i’m guessing this. I’m actually moving this way myself. Slowly replacing my Blue Iris cameras with Wyze cams with the goal of shutting down my super old (and power hungry) desktop that runs Blue Iris.
So … less local execution, instead of more; unless they have plans to substantially optimize the local execution footprint requirements.
I’m new to all of this and am trying to learn so I have several questions.
I have been planning on updating my network using a Netgear CM700 cable modem, Netgear Nighthawk X10 router, and Netgear LB2120 4G Modem.
If I went with the RV340 and added a WAP would my wired and wireless devices be on the same network?
If they are on the same network can you limit what devices would use the cellular connections (I would not want my PS4 and TV for example using up wireless data)?
They’ve said in the other thread on the early FCC specs that the processor will be sufficient:
We probably should pull this out of the thread if it gets into private networks but, short answer, no on being able to stop certain devices from using your cellular data unless you get highly creative.
As far as wireless and wired devices being on the same network, I have never been a fan of router/switch/wireless combos. They are great if all your computer equipment is in one area but we have needs in our homes over the entire home but yes, they certainly can and would be. Mesh networks would do it over wireless, but you lower your throughput, and wireless over Ethernet backbones use wires. You just add switches and wireless access points based on your need.
My network consists of that RV340 router, then a 28-port Power Over Ethernet switch for my wired connections and then I have wires running to my three wireless access points for WiFi coverage. I also have what are called virtual local area networks (VLANs) set up and multiple wireless networks set up to keep IoT devices separated from my normal computers and cell phone. I just do not trust IoT devices because of the sometimes lack of firmware upgrades that address security issues. Most wireless access points can support multiple networks. For some reason, some ISPs or default configurations separate 5GHz wireless from 2.4GHz wireless by separate SSIDs. I always hated that. Make them the same network and use band steering to encourage client devices to use 5GHz until the signal is too low and they switch to 2.4GHz.
Also, the RAM for V3 is actually 256 MiB, the listing of 128 was a mistake.
More new hardware. Samsung SmartThings Wifi. Looks like the successor to the Connect Home and it powered by Plume
V1/v2 Migration utility?
This is definitely interesting, and at the price point it might just be worth it to play with it. The wi-fi would be my only reason for changing hubs, but even that isn’t needed with the advancements in Mesh-networks.
I’m running two Asus 1900 routers with one as primary and the other as a mesh node. This covers my entire house and allows me to put the hub and router wherever I want them to be.
But either way, I’ll probably buy one just so I can play with it.
I didn’t want to change the Title of this Topic, but… Can we agree to call it Hub V3? (or what?)
Though this Hub doesn’t have nearly as substantial differences as Hub V1 vs V2; nor SmartThings App (Classic) V1 vs SmartThings App (Classic) V2 vs SmartThings App (Samsung Connect)… having a consistent short form to use is super helpful.
- Hub V3 (my choice)
- Hub V2018
- Samsung SmartThings Hub 1… ?
JD added the model number , I added V3. That should help clarify.
The V3 doesn’t provide WiFi coverage. It’s just a WiFi “receiver”, like any other WiFi device connected to your network.
The Samsung SmartThings WiFi mesh/hub combo is new, it isn’t necessary if you already have good WiFi coverage.
The only reason I hesitate about the three is that conformance statement for the ETH model, which is not the same as the model announced today. I don’t know if they’ve decided not to release that one or what. There’s no conformance statement for GP-U999SJVLGDA yet,. So it may be that it’s V3 from a sales standpoint, but V4 as far as development. Plus there are the issues with the Nvidia and ADT versions.Confusing, I know.
I can’t find any third-party compliance documents for this new hub. And the Samsung site just says “zigbee.” Do you happen to know if it’s ZHA or Zigbee 3.0? I know the new end devices, which are rebadged Samjin products, are certified 3.0 but they should be backwards compatible to a ZHA coordinator.
One thing is clear though, with $69.99 listed price Samsung is seriously undercutting the competition. I suspect they’re selling it at loss just to get the hold of the smart home market.
Based on the Hub stats… more like Hub v2.2
I’m tired tonight, do you have a link to the FCC entry for this hub?
(To explain what I’m Looking for, If this is a Zigbee 3.0 coordinator, that’s definitely an evolutionary step forward from the previous hubs. But if it’s a ZHA coordinator, it’s not.)
FWIW, Newegg claims it has Zigbee 3.0 in the spec listing on their website:
Hey @JDRoberts. The new hub has gone through Zigbee 3.0 product certification (the listing should be made public in the future). At launch, the mobile app will not yet have the feature to be able to perform install-code based join (QR Code); it’s coming.
The plan is to release support for Zigbee 3.0 support on the V2 as well sometime later this year (there are some added challenges associated with any major Zigbee FW update on radios with existing networks).
Do you know if they plan to implement the advanced zigbee 3.0 security features (which might not work with ZHA devices), Or stick with a default ZHA security key for backwards compatibility?
( see the security note at the end of the following article: