Currently my hub is operating autonomously, but I can’t see it in either app or the IDE. My Classic app is looking for a hub, the Samsung app has added two devices but doesn’t have a hub. IDE shows my location - correctly - and ‘true’. I’ve a ticket to support for my V2 Welcome code. But I wonder whether claiming/re-claiming the hub will salvage my programming currently functioning.
I’ve a V2 hub connected to about 40 devices [an eclectic mix], redloro’s programming for Vista20 running on a RPi4, some smart apps, git integration, and a bunch of routines. All the routines are currently running.
I foolishly didn’t recognize that my Samsung account OWNED my ST programming. When problems arose with their site, I deleted my account knowing that it could be reinstated using the same email. I could still log onto IDE with Smartthings. All of a sudden, wrong. So yes, I’ve some work to do by my own hand.
The questions really comes down to can I save any of the programming by reclaiming the hub? If so, how? If not does it make sense to start anew with an updated hub. The current hub, user error not withstanding, as worked fine to date ?
Thanks for any guidance
Not really, IMHO. The v3 hub has half the CPU/RAM of the v2 hub, and no battery backup (FWIW). If you really want to connect the hub to your home network via Wi-Fi, then yes, the v3 Hub has that feature.
The v3 Hub is also reported to have stronger Z-Wave security, but I am not sure whether or not Samsung has enabled that feature yet.
Neither of them use the Bluetooth radios or USB ports.
Thanks for the verification. I was reluctant to ‘upgrade’ and don’t really need another wifi. Since my real goal is to keep most everything local, more ram/cpu is what is important. It’s funny the hub is still churning away with all programs and the apps can’t see it to stop. Not an ideal but proof of local durable operations.
Per Hal above, I’m going to return to support and try to get this fixed without re-entering each and every one.
As promised, I’ve contacted Support and with multiple exchanges it turns out I’ve no options but to start again, from scratch. Even though the hub is mine, never owned by any other, and continues to act on my programming, no dice. They were very prompt, patient as I kept trying to avoid the inevitable with questions, but they remained firm and unyielding. My previous hub info is toast.
Some processes need to continue for a week or so, so I will begin mapping the path of the rebuild. I have a mix of Zigbee and Z-wave, so some Zigbee repeaters will probably begin the process. Also wall switches will be next as they are also repeaters for Z-wave.
The fact that there’s no backup/restore or migration functionality is the only thing that’s keeping me on my v1 hub. It’s also the exact reason I’ll be leaving SmartThings for another platform as soon as my v1 hub dies (which I know will happen eventually) or if it can’t provide me with some feature or functionality that I need.
Without a migration function, there’s no reason for me to stick in the SmartThings ecosystem. Switching to something else will be exactly as difficult as migrating to a different SmartThings hub would be.
So maybe take this moment to look around at other options. If local execution is important to you, look at Hubitat.
In researching solutions to my issue, I realized just what you’ve said. To ‘upgrade’ is to demolish and rebuild. This was not a pleasant discovery and why I’ve been persistent with Service, there has to be a way. Hell, it’s a link/element in a database, geez.
Have downloaded some material as discovery for Habitat and will review. May be more tech than I’ve worked in a while, but I’m open to a platform I can revive if necessary. Since the Zombie hub is churning away, I have some time to better understand what’s next.
Thanks.
I’m not sure but the best place to ask would be the Hubitat forum. Someone over there might have done it already. Both SmartThings and Hubitat can use Java-based device handlers and apps, so people have had some luck porting custom code across. But it’s not a seamless process.
Already over there, not a thing. However, there seems to be some effort to include STHM events into the bridge to Hubitat. If so, ST would become a child of Hubitat for, ultimately, one service - ST to communicate to eyezon that communicates with Honeywell. All local. Just have to be sure no updates are implemented. ;>)
Update:
I’ve received a message from STCService. They have offered to work with me to attempt the reclamation operation. The offer is an interesting and one I’m considering in that while there doesn’t seem to be a known or clear path, finding one would be helpful for a bunch of folks. I just don’t want to brick my V2 if it can be helped. This was a singular and direct offer from the ST Service group and much appreciated.
Sat down last night a listed my setup, devices, mfg, location., interface in prep for either path. I’ve some critical processes that will revert to analog.
Also looked at Hubitat and found it interesting but not for me at this time. I’ve a Honeywell Vista integration that is only available on ST. It can be bridged to Hubitat, but from what I see, the states are not yet transmitted; and no actions can bridge back to ST.
I’ll post if and when we begin the journey into the dark night of reclamation. If so, it seems this post might be better positioned in another thread. I’m new to participating instead of researching, so any suggestion would be appreciated.
FYI - The Hubitat Community created “HubConnect” integration is bi-directional.
I am not a Honeywell Vista user, but again there seems to be some community integrations available. Not sure if either of these would work for you or not.
Thanks for the correction. Still a journey in self-awareness. But see the two platforms less as alternatives and more as options. Still early. I’ve spent a lot of time with ST and reasonably comfortable with the foibles. Hubitat is a new platform [to me] with a lot of unknowns, from devices to api’s.
I was able to view more information last night and found a possible direct Vista integration, actually using the ST integration tools. Haven’t read the full thread to understand the issues and durability yet, but do see an possible path.
Currently and depending on the process and risks, I’ll probably attempt the resurrection of the ST Hub. It should be a quicker path functionality, the learning curve for H is unknown but certain to be steeper than ST at this point. But until I hear from ST about moving forward, I’ll continue to look at H as the possible future if not the present.
