… sucks for those of us who have been running Blink for years. Off to eBay these little SOBs go.
Alex just mentioned on a podcast that the Alexa/SmartThings relationship is mutually beneficial. Houses with SmartThings gets them something like 60% more utterances.
I think it would stupid for them to break off the relationship in favor of trying to compete with and outdo one another. For stuff like this it only helps when companies work with each other - and for that matter, customers hardly ever like the idea of monopolization because usually the results are less than favorable for them.
Interesting. But once people can ask “Bixby” instead of “Alexa,” I doubt many of those utterances will be related to Amazon devices. (Less mutual.) I guess time will tell. Right now, I don’t even use the Bixby that came with my phone, so there’s a good chance it won’t gain enough traction to threaten Amazon.
1 Like
Apple glamorized the concept of Ecosystem to shareholder’s delight. These companies want the biggest piece of the HA pie. And Amazon has a history of moving into a sector and grabbing the whole pie even if they lose money at first.
I think Blink was dead regardless of their bad PR move of killing ST integration with no notice. IMO, nothing but positives can come from this acquisition and now Blink will actually have money to deliver products and the features they promised.
This is Amazon’s “Nest” acquisition IMO and they’re going after Google/Nest.
1 Like
Amazon never acquired Nest. Alphabet (Google’s parent company) allows Amazon to have access to control Nest. Google just decided they want more control of Nest for themselves recently. Google could pull Nest from Amazon anytime.
I thought it was pretty clear what I meant, but please reread what I wrote and think about the context. Of course I know Amazon didn’t acquire Nest - this is their equivalent of Google’s acquisition of Nest, hence Amazon’s “Nest.” Like when you say XYZ is someone’s Waterloo - obviously they aren’t Napoleon.
3 Likes
I get what you meant & I understand it. But if somebody read that and they did not know Nest was not owned by amazon, it would be confusing.
1 Like
Yep, I can see that. I’ll edit and put it in quotes.
1 Like
Actually even if you ordered through the Blink website it gets sent from Amazon warehouses using Amazon’s distribution system anyway.
Since Blink have been unresponsive so far to my refund request, I might actually try and see if Amazon WILL refund me even though I bought through the Blink site…
This why I bought a Homey Hub as a backup when the smart home wars started.
Blink has released a API about 2 months ago.
Hypothetically…say someone received a Blink setup for Christmas and within a year Amazon decided to stop supporting the current Blink line up in favour of it’s own new setup using the Blink team…
Where would that leave the consumer from a legal stand point? Could they get a warranty / refund return citing that the product was not fit for the purpose it was designed for?
- If the product is sold with an explicit (not just “implicit”) 1 year warranty, then sure.
- If the product is sold with 30 days or 90 days or other explicitly limited warranties or explicit exclusion of all warranties, then it depends on State by State consumer law.
- California, for example, is particularly consumer friendly. A skilled lawyer would be able to assess if they would be likely to find a judge that would agree to hear the case and consider the warranty limitation to be void under some consumer protection statute. This would only be practical if a class action was formed, and Amazon, obviously, would offer a generous (but reasonable) settlement long before it got messy unless their own legal team felt that they could win and should avoid setting a risky precedent, all while trying to avoid bad PR and maintaining good customer relations!
In other words: “Caveat emptor” - buyer beware. If product is sold without warranty (read the Terms of Service!!!) and there is no evidence of intentional fraud, the impetus is on the consumer to prove there was fraudulent intent, negligence, or a clear violation of some specific State consumer protections.
How many people here have read SmartThings’s Terms of Use? How many realize that the Terms allow SmartThings to substantially change the services (including killing any features or add any mandatory fees…) with no more than 10 days notice required?
Could this be challenged legally? Yes … but only the lawyers really win. We wouldn’t really just want refunds for our $50, $80 or even $100 hubs, right? The Terms are written to ensure that SmartThings & Samsung aren’t “boxed in” to impractical obligations and would be, initially, considered reasonable in this regard. Again… SmartThings’s customers would have to prove the terms were unreasonable, illegal or that there was intentional deceit.
