Should I wait for v3 hub? (STH-ETH-300)

I really hope this new hub is the trigger for a proper international rollout. We were told ST was coming down under 3 years ago…


Wow, it’s gonna retail for just 70 bucks.

I wonder if they’re feeling heat from amazon, which seems to be able to endlessly offer deep discounts on their own smart home hardware.

1 Like

They’ve rolled out partnerships with Spanish, German and Korean partners, but nothing down under :slightly_frowning_face:

Where have you read about those partnerships? Just wondering what places I should be checking for news.

What about this? is this SmartThings v3??



Not one particular place.
Here is the Vodafone partnership that covers UK, Spain and Germany

Here’s the Singtel partnership for Korea


So the major difference I see is connection via Wi-Fi in addition to the option of Ethernet. Am I missing something?

Apart from the 3 or 4 other threads on this topic, no



This is what I have been waiting for and never received(hope they get this working/watching my house on my Samsung TV):

Yes. :sunglasses: There are significant technical improvements, particularly in the area of security. It’s not enough for most people to want to change from a V2 to a V3 if the V2 was working well, but it does mean that someone looking at the two side-by-side would probably choose the V3.

See the current active discussion, which includes some staff comments.


The 2018 hub has a slower processor and less memory. Not sure how would that affect the performance though. Side by side comparison is need before we can tell which one is better.

The new Samsung mesh router acts as a Smartthings hub I hear; and includes Bluetooth, which we’ve been missing on v2. So does that device count as being Hub v3…?

The V2 Hub contains Bluetooth.

There are just no DTHs or published API to use the Bluetooth.

1 Like

I’ve never seen anything that indicated that the Bluetooth radio inside the V2 had been turned on. Then it would have to be enabled, so that the hub would process messages to and from that radio. That would be the first and second steps, before you could use any DTH. Has that changed?

( or as the old saying goes, hardware before software. :wink:)



I know you’re pedantic, JD, but obviously it’s implied that if there’s something published which uses Bluetooth, then it would be turned on first.

But… Yes; I guess it’s significant, because we might start seeing Bluetooth connected Things for Hub V3 that might not be supported by V2.

There’s also no evidence (so far) that Bluetooth has been “turned on” in Hub V3. Is there a single published V3 Bluetooth device (or even Bluetooth used during a configuration / pairing process)?


Responding to your comment @JDRoberts, although the brief diatribe here is a somewhat more general one.

The bluetooth hardware for both V2 and V3 is tested in manufacturing as functional. Adding support for a protocol like bluetooth is no small matter and requires significant changes in the hub software, cloud software, device model, etc.

In addition, there are a number of decisions that would need to be made for what kinds of devices will be supported and how that will work with the radios on different platforms and the related stacks. Does the design need to be able to provide the same capabilities on an Anrdoid platform (e.g. Nvidia Shield) or Tizen platform? Making it so that a bluetooth device handler can work seamlessly across varying underlying abstractions requires a moderate amount of work. On top of that, although bluetooth mesh continues to be pushed and make progress, most devices out there today do not support bluetooth mesh and would require close proximity to a hub to work correctly; things like cheap bluetooth connected lights are out there but probably wouldn’t work in many deployments.

None of these are strong reasons to not add bluetooth support but they seek to explain why it might be that we “don’t just enable bluetooth.” As with any engineering organization, we have limited resources and have to make decisions about what to work on based on the value of different features vs. the effort required.

All that being said, continued requests for bluetooth support (or for support of specific bluetooth devices) is not a bad thing. That feedback is one of the things that can help our product managers make decisions on the value propositions of taking on various tasks.

Another question might be along these lines: “If SmartThings doesn’t have immediate plans to add bluetooth support, why even include it in the hardware if they are concerned with reducing cost.”

The answer to that question is twofold:

  1. The Wi-Fi chip selected is a Wi-Fi/BLE combo chip that we were able to source for a good price.
  2. We do want to have the option of adding BLE support at some point. To date, it just hasn’t been considered high enough priority to justify the required resources to support.

Actually, TBH, the question is:

“If SmartThings doesn’t have immediate plans to add bluetooth support, why even include it in the published marketing specifications (& packaging?) if they are concerned about ensuring that customers are not confused or misled?”


Agreed; that was a screwup and we have been working with them to remove that from the marketing materials or to be careful that it is only stated on the raw specifications and not as stating in any way that the hub supports the protocol.


Thanks, Paul!

There have been a ton of posts in this Community asking about the supposed “Bluetooth support” in Hub V2, so - I was disappointed to see it mentioned in the specs for V3; 'cuz as much as I hoped to be wrong, I knew it wasn’t actually usable (yet).

Engineering vs Marketing … endless struggle.