Slashdot Mirror
People Think Smart Home Tech is Too Expensive (usatoday.com)
According to new research commissioned by smart home software and hardware brand Wink, 34 percent of Americans believe it would cost $5,000 or more to turn their home into a smart home. An article on USA Today adds: It's a stark contrast from Wink's real world user data: Of the company's 2.7 million users, the average person starts with just 4 smart devices, and spends about $200. The information comes from a report Wink has dubbed their Smart Home Index, released today, in which more than 2,000 U.S. adults were surveyed by a team at Harris Poll. Aside from the cost misconception, a few other key insights rose to the top. For example, the adoption rate disparities across gender lines and income lines have almost disappeared. 43 percent of connected device buyers are now women, and 20 percent of all households with income under $50,000 per year have purchased a connected product. Of those that did purchase a smart home device, energy savings was the most frequently cited reason for doing so, followed by security. Only 33 percent of buyers expressed a desire to monitor or control their homes while away.
or know?
There's something to be said for simplicity. The more I read about IoT vulnerabilities and clunky smart home devices, the less I want one.
There is elegance in simplicity. If I want to make something smarter, I put it on a timer.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
Back when I was a teenager I played with X10 stuff a bit. As a teenager it seemed cool that I could turn lamps and radios on and off through my computer.
Then the novelty wore off and I realized that at least for those things in the room with me, controlling them remotely didn't matter, and for those few things that could benefit me to be controlled in some fashion, it wasn't in the cards.
I'll admit, having a system that can tell when i'm leaving work in order to turn the water heater back on that's been off since the morning, or could turn on the air conditioning or heat woul be pretty cool, but on the other hand I leave work at roughly the same time every afternoon so it wouldn't really help all that much. Perhaps something to determine if I'm home and use occupancy to keep these systems from being idled would be handy, but on the other hand I can just go flip a switch on the water heater timer and it's on again, and I can turn down my thermostat easily enough on my own.
The one bit of kit that would actually be useful to me would be an HVAC thermostat that didn't require me to switch between heat and cooling modes for the heatpump. Just let me set upper and lower thresholds and have it automatically switch between modes. That requires no computing outside of the termostat itself.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
How hard is it to set your thermostat or flip on a light switch?
Impossible if you aren't standing right next to them. On the other hand it's pretty nice to be able to turn up the thermostat from the airport after you've landed the plane or even do it from the other side of the house without having to get out of bed.
I realize we can't spent all the extra time and $$ on "connecting" all of our otherwise mundane devices, but seriously, why is this needed?
For the same reason we have so many other devices and bits of technology in our home. Why do you "need" a smartphone when you have a perfectly good desktop PC? Same reason. Convenience, comfort, and in some cases fun.
Welcome to economics. The devices have security vulnerabilities and are expensive for what you get in return.
A lot of that is fragmentation. I enjoy reading up on home automation and building up a few things (don't have much, but I figure I can build up over time), and the one overriding factor is just how every single company feels the need to develop their technology above all else. No standard communication technology, no standard API for interacting with the device, no compatibility with other systems. You end up with many many "smart bridges" that only do one thing and have to chain them together to get anything done.
There's just a complete disconnect between manufacturers and users when it comes to value as well. A good recent example: for the same price, I can get a Lutron smart bridge, which only supports Lutron's smart lights and blinds, or I can grab a Wink which supports Lutron's stuff plus Z-Wave, ZigBee, BLE and Thread. There's half a dozen smart hubs on the market with the same kind of problem. Even the more generalist hubs like Vera or SmartThings tend to miss at least one thing which means you'd have to have many of them to fully cover everything (namely, Lutron's stuff, because they decided they'd have their own proprietary communication method). Philips Hue poses a similar issue: it's proprietary and doesn't integrate unless you also grab their hub.
Basically, they all want to lock you into their system, even though no given system has everything you want. On top of that, they make extension and customization really limited, often preventing integration (Lutron sells a telnet enabled bridge, but only to professional installers, otherwise it's fully locked down). I really shouldn't have to run Home Assistant on my home server to make Wink not suck, but if I just stick with Wink's app (no PC app, no website), the automation basically amounts to a dumb timer and making switches do something.
Smart homes should feel smart, almost magical. Right now you just end up with 10 bloody plastic boxes which all do one thing not all that well and rarely want to work together properly, and if you lose internet... tough luck (next to no smart devices support local control). If you want to do all the stuff they show in ads, you better be ready to start hacking, because none of them really do that without integrating into a third-party system like Home Assistant or OpenHAB.
...Then the novelty wore off...
Sums up the entire value-add right there.
Also sounds a lot like 99.9% of smartphone apps in existence today that get downloaded and used once...