2 Likes
Though Amazon will of course apply their own Terms of Service soon enough, take a look at what Blink currently states:
https://blinkforhome.com/pages/terms-of-service
We may change, suspend or discontinue the Services at any time, including the availability of any feature or content. We may also impose limits on certain features and services or restrict your access to parts or all of the Site or Services without notice or liability.
…
IF YOU CHOOSE TO USE OUR SITE OR SERVICES, YOU DO SO AT YOUR SOLE RISK. OUR SITE AND SERVICES, AND ANY CONTENT IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, ARE PROVIDED “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE,” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, WE EXPLICITLY DISCLAIM ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, QUIET ENJOYMENT OR NON-INFRINGEMENT AND ANY WARRANTIES ARISING OUT OF COURSE OF DEALING OR USAGE OF TRADE. WE MAKE NO WARRANTY REGARDING THE QUALITY OF OUR SITE OR SERVICES, OR ANY CONTENT IN CONNECTION THEREWITH OR THAT THE FOREGOING WILL BE FREE OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL COMPONENTS OR WILL BE AVAILABLE ON AN UNINTERRUPTED, SECURE, OR ERROR-FREE BASIS. WE MAKE NO WARRANTY REGARDING THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, TRUTHFULNESS, COMPLETENESS OR RELIABILITY OF ANY CONTENT OBTAINED THROUGH OUR SITE OR SERVICES.
APPLICABLE LAW MAY NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES SO THE FOREGOING EXCLUSION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.
2 Likes
That seems pretty cut and dry then i.e. if we decide to stop things, you’re up the creek without a paddle… Nice. 
Sure… but consider the “deal” consumers make with such providers in exchange…
In exchange for the risk that services may suddenly be cutoff or degraded, the manufacturers / service providers deliver numerous service upgrades throughout the lifetime of the product.
I purchased SmartThings 5 years ago (well… Kickstarter backer, but you know what I mean). I purchased it with full awareness of many significant the limitations of the service. For example, there was no Android App whatsoever! Since then, there not only has been an Android App created, but several upgrades to it!
Compare that to buying a (much more expensive) major appliance (TV, dishwasher) or automobile. Sure… the manufacturer cannot (generally) disable features or add monthly fees; but they also don’t add features either. I love my Samsung fridge, but it doesn’t have the 22" Home Hub screen, and it doesn’t have a Seltzer water dispenser … the new models do! Why didn’t I get a free upgrade?
It is a shame that consumers cannot make their own choice between the two sales models. Some number of Blink and SmartThings customers would be satisfied if the product worked out of the box and never, ever changed. No firmware updates, new features or performance improvements … but also no risk of the cloud service being suddenly cancelled or having mandatory fees added. But most of us take for granted that SmartThings is continuously improving. There are lots of bugs we want fixed and lots of features we hope will be added. That’s why we accept the risk that comes along with that benefit.
Personally I think the ‘major appliance’ way of working should at least be the norm. It’s then up to the company whether they want to provide free ‘add-ons’ to that service to keep customers happy.
If I decide to pay a lot of the money, the least I expect is for that item to work ‘as is’ for as long as possible. I understand parts may fail, or companies go out of business… but just to turn a service off effectively making the item an expensive paperweight isn’t acceptable to me.
When buying an item, I take the decision at that time whether I’m happy with the item as it stands with zero upgrades, if I’m not, I either hold off till an upgrade (like I did with original Blink not being waterproof).
I do not have any cameras of any make but I have been following this and reading all the comments on this and other threads.
Am I right in saying that in the original release about the withdrawal of integration one of the reasons is a breach of security.
I haven’t seen much about that since.
Is this correct and if so does anyone know what the breach in security was.
No - I’m not aware there has been a breach. That was purely speculation from various people because of the phrase used in the email sent to users:
For your security, we recommend that you change your Blink password.
2 Likes