Just crossed by this option, seems there is an update though there wasn't any notification, no details from / to which firmware...
Is it a new hub and if yes - can we have changes log?
I just clicked Update on mine and it states the z-wave firmware is already up to date.
3 Likes
This is for the Z-Wave radio firmware, not the "main" hub firmware that it sounds like you're talking about in the rest of your post. To my knowledge, there has only been one such update, and it was shortly after the release of the C-7 and has been automatically installed for some time (and likely preinstalled on new hubs by now), so there's nothing really to do on this screen anymore. But maybe again some day. 
1 Like
you are wrong Sir.
Put your glasses and look again at the screenshot I've provided. Couple of days ago it was showing "Up-to-date", now seems is different.
And yes, it is for the main zwave HUB radio.
Go ahead and click it. You will probably see a message that it was already up to date. (I just did on mine.) I think this is the way it has always been displayed--you don't really know until you get a bit farther. Nothing in your screenshot really suggests to me that there is actually an update.
3 Likes
Click it... Very unlikely anything will happen. Mine looked the same, I clicked it, and a few moments later it stated it was already up to date. I am running 2.2.6.133 on my hub.
3 Likes
Indeed... Too bad yet no fix on zwave. Zigbee works great but zWave veeery picky and unreliable (ST was very stable with same devices I use now with Hubitat, tho ST is pretty much dead now).
Same here! Clicked it and it said up to date. I think we will get a new FW update when the LR stuff gets added but that's been put on hold for a bit sadly.
1 Like
Zwave LR is getting closer, as they will now allow manufacturers to pre-certify Zwave LR devices. I would assume that means the 2021A draft spec will come out of draft at some point.
Not sure if it will happen before or after the intellectual property review (IPR), though. That isn't scheduled to be done until June. Can't have any 'officially' certified Zwave LR devices until that is complete (and verified to not have issues that need to be resolved).
So maybe mid-year?
That said, there are still new firmware coming out periodically that hubs can use. 7.15 firmware (that supports Zwave LR) is on its 2nd release already.
Some surprises people may not know about Zwave LR as it stands today
- requires pairing via Smartstart
- requires S2 Authenticated pairing
- Only supported in US markets today (will expand to other markets soon)
3 Likes
Is it your personal estimation that this "LR" will be a "game changer"?
Do you think that this will fit a market niche that has hitherto not been exploited?
Personally, I'm not convinced that in the retail/consumer arena this is a "missing" capability (but I'm willing to listen to arguments on this!)
Long term, yes. Zwave LR completely changes the zwave game - no more mesh, everything point to point with the hub. Most of the advantages of Lutron RadioRA without the butt ugly devices (don't get the pitch forks out, I'm jsut kidding!).
Point to point vs mesh has some serious advantages when it comes to latency, device-to-device interactions/interference, signals repeating through bad firmware or devices goes away, etc. I expect that as long as you can keep the signal strength acceptably high, zwave lr will perform better and more consistently than mesh zwave. With the obvious downside being if you CAN'T keep the signal strength high enough, you are SOL as there are no repeaters that can be deployed.
I already use LoRaWAN (which is very similar to Zwave LR) for long distance devices. But I can't make every device type myself - so I look forward to more consumer oriented Zwave LR devices filling the void for things I can't currently get in LoRaWAN (light switches/dimmers and door locks being prime examples).
Yes, for outdoor/long range devices. Soil moisture sensors, gate contacts/motors, etc.
3 Likes
In terms of your two points:
- In effect you're admitting that the existing zwave (mesh) implementation has some serious shortcomings because the LR approach is a complete repudiation of at least 10 years of Zwave approach. Hmmm... You're right to preface this point with the words "Long term". A complete reconfigure of every Zwave device out there is a Very Long Term thing. At least 5-10 years.
- This is the whole essence of the mesh approach - you only need a repeater every 30-50 feet. I just installed Ecolink (Zigbee) contact sensors on the outside gates of a mansion in the neighbourhood. The farthest gate must be at least 50 feet from the house. I surprised myself by finding that I had no issues. Please note, that in my personal opinion, this LR is a tremendous capability in the industrial arena. I'm just not sure it's needed in the consumer space.
One last point - will Zwave have 5-10 years to reconfigure, or will the competition blow it away before then?
Only time will tell...
As I understand it, LR devices will be able to coexist with non-LR devices and both connect to one hub. LR would be an option. I would find it useful for the use case you mentioned - devices some distance away due to being outside of my mansion. If the co-existence thing works, it could ease the transition considerably.
3 Likes
Not really. There are availability and extension benefits to a mesh network when the signal strength and range is low or interference is variable. Mesh has its advantages for sure.
I will say, though, that if the radio and processor technology existed to make battery powered devices (or a reasonable size) with 1km+ range and multi-year battery life back in 1999 when zwave was 1st introduced they probably wouldn't have bothered making a mesh based protocol at all.
Not really. We have protocols today that cover industrial space just fine. I've been using long range 900MHz devices for 15+ years in industrial applications - don't need Zwave LR for that, and I doubt a consumer oriented protocol like zwave would make any in-roads in industrial settings.
However, for commercial or multi-tenant use zwave LR has a lot of potential. If you are a property owner and trying to cover a whole apartment complex, or a building of a complex, something like zwave lr has quite an advantage over zigbee or old zwave - regardless how many repeaters you have.
Remember on zwave LR you can also connect many MORE devices (1000 in 1st iteration, up to 4000 later). Again, really useful for campus or multi-tenant implementations.
But even for a normal house, not going through repeaters reduces points of failure. How valuable that is, I dunno. But less hops is usually better than more hops.
Again, let me stress that "zwave is not the only dog in the show".
And, as we all know, it's not the best technical approach that "wins the day" (e.g. Beta & VHS).
I think that you're right that LR represents a major technical achievement and breakthru.
I'd like to see the Hub that manages 1000 Zwave LR devices.
I'm not sure that any commercially available Hub can be scaled up to handle that. Of course, we'll have to see...
But does it do anything for zwave in the marketplace? Yes, having less (or no) repeaters is very good.
However, the only question that matters: Does this technology rise to the point of a "market winner"? I'm not so sure... Doesn't seem that way on the surface, but only time will tell...
Your phrasing implies there will be a "market winner". I'm not sure there will be. There may always be multiple, and room for multiple based on function and need.
Obviously one option may sell more volume than another, but it could be a Windows vs Mac vs Chromebook vs Linux in the end. 
Or a Thread vs Zigbee vs Zwave vs Lutron vs Control4 vs WiFi vs Bluetooth vs ???. Beats me. My crystal ball isn't that good.
