: You put your child to bed, and as soon as you leave they turn the light back on.

SOLUTION: Offer a smart bulb I can turn off or disable remotely, even better yet, set a timer.

PROBLEM: Most of these smart bulbs come on when you turn on the switch. That's the exact opposite of what I want. I want the bulb to be de-activated from when I set it to say 7am. So that my kids cannot turn it back on.

Re:There is a problem... by Russ1642 · 2014-04-01 07:09 · Score: 1

Ha ha. You suck at parenting. Bring forth some real consequences, not just threatened ones, for turning on the light and watch that light stay off.
Re:There is a problem... by SuricouRaven · 2014-04-01 07:21 · Score: 1

Remove the bulb.
Re:There is a problem... by csnydermvpsoft · 2014-04-01 07:22 · Score: 2

Let me guess: You're not a parent. The best parents are always the ones without children. After they have kids, they realize that their perfect ideas don't work on actual children.
Either that, or you've been blessed with an angel of a child. It happens, but it's far from guaranteed.
Re:There is a problem... by CanHasDIY · 2014-04-01 07:28 · Score: 1

Here:
Leviton Gray Tamper Resistant Locking INDUSTRIAL Wall Light Switch Keyed 4-Way - $10
You're welcome.

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:There is a problem... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 08:33 · Score: 0

PROBLEM: You put your child to bed, and as soon as you leave they turn the light back on.

SOLUTION: Offer a smart bulb I can turn off or disable remotely, even better yet, set a timer.
So.. the problem is your child wasting electricity? Because if the problem is your child is not going to bed on time, I'm surprised. I learned early on to use a flash light so my parents wouldn't know I was still awake.
Re:There is a problem... by mythosaz · 2014-04-01 10:08 · Score: 1

I'm with Russ1642 here.
There's a very simple path to take with disobedient children: Teach them early that actions have consequences.
....or end up with "affluenza".
Re:There is a problem... by swillden · 2014-04-01 11:00 · Score: 1

There's a very simple path to take with disobedient children
I see you're also not a parent. Not that parents shouldn't teach their children, but there's nothing simple at all about it. Each child is different and needs to be understood and taught appropriately. Parenting is the most difficult thing you'll ever do. Unless you luck out and get an angel, as the GP says... which does happen from time to time, but luck is what it is.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:There is a problem... by Snospar · 2014-04-01 19:31 · Score: 1

How I hate that phrase "You're so lucky to have such well behaved children!", there's no luck involved it's hard work being a good parent. GPP is even worse: "blessed with an angel of a child"... utter nonsense. Teach your children early on that there are rules and standards they need to follow - encourage with rewards and praise, discourage with simple punishments (time on the "naughty step" or temporary loss of TV or cherished toy). All this hard work will pay off and your children will grow up to be well rounded, polite adults.

--
Moore's law is not a law. Theory, yes; Predictable trend, certainly; Law, no.
Re:There is a problem... by mythosaz · 2014-04-02 08:51 · Score: 1

I'm a parent. Between the wife and I, we have a 22, a 15, and a 13, one of which is special needs -- the sort that actually lacks the ability to correctly understand and weigh the long-term consequences for his actions (good or bad).
Parenting is very difficult.
It's even more difficult if you don't do the simple task of teaching your children at a young age that actions have consequences. If you do X, Y will happen. Period. End.
It is a simple thing to teach your children that actions have consequences. Getting a child that's "an angel" may sometimes happen by luck, but happens much, much more because parents taught good lessons at an early age.
Re:There is a problem... by swillden · 2014-04-03 03:14 · Score: 1

It is a simple thing to teach your children that actions have consequences.
Certainly it is simple to teach. That doesn't mean they'll learn.

Getting a child that's "an angel" may sometimes happen by luck, but happens much, much more because parents taught good lessons at an early age.
This does not match my observation, at all. I know lots of great parents with troubled kids, and lots of terrible parents with great kids. And a lot of parents (like me) with some of each, even though all were taught the same. Not that it in any way reduces parents' responsibility to teach, but I've come to the conclusion that nature has a lot more influence than nurture.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:There is a problem... by swillden · 2014-04-03 03:15 · Score: 1

So... how do you explain parents who have some well-behaved and some ill-behaved children, even though they were all taught the same?
You were lucky.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.

