Of these three hubs, only one adopted a non standard zigbee profile (iris v1), but later supported zha and zll like the others, hue being primarily a bulb hub, doesn't support zha devices.
I don't agree with this, zigbee devices of a given type are far more interoperable than their zwave counterparts, largely due to zigbees more highly defined reporting and configuration schema.
From a device and hub vendors perspective this translates into less development costs.
I see this as a benefit to the end consumer, not a detraction.
Not that it matters, but personally while I have an equal number of zigbee and zwave devices, and having written a significant number of drivers for both protocols, if I were to start from scratch i would go all Zigbee.
Another less known, zigbee advantage being battery devices they sleep differently than zwave, zigbee devices per spec check into their parent for pending messages every 7.x seconds max, zwave battery devices have no spec driven check in interval. This is why many zwave drivers have pending status bits indicating the remaining unconfigured parameters, while none of the the zigbee devices require this.
With zigbee devices you can push configuration changes without the need to manually or programitacally wake the device up.
