zlacker

>>linker+(OP)
Time and time again It takes just one MBA trying to boost numbers to turn a good product into a data collection nightmare.

Honestly is there any IoT brand that we can trust long-term? Maybe IKEA stuff?

>>zeisch+U8
I'm sure the right answer is open source stuff, self-hosted. But as an alternative, the Apple Homekit architecture does seem serious about keepig as much info as possible on the devices themselves and not throwing stuff into the cloud.

>>Angost+1p
Maybe that's why the number of smart devices that work with Homekit is so limited?

I really don't understand many of the "smart" device manufacturers. They clearly aren't capable of running the services required to manage their devices, so why do they keep insisting on doing so? My parents have a smart radiator that couldn't be managed for over a month because a server in Norway was down. Why not just have it be manageable by Homekit and skip the infrastructure cost?

>>mrweas+lp
I really don't understand consumers who, despite companies clearly demonstrating this, will just buy the next IoT thing anyway.

Why don't companies offer better, longer-lasting products that can be community-driven after EOL? Because money.

>>squigz+tx
Money for one but there is little actual standarization that have enough clout for it to happen.

99% of IoT devices would be fine with just "here is MQTT address" and a way to push updates (preferably with gateway downloading updates and devices updating only from gateway)