Interestingly, the email they sent me says this...
... so they need to be a little careful if they do intend to renage on this in the future...
(so much for "no more confusion")
At least good to know that they are listening.
It always doesn’t work out this way but there is no downside to providing feedback to a company.
Can’t complain unless you’re willing to provide that feedback and by the looks of it ...many of us did!
I recently got the few IFTTT routines I use dialed it. Had some great advice here on letting HE do most of the logic and i have my ACs turn off and back on flawlessly now when electricity spikes and returns to normal. Well worth 2 bucks a month for what I save but as noted prior....I wouldn’t be willing to pay 10 for that convenience.
May set up some more now that I have a pro account ( for 2 bucks a month).
Cheers.
1 Like
@HAL9000 got that one right - if they decide to jack up the price, they'll just sunset IFTTT Pro and replace it with a different, more expensive tier of service.
2 Likes
" IFTTT Elite "
I'm calling it now.
1 Like
So far, my applets are still working and I definitely have more than 3 user created. I wonder if they will be shut off in October and will be forced to pick 3 or pay up?
it seems that we need to pay attention. I am sure for the time being that HE will stick to its guns, but they are also giving us the option of a sub soon. so take it as you can i suppose.
I don’t quite get what he was trying to say, other than he seems to be inherently suspicious of all subscription models. He just kinda stated the obvious, companies make money one way or another, and we all have different needs that factor into what we consider to be valuable or not.
For an optional service that has an ongoing cost to provide, it makes sense to pass that cost onto users that find it to be valuable.
I’m going to go look into that underwear subscription that he mentioned 
.
2 Likes
everything is becomeing subscription based, I will admit that , and I understand that this is how we make money.
the hardest part for me , is picking and choosing what I need and what I can do some other way that wont cost.
I am worried about HE having something that I want that I will need to pay for that I thihnk I might have now. I don't know at this moment.
I might not be following 100%, but if hubitat develops something we want, doesn’t everyone win if they get paid for their effort?
If it’s not valuable, however you assess that, don’t pay for it.
I agree, but since that was not an option when we got it, I can't complain too much. if they take away web Dash access , then I will get pretty mad.
On that note, it would be cool if they did have a service where we can actually connect to the apps and other parts of the HE remotely without having to remote in via a computer or VPN. (Though VPN's are pretty simple these days and come with many routers)
I think over the last 10 years everyone was getting everything for free from Google but the price was your privacy, many companies tired the same thing and it didn't work and now we are seeing the cost of running businesses and services though their subscription models.
Nothing that I see is changing in their business plan of Hubitat, nothing they do forces you to use the internet except for the time service at bootup and software.
Think about "planned obsolescence" it was a business strategy the kept people buying newer versions of the same device as the devices continued to evolve. Providing a continuous revenue stream for the makers or cars, appliances, etc.
Now we are no longer "planned obsolescent" and software diving continuous innovation requires a revenue stream. And that comes from "value add" services. The cloud backup makes sense because how many times have you never taken a backup of your computer and lost files? Online backup service offer "piece of mind' that it's being taken care of for you.
I don't have a problem paying for various services, including content. My problem is when the payment model doesn't fit my usage. For example one online newspaper has gone subscription only. About twice a year I would really like to read one of their articles. I'd pay £1 per read. But I don't want to take out a monthly subscription even though that would make their articles probably less than a penny a read because I still wouldn't read more than two or three articles. I spend a lot of money on an online game I play, but that is when I have the whim to buy some premium content. If I'd had to subscribe monthly I'd probably not have played at all.
Maybe all services should have a subscription and a pay per use model, to appeal to everyone rather than losing the half who don't like that model.
Yes and getting back to the IFTTT price model of 9.95 a month. The largest complaint from the community was the quality of their services in the form of response time. In addition devices makers leaving the platform, Tuya Smart Life, etc. and the limited number of automations that have been exposed by device makers and the effort to build your own. Would that be worth more than a discounted Netflix or Amazon subscription?
If I had an obscure use case with a device or service in the cloud that I couldn't live without I wouldn't want to pay a premium since I am only using a single part of the service but I do have to cover the costs of that platform. I think it was smart that they sent out the "feeler" for what they thought their service was worth and are now looking at what the market is willing to pay. The market does work when $$$'s are at risk.
The main issue I have (besides giving up control and data to some corporate entity) is the longevity of said service. I bought into the HE ecosystem because I want to treat my setup like an integrated and (mostly) permanent fixture of my house - something that in of itself could just run without too much intervention other than periodic maintenance/battery replacements. Will I be able to use the service as-is in 5 years? 10 years?
I agree (I definitely would not buy it if the radio backups were local/free). And that is their decision as a company. Users can buy into it, or not - but it is Hubitat's decision in the end how to offer the service.
User's should feel free to lobby their opinion, though, of course.
2 Likes
Well, I don't see those two things as mutually exclusive.
I think there are some that legitimately would prefer the backups to be in the cloud automatically, so they don't have to do it themselves, or worry about where they are stored.
But I agree that the backups can be perfectly safe/secure locally as well with some work. 
Not as often as I'd like. Phone companies seem to manage both contract and PAYG but not most other types of company.
1 Like
That is the ultimate question. My android phone is either all to Google or piecemeal backup's and makes moving to another phone difficult. And do you trust their back to restore with so many different types and versions of their OS in place. And since they aren't charging for it what is there terms on restore. Actually if you read it, it's best effort, no guarantee of functionality of the restore process or that apps will work as before.
With a user initiated backup and restore is the vendor supporting that process and under what conditions? MS deprecated the legacy backup format for a new one that is more "cloud" friendly. Look at all the folks that wouldn't be able to restore backups if they didn't provide backward compatibility to restore old while having to force them to move to their newer solution.
Thinking about this under what conditions can a class action be taken if you have a local backup and lose functionality because something happened with the restore? And say that backup wasn't vendor but user? We live in a very litigious society.
Yes it's great to have choices, service providers are looking for revenue and reducing risks for litigation, and providing well defined service levels. that make the consumer feel comfortable. We as technology folks don't think like the average consumers.
LOL. Won't waste my time watching that one either. His videos are worse than click bait.
2 Likes
