Groovy is on the way out Smartthings Edge is the replacement

Mostly because both zwave and zigbee are very low power protocols with little tiny messages. So you just don’t get a lot of interference. Strong Wi-Fi can drown out zigbee quite easily, but zigbee won’t normally make a dent in Wi-Fi transmissions.

There are also a number of community members now running both a smartthings hub and a Hubitat hub in the same building. :sunglasses:

Thank you JD, I ask stupid questions for a reason, I have always held the belief that Smart homes are the future, all of current hub and device manufacturers are trying to find a way to eventual mass adoption retro fit or as a complete low cost initial install, a very lucrative market if it can be achieved

Having the ability to run without Internet and with zero local interference would go a long way in moving the possability closer

It’s not zero local interference, it’s just not a high probability.

And the original home automation systems, such as Insteon, didn’t use the Internet at all. But they didn’t get a lot of market share either. Most people these days do want Internet access so they can get added features and out of home controls, it’s just that they also want the system to work for basic functionality if the Internet isn’t available. Which is how many systems, including Hubitat, Homeseer, and HomeKit work. :sunglasses:

I’m not sure Joe clueless wants extras provided by the Internet, an enthusiast perhaps, Joe clueless wants long term reliability and low cost

Long term reliability means 30 years minimum to match what has always been available from standard wired electrical systems and switches, however that makes profit making difficult as any tech relies on advancement which in turn creates purchases, this keeps the wheel spinning

So I keep hitting a wall on how does a company win market share, create profit but supply 100% reliability because without reliability adoption is a non starter… its a conundrum

1 Like

I disagree. I think users want to be able to check if their doors are locked, their garage door is closed, etc.


Yeah, but is your name Joe?

heheh… I’m the same way, but most people I know don’t want the extra cost associated,

It could be… my initials are jkp

1 Like

I’m imagining Joe, and the whole Clueless household are tired of people making examples of them.

What thread is this anyway… Sorry, I’m done.

1 Like

I agree I think most people are learning how to and liking having access to their homes when their away. Also basic smart functionality.

Why else would home camera’s, be so popular and once someone See’s a friend checking their house, they also are interested.

Also echo’s and other voice hubs with their basic switches and plugs.

Just my 2 cents


I have said this many times in a different context, so forgive me if you have heard it before, but I don’t believe we need 100% reliability for automated systems for most home automation use cases.

Instead, there is a concept in manufacturing called MFOP. (Maintenance-free operating period) This is often applied to the design of consumer products like thermostats and dishwashers and washing machines.

These don’t have to be 100% reliable. They just have to have an acceptable MFOP, which for most consumer products is 1 to 2 years. Something that will work with an annual maintenance schedule.

Nor do I think technology of this type has to last for 30 years to get market share. Most consumers have a different expectation of technology replacement cycles. And it’s very likely that there will be new features that become available in the future and they will want to replace just for that reason.

As I’ve mentioned, I myself budget for a three-year replacement cycle, but I think five years is sufficient and 10 would be considered premium.

So you do it the way Philips hue and Apple HomeKit and Amazon echo are doing it. Each of which has millions of users. Make the setup easy, have an MFOP of 12 months or more, and when you upgrade provide very clearly understandable end consumer reasons to do so.

1 Like

I must be lucky, JD. I’d be hard pressed to find something that has needed maintenance in the last 10 years (automobiles being an exception), much less needed replacing. But I will say that the one brand that stands out as being less reliable has a close relationship with Smartthings.

I have to say, though, my expectations are closer to those of Mike, but as things become more complex, electronics wise, I doubt that the 30 year standard is being realistic.

But, my Realistic tape deck is still kickin’


LOL I am the opposite…on my third heating/cooling unit in 20 years and with more repairs than I care to count. Just replaced my water heater today that died after only 5 years so now on my third.


I’m knocking on wood right now… That’s one of my fears, and to be completely honest, I’m not sure how much faith I have in LG with HVAC, and I haven’t had much experience with them, in general.

But I guess it’s an example of a complex machine/system, heavy on the electronics. I’d settle for parts being available for 10 years.

My water heater has been doing well for 10, but it’s stated to be guaranteed for “life”. So, maybe there is something to being designed as such.

1 Like

If this were true, Alexa would not have been the important HA ecosystem it is today.

1 Like

I am just interested in the goal, what is the goal, Alexa and Google Home are a tool to collect data right now, data is revenue,

A hub that does not connect to the Internet provides no data, right now hubs do connect to the Internet but users want local reliability, privacy and speed moving hubs away from the internet, where does Alexa and Google Home fit in future HA, as they stand today they don’t fit not as 100% reliable devices to control HA but they are an option for control should the user have internet

Any HA in the future that becomes a standard will have had growing pains but eventualy proven old fashioned, switch reliability and longevity

We all have 100% control and reliability of current lighting at home supplied by a wall switch and cables (power outages asside)

How can you make money supplying switch reliability, privacy and speed with no Internet connection

If a property is fitted with no traditional switches or cables for lighting but instead features wireless switches and a main house hub and you cannot use it until you have paid for internet and signed up to the hubs ecosystem that would kill adoption

I’m interested in the goal of ST or any HA, what is the goal and how do you monetise it

I guess really the answer is Hardware, if you produce the hardware and sell by the millions with your company stamped on the product that is where the profit comes from or maybe supplying software to go in the hardware

Anyway we are only at the Windows 3.1 stage of HA at the moment, still a ways to go yet

And I’m sure SmartThings is too, in addition to being an incentive to selling appliances. If im an appliance manufacturer I would absolutely love the data mine of knowing how many hours my TV is being watched, how many loads of laundry the average household does, how many times a day does the fridge open, etc etc. It’s literally the only way SmartThings has survived. It’s very hard to stay in business based on hardware alone. Hence why Hubitat is adding value add subscriptions. Why Home Assistant charges for cloud access. Honestly the only smart home platform I don’t know how it exists is HomeKit. They’re monetizing a little with HomeKit secure video, and maybe slightly with certification charges. Otherwise they’re basically bank rolling it and hoping it’s incentive to buy HomePods and Apple TV’s.

1 Like

Exactly my point Jimmy, ST is a data mine currently just like all (most) other HA platforms

Offline/privacy does not fit !

Also you have cake there on your title… is Happy Birthday in order or do you simply like cake :smiley:

1 Like

Wait i thought cake day was the day you join a website/plaform

1 Like

If that’s the case Andreas… welcome aboard/happy birthday both of you :sweat_smile::sweat_smile:

Lol thanks :grin: My birthday is on the 2nd so not far off.