Its enforced. I ran a test not too long ago and posted the results here. I was adding virtual devices in chunks of 10. At 199, I added another 10 devices. After 205 or 206 it started failing. I suspect that because the virtual chunks are all added quickly, there was some lag time before the new total is sync’ed. Any attempt to add devices after would fail.
2 Likes
Mkay, if they want to play that way then we will just run multiple hubs with different locations. LOL
switch/plug/remote control hub, motions hub, contact hub, leak/smoke hub, etc.
best not to max out any hub for memory expansion room.
There are lots of home automation platforms (Homeseer, vera, Hubitat, etc) where whole house systems run multiple hubs successfully.
My biggest concern with the smartthings architecture is that, at least, at present, if you have two hubs on the same location your automations/routines that run devices from more than one hub in the same location will all run in the cloud. Not locally.
And as I understand it, there is no official way to have a routine with devices from two different locations, although you can create a rule crossing locations with some of the third-party integrations like SharpTools or Alexa routines (not SmartThings routines). Again, cloud-based, and now more complex.
So if you put your sensors on one location and your lights on another location, any sensor-triggered lights rule will need a third-party integration.
Also, in that configuration, you wouldn’t be able to use switches as repeaters for sensors. Designing a strong mesh for your sensornet is definitely going to get tricky.
I don’t know… It just feels potentially troublesome to me, just looking at it as a former field tech. I’m not saying it’s impossible, just tricky. Especially when there are much easier alternatives from other brands.
But, choice is good, and if you want to run a 500 device multi hub system on smartthings, you can probably figure out someway to do it, depending on the exact devices involved, and the exact rules you want to set up. 
1 Like
It seems with Matter and more and more things being “Smart”, Samsung or Aeotek probably needs to start looking at a version 4 hub with memory and CPU to handle more than the 200 device limit. I don’t want to be forced to jump ship for other environments, especially given the hard work I have put into my home and without any backup or export option.
I am not sure how different manufacturers will address integrations but unless they do it over the local network, cloud to cloud is probably a must.
I do like the driver I installed for my Kasa power plugs and power strips however, I did verify that only the smart plugs work across the LAN. You only get overall power reports from the power strips. Individual control of the individual outlets happens over the cloud. However, Sense picks them up and controls them without issue. I see a big potential security problem with how this is done because there is no authentication mechanism for SmartThings or Sense to control these strips and plugs except through the cloud (and Sense does not do cloud-to-cloud). I use an access control list on that VLAN interface but that would not stop a compromised device on that network from attacking other things in the network.
To handle better security on Wifi devices, someone better figure out authentication.
Everything is getting “smart” whether they probably should or not. Everything is getting connected. It is fun, but my V2 was released in 2015 and V3 was in 2018 but they put less memory?? 5 years is like retirement age for electronics.
There seems to be a hint of a direction, now, with Matter and Thread. I am glad to see widespread standardization coming out. I guess manufacturers are starting to figure out one manufacturer doesn’t fit all in this environment…just like computer networking was way back when IEEE adopted 802.3 (wired Ethernet) and 802.11 (wireless).
Anxiously awaiting…I see a bright future…that you can dim with a voice command whenever you have a headache.
Apple did it for HomeKit, and that’s already been folded into Matter. Much better security than previously.
1 Like
Remember that over 90% of SmartThings customers don’t have a SmartThings/Aeotec hub, and even of those who do have a hub, most have fewer than two dozen devices, and never use any custom code at all.
The power users who have always dominated this forum are a small percentage of a small percentage of the smartthings customer base. I doubt if Samsung is thinking about a new hub for us.
Instead, they have produced the station, a $60 Matter hub which dropped zwave all together and reportedly doesn’t support any custom code. That’s the likely home automation future for Samsung, both in terms of numbers and profitability.
SmartThings Station if you already have a V2/V3 hub?
JMO, of course.
3 Likes
Makes sense, objectively analysing the way Samsung separated the V3 hub from their range. Samsung have committed themselves to putting hubs ‘everywhere’ and for ‘everybody’ and left Aeotec with the ‘power users’ hub. Will Aeotec bring out something new or are they controlled by Samsung?
2 Likes
That raises an interesting (to me) issue.