I have a $9 device from a hardware store that I plug into a wall and it turns on whatever I plug into it at a preset temperature. I use it to turn on a space heater in a cabin on my property to keep it from freezing. I really can't think of any use for the tech beyond that.
There are only two "smart home" features I've actually cared to put in:
* Occupancy sensor lights in bathrooms and other places that one frequently enters and exits a lot of times per day.
* A smart thermostat with remote access
Both were more about saving money than adding convenience.
Nothing else is really worth the cost because the usability is utter shit and the interoperability is almost nil. Give me Star Trek level functionality ("computer, lights; computer, play ; computer, we're about out of TP, order some more") with cost effective equipment/install (wiring your house for automation, audio, etc. is insanely expensive, wireless stuff is still shitty) and I might change my mind, but we're a long, long way from that level of UX. Alexa, etc. notwithstanding. Also, it would require non-invasive implementations that don't collect data and/or otherwise spy on me.
"OK, Self. Open the refrigerator and grab me a beer."
Works every damn time.
Obligatory XKCD:
https://xkcd.com/149/
I'll admit, having a system that can tell when i'm leaving work in order to turn the water heater back on that's been off since the morning
The only reason to put a water heater on a timer is to save money by consuming energy off peak when it is cheaper. These schemes do not save any measurable amount of energy unless your away from home weeks at a time.
or could turn on the air conditioning or heat woul be pretty cool
The one bit of kit that would actually be useful to me would be an HVAC thermostat that didn't require me to switch between heat and cooling modes for the heatpump
Micro-managing temperature to save money when you have a heat pump accomplishes the exact opposite result. The most efficient operation comes when you set a temperature and don't mess with it.
Back when I was a teenager I played with X10 stuff a bit. As a teenager it seemed cool that I could turn lamps and radios on and off through my computer.
Then the novelty wore off and I realized that at least for those things in the room with me, controlling them remotely didn't matter, and for those few things that could benefit me to be controlled in some fashion, it wasn't in the cards.
I've used X-10 to control anywhere from 2 to 9 lamps for the last 15 years. Mostly just 2. I've gotten so accustomed to the lamps turning on and off automatically in the evening that if something goes wrong and it doesn't work, for whatever reason, it's mildly shocking.
I like it because, being computer controlled, it can be more sophisticated than a dumb timer. I've got a cron job that launches a tiny program that recalculates sundown at my latitude each day and issues the turn-on command appropriately. Considering I got all the X-10 equipment for $10 per pack of 4 items (one RS-232 transmitter, one receiver that can control one socket, one lamp control that listens to the receiver, and one remote), it was a bargain, and a very nice convenience. But it would be better with a light sensor, which wasn't an option at the time, and I was only willing to do it at all because of the promotional pricing. I would never buy more pieces at full price. $45 per socket is far far too expensive, especially for a somewhat unreliable system with absolutely no security. The relatively large wall wart external box is also a major turnoff, and makes it impossible to control both wall sockets since it's polarity-sensitive.
...and I can turn down my thermostat easily enough on my own.
For that, I have a programmable thermostat, which was included with my new, high efficiency furnace. Very very convenient, and as someone else said, you can get one clever enough to control a heat pump properly. (Mine isn't that smart.)
34 percent of Americans believe it would cost $5,000
Apparently 34% of Americans are actually aware of the security implications of a "Smart Home" and know if would cost over $5,000 in leaked personal data.
Don't forget that they'll stop working when the manufacturer goes bust and their 'cloud' server goes away. Or when Amazon's 'cloud' goes down again. Or when the manufacturer stops supporting them and shuts down the 'cloud' server that controls them.
Look, most "smart home" tech is always on, wasting electricity. Stuff you need:
1. home temperature or floor temperature feedback for heating/cooling that can be programmed. this is also very useful in second homes, and saves lots of energy.
2. security system ... LOL, jk. No seriously, most motion and heat detectors will rack up big charges from the local police, who can't even get there in under 45 minutes, no matter what the commercial says, so get rid of those. Better bet - lights tied into home motion detectors. Determined people will case your place and can always - and I do mean always - get in. And get out before any security or police show up. And get a real dog or cat.
3. low electric price on demand laundry wash dryer systems. These modern ones use very little energy and "buy" it when it's cheapest. Since modern laundry can run very quietly, it's ok if it turns on at 3 am. Same with dryers.
4. low energy fridge NOT CONNECTED TO Internet. Modern fridges are very quiet and save tons of money. Same goes for freezer.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Do not want! I mess with 'gadgets' all day I don't want to have to deal with that at home. If it's cold I light the pellet stove that is my automation.
love is just extroverted narcissism