Re:The Connected Browser's Battle of the Mute Butt by Physics+Dude · 2014-04-01 07:04 · Score: 3, Interesting

1. Right click on player
2. Add AdBlock audio filter to slashdot.org domain
3. Problem solved! ;-)

More power vampires... by HockeyPuck · 2014-04-01 07:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

So now I've got a bulb that when i turn it off at the switch it stops drawing electricity, they want lightbulbs all over my house that are not off but in "standby" mode. Sucking on power throughout the day...

I remember when lightbulbs were not $15 but $.50.

Re:More power vampires... by Lumpy · 2014-04-01 07:26 · Score: 1

HUE bulbs are $75 each. I think you need up update your pricing information.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:More power vampires... by HockeyPuck · 2014-04-01 07:37 · Score: 1

Argh...
Now the bulbs are more expensive than the lamp....
I couldn't imagine outfitting a chandelier with $300 worth of bulbs...
Re:More power vampires... by WindBourne · 2014-04-01 11:36 · Score: 1

You can now buy Cree light bulbs from your local home depot for $5.00 (9 for a can light).
And if clarity is your thing, then they have a new line that matches the GE reveal for color, but it IS expensive ($19).

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:More power vampires... by hey! · 2014-04-01 16:48 · Score: 1

Only if you're silly enough to buy smart bulbs for a chandelier. Practical LED bulbs these days cost about 4.5x as much up front, cost 1/4 as much to run, and last 10x longer. And within the available power ratings they're a plug-and-play replacement for incandescents, offering similar color temperatures and operating with dimmer circuits designed for incandescents.
A "smart" bulb is not particularly compelling for a consumer, but I can see why it's attractive for a manufacturer to offer. I've seen this kind of vendor-driven over-elaboration many times before, and the reason is usually that they hope to lock their customers in. You wouldn't care about having a half dozen different brands of plain old lightbulbs in your house, but you're not going to want to live with a half dozen incompatible smart bulb systems. You'll settle on one brand and stick with that. This is important because in the long run you're going to buy a lot fewer light bulbs. Not only will this ensure you buy the smart bulb vendor's brand, by selling a more complicated bulb they get to charge you more.

--
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Re:More power vampires... by Neil+Boekend · 2014-04-01 21:04 · Score: 1

The initial price may have been $0.5, but they used so much energy that it wasn't funny. I can't breath water.

--
Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.

Sadly they are far too dim for the price by Lumpy · 2014-04-01 07:25 · Score: 1

HUE bulbs are 30 watt equivalent brightness. they need to get to the 60 watt world before they are useable.
Also they are ungodly expensive for what they are, and from a friends failure rate, I know why, you are paying for a warranty that will be used. he is having a 30% failure rate on the bulbs.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.

Too dim by ArchieBunker · 2014-04-01 07:48 · Score: 2

Is 60 watts the new 100 watts or something? 60 is too dim. Is anyone making 100 watt equivalents or is bright light now a victim of the green movement?

--
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard

Re:Too dim by sconeu · 2014-04-01 08:50 · Score: 1

From what I've seen, most manufacturers are using high-efficency halogens as the replacement for 100W.

--
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Re:Too dim by WindBourne · 2014-04-01 11:46 · Score: 1

Switch and Cree make 100 watt bulbs. BUT, they are far more expensive ($20-30). With a $5 cree 65 watt light bulb, there are plenty of places for one to put these in and have them pay off within 6 months. Even the $9 BR-30s are paying for themselves within 1 year in most places.

