Wait. Let me guess. It’s about 600 dollars overpriced, requires proprietary wiring, is not repairable (because Tim Cook believes you are leasing it from apple), requires an Internet connection to perform a basic function that has worked for over 100 years without AI, oh and it doesn’t have an actual button to reduce waste. You are supposed to use your old one or buy an apple button for another 600 dollars. Also, it stops working or slows down after a year and for some reason you need a subscription to use it.
Apple is pretty much the only company in the smart home space right now that not only allows, but requires that devices be able to function locally, without having to call home. They CAN call home, but they continue to work just fine locally if say, the internet is down. It’s a central tenant of their homekit standard.
You forgot the last part, people will flock to it. /s
I see you work in their PR department
How long have people been trying to make smart homes a thing? I feel like this would have happened by now if there was a real mass market for them. It’s not like there is a huge technological impediment to achieving that vision, like there is for VR/AR. In other ways it’s just like VR, a cool idea that’s been around forever, but doesn’t seem to have widespread application or demand.
If apple is really working on this, I consider it further evidence that they are really really struggling to have a substantive vision of the future. Other than incremental improvement of existing products and financially beneficial business maneuvers, what have they done in the last decade other than try to grasp at old sci-fi notions of ‘the future’. I suspect that this can’t change until they get new leadership. Of course, they’ve largely achieved escape velocity in terms of revenue, and are so established now that the money machine will keep working for a long time, independent of any need to be actually visionary.
I vaguely looked into it when I bought my first home and ultimately decided that it was more trouble than it was worth. You basically either have to pay a subscription fee for some company to do all the processing for you, and they’re liable to either increase the price on you, or go bankrupt. Or you need to run your own server.
Who can be bothered?
The biggest problem for smart homes for people who aren’t enormous nerds is that nothing works together with each other in a simple, coordinated way.
And, of course, one of Apple’s biggest strengths is that they’ve built a cohesive ecosystem that, usually, works just fine with limited fiddling.
Right now you’ve either got 14 apps for different shit, or you’ve built something like Home Assistant to try to glue together all this garbage into a coherent solution. I’ve gone that route, and it works mostly, usually, typically, fine-ish.
It’s a shit experience, still, because it’s a pile of random plugins and code from random people glued into something that can’t stop fucking with existing and working features and thus is perpetually in need of updates and maintenance and fiddling.
I wouldn’t bet against Apple being able to make a doorbell, security cameras, light switches, and a thermostat and then turning that into something that actually works properly in homekit, is kept updated, and is easy to configure and use and secure.
That’s really the missing piece that nobody seems to have been interested or willing to go after.
The lack of cohesion and the fact that everyone who makes camera stuff is shady as shit.
No, the biggest problem with smart homes is that honestly, a switch on the wall that always works, even when you don’t have your phone on you and even in the dark when you are half asleep is a pretty optimal interface for things like lights.
If only they made smart switches you could use, perhaps?
100% agree that smart bulbs are incredibly stupid and you should go with a switch if you want to smartify shit.
The problem with the idea of smart light switches is that they are only useful if you aren’t already in the room and turning on your light when you aren’t there is a pretty niche use case.
deleted by creator
I don’t doubt apple’s ability to make this work well. I do doubt that there is more than a niche market for it. I also think it’s boring, and for some reason, I still expect apple to do better.
Having a Ring doorbell is a game changer. If you’ve never used one I understand the reticence.
I do think it will be standard thing in the future. It’s a basic quality of life improvement having a record of door interactions, being able to answer when you are away, even answering without going to the door. It’s easy to understand and appealing to most people.
Ring is pretty Orwellian… Piping the stream from your door right to the police.
Also true. I use it in a business setting and it sort of doubles as a security camera. I would love to have the same functionality at home but it would have to be self hosted. Super creepy for a company to be watching my house
I’ve had one for a decade or so. It’s fine. Life was fine before it too. Let’s all stay grounded people.
Well no, it’s not enormous, but Amazon is selling a couple million ring doorbells a year, and a couple million more of their cameras.
It’s a sufficiently large market to hop into, especially if you can make a product that’s easier to deal with from an ecosystem perspective than the incumbents, which isn’t something I’d ever bet against Apple managing to pull off.
It’s the lowest entry point into smart homes.
Only if you put it outside the basement door
DaaaAaaD!!
I dont have a smart doorbell because I cant decide which to get. I am screwed by indecision if this is the lowest barrier for entry.
I don’t want anything that records to the cloud, because then I don’t control the footage. And pretty much all of them do that now…
In that it will appeal most to the people at the lowest end of the IQ range?
