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…? https://mashable.com/2018/08/13/samsung-smartthings-mesh-wifi/
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. 
)
2 Likes
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)?
4 Likes
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:
- The Wi-Fi chip selected is a Wi-Fi/BLE combo chip that we were able to source for a good price.
- 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.
10 Likes
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?”
6 Likes
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.
4 Likes
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.
6 Likes
So, based on everything we know… no real reason to upgrade from v2 to v3 unless
- you really need Wi-Fi home network connectivity
- you a really worried about hackers (i.e. improved security)
- you prefer a 50% slower processor and half the memory
- you despise the 4 x AA battery backup of the v2 Hub
- you are a glutton for punishment and want to rebuild your whole system by hand since there is no migration tool
Three years after the v2 hub was released and this is all the v3 hub has to offer? 
8 Likes
The list price of $69 is pretty impressive, actually. Anything that reduces purchase friction and helps SmartThings to grow will eventually payoff… I hope.
(There have been plenty of indications over the past few months (post Christmas rush) that SmartThings growth is/has been very stale. Very low activity in this Community, no growth in “Likes” of the SmartThings Facebook Page and so on…).
3 Likes
The v2 hub has been on sale numerous times for $50. I agree the $70 price point is helpful, but I don’t see it driving sales through the roof. The hub has really never been the major cost of a home automation system. The devices are where the vast majority of money is spent.
4 Likes
So what will?
Reliable ease of use. But nobody is close to that yet. 
5 Likes
Don’t forget the Connect Home and Pro released last year.
1 Like
I have zero desire to integrate my hub directly to my router. When either device fails, You lose both. Plus, I really like my Asus RT-AC86 router running AsusWRT Merlin firmware.
6 Likes
99.9% service uptime.
Or, if not possible, more local execution 
2 Likes
No matter you like it or not, they did released these products. On the other hand, you don’t have to use both the mesh network and the smartthings hub functions on them.
2 Likes