Or you can do mixes. For example, I use a single 60 w incadescent in my bathroom mirror that needs 3 bulbs. The other 2 are the crees. As such, I burn up 80 watts instead of 180, and the light is more than good enough. And yes, you get use to it quickly.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.

not as good as the old Philips L-prize bulbs by Chirs · 2014-04-01 07:49 · Score: 1

I like the Cree bulbs. I just wish they (or any other) were as good as the Philips L-Prize bulbs (93 CRI and 93 Lumens/W)

For comparison:
Cree TW series: 93CRI and 59 Lumens/W
Cree regular: 80CRI and 84 Lumens/W
Philips: 81CRI and 72 Lumens/W

Re:not as good as the old Philips L-prize bulbs by WindBourne · 2014-04-01 11:56 · Score: 1

I own one of the phillips. BUT, at 30/bulb, the return is a LONG TIME. I DID notice that HD just brought the price down to 9/bulb.
However, just looking at it, at HD, the phillips is not as good. It is 76 lumens for watts and 5 year warrenty, while Cree is is not only half the price, but guarenteed 10 years, and is doing 84 lumens per watt.
And the crees are made in America using Cree LEDs (widely considered the best). The dimmer capability on the cree is also considered the best. Pretty much works with any dimmer without sound. The Phillips WILL make sounds or not properly dim if the dimmer is not a special one.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:not as good as the old Philips L-prize bulbs by NJRoadfan · 2014-04-01 13:56 · Score: 1

Philips just updated their 60w replacement again. Now it outputs 880lm vs. 830lm the older 2013 model produced. They switched away from the remote phosphor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

The L-Prize bulbs were nice, but its obvious the market balked at the price.
Re:not as good as the old Philips L-prize bulbs by drinkypoo · 2014-04-02 01:26 · Score: 1

And the crees are made in America using Cree LEDs (widely considered the best). The dimmer capability on the cree is also considered the best. Pretty much works with any dimmer without sound.

That is a TERRIBLE LIE.
I have tried the cree 60W equivalents behind two totally different dimmers, one lutron wall dimmer and one cheap lamp dimmer. In both cases two different lamps made a horrible whining sound when plugged into such. The cree lights are absolutely NOT silent when behind a dimmer. They are the loudest pricks which were ever loud.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

ZigBee by almeida · 2014-04-01 08:52 · Score: 1

Hue bulbs speak ZigBee, not Wi-Fi. Communication between the bridge and the lights is done with a mix of the ZigBee Home Automation and ZigBee Light Link application profiles on a ZigBee PRO mesh network using an IEEE 802.15.4 MAC layer. The bridge is an IP-to-ZigBee gateway, but there's no direct IP connectively to the bulbs.

Re:ZigBee by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 09:09 · Score: 0

I was doing a recent remodel and wanted to automate the lights, but couldn't find any solution. Z-Wave switches look like the only universal solution that is affordable,but the reviews of the dimmers and switches indicate a lot of problems generally. The idea of having the bulbs each be a local wireless node is appealing to me but ideally you want the switches to control it, unless you leave them always-on with the bulb handling the on/off.
If you were doing an automated whole-home system, you'd use Hue with Zigbee?

Noise, noise, noise! by Chrontius · 2014-04-01 09:07 · Score: 2

I just loaded a half dozen /. stories in tabs, and now as many computer voices are reading submission summaries to me in some godawful cacophony.

What the hell?

Worse than beta, since there's no off switch.

Re:Noise, noise, noise! by Anomalyst · 2014-04-01 09:53 · Score: 1

adblock plus custom entry "http://slashdot.org/*.mp3*"

--
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Re:Noise, noise, noise! by jshazen · 2014-04-01 11:05 · Score: 1

Yeah, me too! Really?!? Nothing in the prefs to disable it? No cookie even to set the volume to zero once I've silenced 3 of them. Grr.
Re:Noise, noise, noise! by jshazen · 2014-04-01 11:16 · Score: 1

Bad form to reply to self, but just realized this is probably an April Fool's prank. Whee! <grumble>
Re:Noise, noise, noise! by Chrontius · 2014-04-01 14:57 · Score: 1

I briefly considered that, but it's too in-character and unfunny.

why is there no subject? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 09:20 · Score: 0

One word: retrofits

It is super easy to screw in a bulb, but changing the fixture is a PITA.

