I like Hubitat because it will still work even if I lose my Internet connection. I do incorporate Amazon Echo devices in my system and they require Internet, so I would lose the ability to do voice commands, but everything else would continue to work. I have one application that is "mission critical." I have an RO water purification system that works on a timer in Hubitat, but also has a water sensor that will turn the system off early if the reservoir level gets too high. I would never attempt doing something like that if I had to rely on an Internet connection. With local control, it works reliably.
2 Likes
If I had a power I would prohibit any/all cloud-based automation and
required all API to be open/published by law.
1 Like
I think the flexibility is the key with any system like HE. Obviously HE is not unique in that way, but compared to, in my case Google's platform, the list of devices that can be integrated into the HE hub and included in automations I expect far out-weighs what you can achieve on alternative cloud-hosted platforms like IFTTT, etc. Like @aaiyar spelt out, the ability to have triggers and actions across such a variety of devices is a very powerful feature.
The other major feature is the level of customisation you can bring to your setup. As much as IFTTT allows you to create rules, it is a very restricted, narrow use case, with Google only slightly more sophisticated at the moment, in my opinion. That simplicity and accessibility has a certain appeal, don't get me wrong, as an introduction to HA or the speed of bringing unrelated services together, it definitely has a place. But once you're hooked, you always want more, hence HE and other platforms provide that next level. Whether it be the variety and complexity of rules you can come up with in RM, or the ability to write custom code like I do, that just does not exist on any of the simpler cloud-hosted systems like Google or IFTTT.
Simon
2 Likes
There are a lot of open-source technology products, but if all intellectual property were to lose legal protections, companies would lose financial incentive to develop new technologies. Although Hubitat could not function without access to the APIs of various sensors and actuators, the technology within Hubitat itself is proprietary.
Apple produces computers that are closed systems for both hardware and software. Microsoft Windows computers function with a combination of closed source and open source software. Linux computers operate primarily as open-source devices. Windows computers represent nearly 3/4 of all installations. Apple Mac computers represent around 10%. Linux installations, which are more common on servers, represent only 2% of home installations. Android make up most of the rest.
If open source is so great, why isn't Linux used more often. I suspect that the reason is that there is little financial incentive to standardize Linux and since anyone can modify the code as they see fit, there are dozens or even hundreds of versions of Linux. Thus, while anyone familiar with Windows can typically go to another Windows computer and use it. That may not be the case with Linux.
One of the goals of Connectivity Standards Alliance is to come up with standards that will insure interoperability of home automation devices. Only time will prove whether the effort is successful.
FWIW, an Open API != open-source. And even if @vitaliy_kh did mean open source, Open Source licenses can and have been enforced, so there is IP protection.
Finally, while, akin to you, I do have a home computer, we are dinosaurs. The world has moved on to smaller multi-functional mobile devices. Our medical students use tablets that have an underlying Linux-based OS. And multiple small devices in my house run some form of Linux (my cable modem, my mesh router, etc). So it has become all-pervasive in homes.
3 Likes
Generally a windowed enviroment is fairly intuitive if you have enough experience to grasp the fundamental "point and click" nature plus a few other concepts. I would argue that users going between different versions of Windows definitely have had / continue to have issues as well.
Likely due to the chaotic nature of development, licensing confusion, lack of understanding of what opensource is/is not, greed etc a company might internally use opensource but not actively promote it.
Of course in a lot of areas not desktop related - server, super computing, cloud and (for now) mobile, Linux is a very big player and has been for a while. Desktop Users have never really been the primary focus.
1 Like
Local control was my number 1 requirement. Call me paranoid, but I don't trust any online companies with controlling my home.
2 Likes
I don't/didn't want to jump on non-technical discussions such as IPs, Open Source, proprietary
solutions, running business, financials aspects, etc.
My whole point is/was:
Everything what is exposed externally (unless this this 100%+ solution for whatever problem)
must be open, well documented and better to be standardized.
Internally any product (HW and/or SW) could/may have anything company wants (including
patents, IPs and etc.). But externally everything must be open/standardised.
Imagine somebody designed new light bulb. Internally it may have kerosine lighter but
absolutely must have standard socket and at least standard On/Off control.
If any of the above 2 things are proprietary - good luck to sell this product even it is
somewhat superior vs. already existed.
1 Like
I am not even looking for any kind of control what is not local.
As of today I am using SwitchBoat Curtains and Windows/Balcony Shades cloud-based
solutions. Both are just a curtains control which is absolutely non-critical.
And there is an opportunity to get these things under local control.
Ops, I am sorry but I missed your point.
1 Like
