Yeah, my non-techie neighbor was so impressed with my stuff that he went out and bought a HE. I warned him there would be a learning curve and he agreed he would be up for the challenge. That was a long time ago. I've offered to help but eyes glaze over quick once I start in on the details. I'm pretty sure you have to have this stuff in your blood.
That being said, I agree with post, too much clicking.
Agreed. "...a big reason", but not the only reason. Still, would better / more focus on UI help? I think it would.
@bravenel FWIW, Bruce, I think you folks are dramatically better at UI than your competitors, largely because of dashboards. I've purchased three HE hubs in the last few months and have two perfectly good ISY-994s now sitting unused on a shelf because of that. So, thanks and congrats.
I don't have any idea how big the market for folks like me might be, but personally I'm in that middle ground of being willing to devote the time to have an automated home (for 15+ years), but being less technical than a true "coder" (I've vowed to learn for years now, but too much other stuff gets in the way).
Anyway, would I like to see an easier to use but still powerful RM? Well, yeah. But do I think that as a whole Hubitat is the best system available? Yep!
The "average" person just doesn't (yet) understand the complexity of what they are getting into or really even what they want to do. This is a problem with home automation in general. I blame a super fragmented market, over-hyping of HA technologies (while hiding the true complexities) and the wide availability of super cheap but incompatible devices.
I understand that some feel that cheap stuff actually drives innovation and is a "gateway" into the larger HA world and I agree to a certain extent but the limitations and issues of said devices can also have a negative effect on the public's perception. Also thanks to the relatively low initial cost people seem to be unwilling to pay for professionals for help with design and implementation - so when their system fails or almost sort of works the frustration and problems are magnified.
Yes there is a learning curve for any system.. RM is a very good attempt to balance the technical side with ease of use. It's not everyone's cup of tea but has certainly demonstrated it's effectiveness and flexibility - and is constantly improving.
Like many I'm tempted to deviate slightly from the predominantly UI/UX focus of the original post....
I think like many situations in life where you are given a blank canvas, whether it be IT systems or more generally, finding the solution to a problem or creating something new and innovative can seem daunting, often due to the number of options available and/or the level of knowledge and lateral thinking required. Equally, for developers to provide users of an IT system with a multi-purpose platform that is also tailored enough that it can serve up the most relevant options in a meaningful way, to users with varying skill levels, across a variety of situations.... that is no easy task! Let alone any limitations that may be out of the developers control. As someone who has worked in Business Intelligence / Reporting for about 15 years, I can understand both a users perspective in getting frustrated by the limitations of a tool, but also the scale of what developers of those systems are being asked to deliver.
In terms of HE and RM specifically, I think it is worth noting that (I think) it has often been suggested that users should look to use the built in apps as much as possible, and only when these apps don't provide the necessary outcome that RM is the fallback option. Aside from the performance reasons, these built in apps allow for a much more targeted interface given that the scope of what they are trying to deliver is much narrower. That said, I haven't taken this route yet, but I intend to make the shift sometime soon.
Simon
This is partially right, and partially not. Motion Lighting came into being because it does much more than RM in its specific motion lighting use case. To accomplish what a single ML instance can do would take numerous rules -- what a pain that is, especially when you want to change something.
The "performance" issue about RM is blown out of proportion in many posts. It incurs an additional overhead relative to Motion Lighting of around 75 msecs. Ironically, the most time sensitive automations are motion lighting, as we see the result -- it's in our face. Most automations are not that time sensitive, and it doesn't really make much difference how long they take. Consider for example, changing mode or changing a thermostat setting. These happen infrequently, and who cares about an extra tenth of a second?
But, as many of you know, I'm a big believer in the KISS principle for home automation. Simpler is better than complex, less is more. I only use RM for weird stuff there is no other way to do, and none of my rules are very complicated. Having said that, I agree, its UI can be a pain point. However, what it does is non-trivial, and a new UI will someday be a major undertaking, to say the least.
For the record, I care very deeply about that tenth of a second.
A good way to get beginners on board is by easy-to-use presets. Currently with everything in HE you definitely have to RTFM. But a good set of presets (like maybe in Simple Automation) that you can implement with the click of a button would both get people using it, and also potentially create some HA standards.
On the other hand presets are also kind of basic and not everyone might agree on basic use cases, so there's that.
Yes, performance was more of a passing comment, thanks for clarifying that one...
KISS was more front of my mind and relevant for this conversation...
Absolutely. I would add one more thing: protocols that require too much technical information to implement properly.
The average HA user should not be required to have a degree in RF engineering or computer programming. Things like repeaters, mesh networks and for/next loops are not in the world of normal people.
It could take decades before this changes. It took a very long time before homes were built with standardized electrical systems, all using the same color codes, conductor sizes, receptacle configurations, mounting dimensions, etc. Likewise for telephone and and cable infrastructure, HVAC, etc. Every thermostat you buy today uses the same wiring scheme and color codes.
