Love every part of my C7. I would love to see a C9 that use Power Over Ethernet. Eliminate unnecessary cables is always a good thing!
1 Like
They talked about this in the last Hubitat Live episode for the release of the C-8. I'd say it's unlikely. 
But the good news is that you can basically do it yourself with an inexpensive adapter.
3 Likes
That's exactly what I have done. Works flawlessly so far!
4 Likes
The C8 is only, what 2 months old? I would cay a C9 would (A) We first need a Z-wave 900 chip to be released (at least on the 7 and 8 that referred to the Z-wave chip) and (B) About 2 years to pass. (roughly how long it was from the 7 to 8) . In the mean time POE splitters like this work just fine. All of my hubs are on them.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B087F4QCTR?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details&th=1
2 Likes
+1 for the POE splitter idea. Makes it much easier to have a single UPS powering several HE hubs, APs, cameras, etc., as well.
A lot of us use POE splitters. Just be aware there seems to be some issues with poe splitters using unifi poe switches with the C8 (doesn't seem to affect the c5/c7) No one is sure why yet... I use one with my c8 and a Cisco Catalyst 3750-x 48 port POE switch. It's been flawless.
I use PoE splitters with my C3, C7, and C8 hubs and Ubiquiti UniFi PoE network switch without any issues whatsoever... however, I am not a Z-Wave user. 
I also use PoE splitters for my Philips Hue bridge and my Lutron Caseta Smartbridge Pro2. Again, no issues.
1 Like
I use poe for my hue, c8, and Lutron caseta but i use a lot of z-wave but don't use unfi. I think it's only the z-wave reported to be an issue with that combination...
1 Like
Same...I have splitters on above (and also a C7) and do use a Ubiquiti ER12 router and Unifi APs, but my POE isn't provided by Unifi.
1 Like
I use unifi ap's but that's it. I've never been a fan of their other stuff.
1 Like
I suspect it's a certain design/manufacturer of POE adapters that are leading to a fault. If you have splitters from another manufacturer, and no troubles, and there are links to known working splitters, then you're golden. Some manufacturers cut costs (imagine that) and don't filter the resulting DC perfectly enough, I suspect. It's just a hypothesis at this time though.
2 Likes
That's why I'd love the Hubitat crew to build in POE. I love just being able to run CAT 6 cables for my cameras and WAPs.
Be aware that most budget POE splitters only handle 100Mbps and if you need 1Gb then you should check the model can do that. Not important for HE.
I would guess that the chance of built-in POE will remain slim-to-none until the cost of built-in POE becomes equal or cheaper than a plain old Ethernet port.
5 Likes
Honestly, I don't know how it much it would cost to add, but Raspberry PI's have had this feature for awhile now, and the POE Splitters are fairly cheap on Amazon, so I would guess it can't cost too much?
This isn’t relevant to what it would cost them to include PoE support in a future hardware revision when working directly with a manufacturer in China.
And furthermore, cost is probably only one consideration that has led the staff to decide not to support it so far, I’ll bet there are other reasons too.
I get it, you want PoE. I’d use it too, my C7 hub is powered by a PoE splitter. But there’s not much left to talk about…
1 Like
I would like quite a few things in a new model Hubitat hub, including PoE support. I know that the Nabu Casa team recently learned quite a bit about adding PoE support to their new Home Assistant Yellow hub. Their initial PoE hardware design caused too much electromagnetic noise, and I believe they failed their initial Radio Frequency compliance testing. This resulted in a redesign and a significant delay in being able to ship the product to customers. Perhaps Hubitat is just trying to keep things simple, in order to get the product through manufacturing and testing as quickly as possible? It also helps to keep costs low, especially for a feature that will probably only be used by less than ~20% of their users.
4 Likes
Bert and Mark are both right. I was wrong. Apologies!
"Bert" is actually Robert.
But I like the idea of calling him Bert, if we can just find an Ernie. Love those guys.