Plus, an LED bulb should last well in excess of 10 years. With all that time to amortize the additional cost for the controller circuitry, it makes financial sense to put it in the bulb. Besides, after 10 years whatever tech that could have been in the fixture is going to be obsolete.

Re:why is there no subject? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 12:30 · Score: 0

Or if there turns out to be a flaw with the hardware, it's easier to replace the bulb than the fixture.
Would you rather have a self-screwing/unscrewing bulb or fixture? Imagine a hacker unscrewing all the bulbs in your house. Imagine having to buy new fixtures because the firmware isn't updatable.
Re:why is there no subject? by Ravaldy · 2014-04-02 06:25 · Score: 1

They said CFL would last 7 years. Good luck having one last more than 2 years if it's used regularly. I replace my outside CFLs yearly. I don't, buy the garbage brand either so where am I going wrong? I also don't touch them with my hands unless I have gloves on (which is required for any type of bulb.
Re:why is there no subject? by uninformedLuddite · 2014-04-02 12:54 · Score: 1

IMHO the older ones worked a lot longer than the new 'fancy' ones. I do not generally buy the cheap stuff w

--
The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
Re:why is there no subject? by evilviper · 2014-04-02 16:50 · Score: 1

They said CFL would last 7 years. Good luck having one last more than 2 years if it's used regularly. I replace my outside CFLs yearly.
CFLs are terrible for outdoor (cold location) use, and they're lousy anywhere they'll be turned on/off frequently. CFLs also have issues with failure if not mounted in the proper orientation they were designed for, or used in small fixtures that get hot.
LEDs have no such problems, and furthermore, the $10 Cree 60W equivalents come with a 10-year warranty from the manufacturer.

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant

stupid subject line is blanked when I reply - buck by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 09:29 · Score: 0

There are 100w (1600 lumen) LED bulbs, philips, cree and feit all have them at most home depot / lowes type stores. They took a little longer to come to market than the 60w equivalents because of energy star testing requirements. The energy star guys realized the fucked up the compact florescent standards, letting lots of crappy bulbs onto the market which often died waaaay too soon. So with LED they raised the standards a lot. That's not to say anyone is immune from the occasional manufacturing error, but in general the engineering that goes into the design of an LED bulb is of a lot higher quality than what went into early CF bulbs.

I do wish philips would come out with a 1600 lumen hue though. The ~600 lumens they do at full-white just isn't enough for the $60 price. If they can't do 600 lumens, they should at least halve the price since a 600 lumen white-only cree is in the $10 range.

bucking feta blanks subject lines on reply by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 09:33 · Score: 0

LED bulbs last 10-20 years. That means there is little economic value in putting the smarts in the socket rather than the bulb. And if you are a renter, even better since you can take your smart bulbs with you if you move.

*unghhnhhghhghh* *PLOP* Ah by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 10:01 · Score: 0

Well written, but a tad too much info. LMAO

Re:The Connected Browser's Battle of the Mute Butt by Harlequin80 · 2014-04-01 10:50 · Score: 1

Thank God! I thought it was only me! I've been trying to find a slashdot setting that had suddenly changed to make this stop.

Guess what guys! I like to read slashdot at work. What I don't need if my laptop TELLING everyone I'm on slashdot in a creepy robot voice. (and yes I know I could mute the laptop)

Re:The Connected Browser's Battle of the Mute Butt by Harlequin80 · 2014-04-01 10:51 · Score: 1

THANKS! Didn't know I could do this.

Hue is not WiFi by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 11:12 · Score: 0

This kind of error is often made. But Philips Hue works with the Zigbee stack. It operates in the 2.4GHz ISM band just like WiFi. Zigbee is based on IEEE 802.15.4 and it's application layer has profiles that are specifically designed for (home) automation. Hue uses the ZLL profile. Go look it up on google. It's actually an open standard. Though it costs money to get official certification and encryption keys, once you have, your bulbs will interoperate with other's bulbs on the same network.

Skip this junk by WindBourne · 2014-04-01 11:34 · Score: 1

Far better to simply start buying the $5 cree 60 w/$9 Br-30 65 w light bulbs from Home Depot and saving yourself some money.
In fact, with these being 1/6 of the watt of an incadescent (and 1/3 of a flourescent), along with a minimum 10 year guarentee, you would be better off jumping to these and allowing them to run a little bit longer.
With these ones other bulbs, it will be a waste of energy.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.