Buy a HA product today, and you better buy an Ouija board to help you configure it, and a string of garlic to wear around your neck to ward off the mesh demons.
At some point, every new house will probably have a HA controller as a part of the building's standard infrastructure. It will be compatible with standards set by some body such as NEMA or IEEE or the like, and manufacturers will insure their products comply. When HA is mainstream, Incompatible products won't survive in the marketplace.
Will this sort of HA utopia happen in our lifetime? Probably not. In some cases, it took government intervention like the AT&T antitrust suit to force open systems and standardization to happen. Some us here probably remember a time when you couldn't just buy a phone at Walmart and plug in in yourself.
HA needs to be that simple before it's going to become mainstream. In my opinion.
Could you please describe what automations this is important for, besides turning on lights.
Side question
So 75ms is actually closer to a 13th of a second.
This is the overhead of triggering each RM I expect?
Why I am asking is -
I tried the motion lighting app (for my first time) a few weeks ago. It most likely was user error but I couldn’t configure it as I wanted to.
No I have one RM detecting motion and that feeds into another RM that essential mixes the motion lighting ON request with the timer controller.
So I assume I have a total overhead of 150ms.
Turning on lights is pretty much it. I can detect indiscrepancies on that time scale. I guess more importantly it has to be consistent. 75ms one day, and 200ms the next day starts a train of thought that something is amiss. 300ms and I start turning over rocks.
Oh, yes.
I remember my father cadging a standard desk phone from the dumpster at his work (when they were replacing them all, for some reason), and hooking it up on his desk in our basement as a second phone. He disconnected the ringer, of course, because we'd heard they could detect extra phones you weren't paying them monthly for by the ringer current used, but we could hear the ringer upstairs just fine, and it saved him running up the stairs to answer it.
That was late '60s, so the statute of limitations has probably expired. 
Ma Bell had a looong memory, though.
i have had friends that see the automations and definately want it but have kind of discouraged them from now as they are not at all technical and i cannot see them tinker with it at all. They also asked me maybe to do it but I cannot se myself trying to support them long distance over the phone.
Went through that with my parents computers and phones and it is not fun.
Amen. What makes me sad about the state of HA right now is that for it to truly work out of the box, you've got to get locked into a particular ecosystem..."Works with Alexa," or "Works with Google Assistant." And even that just enables specific appliances or gadgets.
I like HE because it works "out of the box," but I absolutely recognize the fact that I'm still doing a lot of work...I'm installing outlets, building dashboards, writing rules, writing a few custom apps, maybe some custom drivers. But then, I geek this stuff.
Right now, we're the ham radio operators of the HA world (and yes, I'm a ham, too...).
AHA, we caught you. I'll be promptly turning you in, as well as my expired Dad, he did the same thing. I despise people who take advantage of our gigantic, very nice, freedom loving, technical oligarchs. And don't you worry, on high priority matters like this, the FBI solves these cases in under 24 hours 
What is the path forward for the Rule Editor? I find it really laborious to create rules.
Is there an API that can be used to build rules? I've been showing my 8 year old daughter some coding in Scratch - she can create rules in that 100x faster than I can in Hubitat. How crazy would it be to try and use Scratch as a UI to the rule editor?
(for those that don't know Scratch - https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/editor/?tutorial=getStarted)
Update: I had previous said "It's crazy what a mess the UI is." for which I apologize. I very much appreciate what the rule engine does and those that helped build it. From my point of view though it still needs significant more work on the UI.
Rule Machine is what it is. It’s not a programming language. There’s not an easy way that an external app could spit out rules for RM to use. Hubitat’s priorities are focused on other things. Some people find it easier to write apps in Groovy rather than use RM.
Bruce Ravenel, who wrote RM, has always said that anyone in the community is welcome to write a replacement as a community-contributed app.
You could always look at Event Engine and webCoRE to see if they work better for you - believe both are available through HPM. Nice thing about the HE platform is that we have options. (Also can run Node-Red from a Pi if you don't mind adding another piece of hardware.
Thanks @672southmain. I apologize if my post seemed offensive, I understand it's really hard to make a good UX for this sort of thing.
You answered my question though - this isn't a priority for Hubitat. Personally I find that really interesting, from my point of view, rules are really where Hubitat shines (once you get them working 
).
Alexa is already a decent hub, has rules, makes rule suggestions based on AI etc. but, to me, what it's really missing is the more complicated rules. With simple rules you can do stuff that works well 90% of the time, but 10% of the time it's a bad experience. With more complicated rules, you really can achieve experiences that work well 99% of the time.
Anyway, perhaps I'll try switching to Groovy. That actually sounds like a really good solution for me.
Download the Hubitat app