- My understanding, possibly incorrect, is that Matter devices can work simultaneously with multiple controllers in different platforms. Is that correct?
- If so, could Matter devices be connected simultaneously to multiple hubs in multiple SmartThings Locations, thus potentially changing our whole approach to ST Locations as there could be less need for cross Location automation? For example, we could have one Location for the room/floor and one Location for the home as a whole, each operating independently.
- What about multiple hubs in one ST Locations. Is there a fundamental reason why a device could not be connected separately to each hub and basically have multiple identities in the Location? By fundamental I mean could it be done, not has it been done like that.
1 Like
Yes.
if so, could Matter devices be connected simultaneously to multiple hubs in multiple SmartThings Locations, thus potentially changing our whole approach to ST Locations as there could be less need for cross Location automation? For example, we could have one Location for the room/floor and one Location for the home as a whole, each operating independently.
Probably not in that configuration. I think it likely that the matter connection is at the account level so instead of different locations, you would have to have different accounts and then I don’t think you’ll be able to bring multiple smartthings matter controllers into the same account. And since at present, there is no plan for smart things hubs to be “matter bridges”, you won’t be able to bring them into another matter controller app, either. 
- What about multiple hubs in one ST Locations. Is there a fundamental reason why a device could not be connected separately to each hub and basically have multiple identities in the Location? By fundamental I mean could it be done, not has it been done like that.
My own answer, although I haven’t seen anything official on this, this is just based on various conversations, public and private, with various engineers is that the smartthings authentication architecture will not support that at present. (This has come up in the conversations about the integration with the voice assistants, which is now all or nothing.) it would require a whole new architecture so I have to say that at present I don’t think it can be done. Plus zwave and Zigbee devices can’t be simultaneously connected to two hubs anyway using the profiles that smartthings uses. So that’s no help.
Agreed 100%. The boom mass market for smart home was 2015-2016 when everyone and their mother had a smarthome product line. Its still a market, just niche at best. Samsung is too large to mess with niche, instead focusing on how to integrate what they already have to extend smart home concepts (simple app automations) to their appliance line. Similar to the simplicity of smart home via Alexa. Or just using the Meross application.
So the new Matter hub seems like a mechanism to extend their existing product line with a Matter bridge to integrate to other infrastructures. Removing zwave makes sense - if you’re trying to simplify, ditching Zwave is a good business choice.
2 Likes
With the amount of connected devices popping up all over the place, I hardy call it niche.
zwave/zigbee is niche. Mass consumers tend to use WiFi or some other “NO HUB REQUIRED” technology. Its all over the box / marketing.
Most people hook up a couple of smart bulbs with their Meross or Alexa app and thats “smart home”. The space between large scale smart home (C4/Crestron) and that is niche, IMO.
As someone with a ton of Z-Wave installed in my house like door locks and wall switches and dimmers, I would be very mad if they stopped working at $250 a lock and $50 a switch/dimmer. I had to go Z-Wave to my detached garage because Zigbee did not have the range and a hub is not going to be happy in -10 in the winter or 110 in the summer.
Zwave won’t go away, its far too engrained into security products and has been for over 10 years. And is from multiple vendors thru the alliance. Hubs will be around for quite some time, just not from the Samsungs of the world. Homey, Hubitat, Z-Box are all options.
Vs something like Insteon… Those guys woke up one morning and their single source was bankrupt.
2 Likes
Is this 200 device limit still imposed? Ty
I have recently exceeded it adding some test virtual switches, so I wonder if it is a limit on hardware/physical devices?
I have 129 zwave and zigbee devices according API Browser +.
It has always applied to all devices, including virtual, since the justification was managing the device tiles in the app. It’s not a hub issue. It also applies to customers who don’t have a hub at all.
Where does that leave @TAustin 's fantastic new Alexa Multi Trigger which produces child device tiles?
Was hoping to have gained 36 potential devices, 1 serving for 19 virtual switches…
2 Likes
I have tested well over 200 devices using the API and HubiThings Replica, but you do need to handle paging with the _links structure moving beyond 200. Not sure if this info helps or hurts, but this might be an application design limit, and is not SmartThings API limit.
1 Like
After the recent iOS update I can no longer add devices or fix devices that have dropped off the network. Getting the 200 device error