Why an Internet of Things? "Because We Can". by billstewart · 2014-04-01 11:47 · Score: 1

Yes, this adds a lot of complex control circuitry to your lightbulb - a microcontroller ($0.50 will get you 8-bit and 16-bit CPUs, and there are probably ARM CPUs for under $1 by now), and some kind of radio or sound or light sensor for signalling (also no more than a few bucks), and a 1/N share of the cost of the remote control (which only needs to cost more than $5 because a $200 home automation system needs a fancy GUI and lots of user interface development.)

I might very well want to set different light bulbs in different rooms to different colors, to coordinate with the paint colors and the lighting needs of the various activities we use those rooms for. I'm not in their target market demographic, but having recently had to pick paint colors for my living room and seen how radically any color we tried changed depending on the lighting (direct/indirect sunlight, different kinds of incandescents, compact fluorescents, and cheap LEDs) and even depending on the color of adjacent walls/furniture - human color vision is an amazingly weird and twisty system - I can see that some people might very well want to have their lighting change its behaviour based on time of day.

On the other hand, I'm definitely in the target market for a cheap LED replacement for 150-watt incandescents, and for that matter for 100-watt; most of the cheap LED market is still for the 40-to-60-watt incandescent replacement.

--

Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks

Re: intelligence in the bulb vs. light fixture by billstewart · 2014-04-01 11:52 · Score: 1

If you sell light bulbs, you'd rather make your profit on the part people are likely to replace soon than the part they don't change very often. People are much more willing to replace a light bulb themselves than a light fixture mounted on a wall (which might require an electrician in some places, might only get replaced during a decorating change such as repainting the bathroom, and which probably still works fine, as opposed to the old incandescent bulb that burned out.)

--

Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks

Planned Obsolescence? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 11:55 · Score: 0

Pairing a light bulb which lasts 20 years...with tech which will be out of date in a couple of years.
It makes no sense unless the grand plan is to get you to replace them way before they are due to expire.

What are we going to call the really smart bulbs? by dbIII · 2014-04-01 13:17 · Score: 1

There's been a lot of research work on gigabit optical networking using LED lights yet we are calling this update of 1950s sensor light systems "smart".

End to capacitor problems by Animats · 2014-04-01 15:33 · Score: 1

Current cheap chinese-made LED lights are amazingly efficient and put out a very good light, but suffer from capacitor plague.

A solution for that has been developed at Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan. Here's the theory paper: "Bridgeless SEPIC-derived LED Driver without Electrolytic Capacitor for Multistring Application". And here's the product announcement. "Dali Power recommends led drive design without electrolytic capacitor, used mainly for bulb lamp. Life is 10 times of the original LED drivers, the design life is as much as 40000 hours or more, can be well matched with the life LED lamp, small size, only forty percent of the original LED driver area. Products are mainly used in household low power lighting, suitable scope is 3W ~ 20W." So this problem is being solved. The new approach is both cheaper and has a longer lifetime.

If those overpriced "smart" bulbs still have electrolytics inside, they're already obsolete.

indeed the new philips are ethernet-powered by Herve5 · 2014-04-01 19:11 · Score: 1

so you can switch them on and off without even reaching for the wall switch ;-)
http://www.engadget.com/2014/0...

--
Herve S.

Bitcoins! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-01 23:57 · Score: 0

But the real question is, can one mine bitcoins with them bulbs?

"Convenience" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-02 00:54 · Score: 0

Hmmm, I can dig for my phone, mess with an app, or.......... I can walk 4' and flip a switch. I think I'll choose the latter. I'm sure "smart bulbs" will have their uses (porch lights (if these things can take cold/moisture), garage lights, etc) but I don't see these things becoming ubiquitous. I also wonder about longevity, at $40-60 per bulb they had better last as long as the house.

Slashdot Mirror

The Connected Home's Battle of the Bulbs

176 comments