This has been interesting to follow, and I’m pretty much of a mind with LMSC, certainly in terms of single point of failure, etc. .
I might go back a stage further than that, though, in terms of Dave’s “revert to switches” comment.
For me, any “smart” capabiliies are a function of what convenience they offer, versus what they cost. If they either offe too little benefot, or cost too much, they aren’t worth it. Obviously, I mean worth it to me. Others mileage may vary.
That ends up meaning simple add-on devices, like smart bulbs, with or without either motion sensors (got a couple, where relevant) or additional remote switch/faders, are fine, but a whole home integrated system, to me, just isn’t wrth either the hassle or the cost. At the end of the day, we managed with simple light switches and thermostatic radiator valves for years and could easily do so again.
Getting ‘radio’ through the internet is also fine …. while it works. But a pain in the rear when it doesn’t, which for me is far too often. Relying on smart switches that cannot be over-ridden simoly by flicking an actual normal on/off switch is not acceptable.
Which brings me to single point of failure. Quite a few times I’ve lost audio services becaue my net connection goes down for anything from minutes to a couple of days, so a system with a remote element (like Amazon/Google) is not acceptable except as an add-on. Anything that requires on-going service visits is also,for me, an uuter non-starter, as is anything that requires any form of coding to set up, or to maintain. To be clear, I can do that, having been coding since the ’70s, but the wife can’t, and I don’t know how long I’ll be here. Could be many years, but might not. I’m not saddling the wife with that, for any reason.
So …. smart add-on services, like lights or radio, are viable providing there’s a manual system lying behind it that can be a fall-back for someone with zero technical expertise, and even less than zero inclination.
And because the utility of such add-ons is inherently limited, so is what I’m prepared to pay for them. A full “smart” home mght be the way of the future but not, in my opinion, until the cost comes way, WAY down, and setting up. tweaking and twiddling gets to be no more complicated than adjusting a dial on a thermostatic valve, or pushing a button on a dimmer switch. Do I want those kinds of household functions reliant on either broadband or cellular data? Hell, no. Definitely not. Nor will I accept anything fundamental, like control of lighting and heating depending on a remote “smart” company. It’s bad enough depending on gas and electricity (and water) companies, which is why I’m much more interested in home insulation, personal micro-generation (and storage) etc. It’s not (for me) viable to rely 100% on that, at least not yet, but if I could, and could be sure not be be saddled with expensive but proprietary solutions, I would, providing it was financially viable.. It’ll come, I beleive, but not any time soon. It’s all too nascent, too early-adopter, and I’m not interested in beta-testing, (or currently (excuse pun) more like alpha-testing) it.
