For all Ubiquiti fans:
2 Likes
Oh boy... Another proprietary closed source LORA system like YoLink.
Hard pass for me, and I do use other Ubiquiti equipment....
2 Likes
Thanks for sharing. Always nice to have more options available!
2 Likes
Not exactly the same. If the video is to be believed, it supports sending a webhook, which makes integrating it with other systems a little easier.
It would be nice if that webhook could be sent locally with no cloud involvement all the way from the sensor detecting an event to the webhook being sent.
3 Likes
My guess is that is exactly how it will work - all local. I know the UniFi doorbell can easily be integrated using webhooks to allow another local system to be notified when someone presses the doorbell, or uses the fingerprint reader, etc... This is how folks have recently integrated the fingerprint reader with other systems like Hubitat and Home Assistant to automatically unlock their Zigbee/Z-Wave deadbolts.
Hopefully, Ubiquiti will stick with this 100% local option for integration with other systems.
3 Likes
While I'm still not particularly interested in being locked into a single vendor, I agree that if it can be used 100% locally then that makes it better than yolink currently is.
Assuming you can actually get the sensors and they aren't out of stock for the 1st year like most of Ubiquiti's equipment. LOL.
Still not sure why they bothered to announce the gateway, when the devices don't come until later in the year. But whatever.
3 Likes
Agreed
1 Like
My guess is they're trying to generate FOMO to pause people about other HA purchases, and sell out of the gateways before they even have any devices that work with them. Based on previous experience with Unifi hardware availability...
Well, I guess existing users of their BLE devices can use the gateway... So it isn't COMPLETELY useless before the new sensors are released.
1 Like
All this really does is make me wonder how much more complex my Protect drivers will get and how many more child devices I will need to make... I need dynamic capabilities and attributes!
ESPECIALLY since I work with Protect over the API, webSockets, and now allow for some WebHook stuff... Ugh. I think I am one of the few people that bothered to buy their original sensor (or floodlight). However, $129 just for the gateway with no idea how much the individual sensors will be... outside of my budget already... Guess I will just have to see once people start getting some and can pass me the data to add in.
3 Likes
I would recommend trying to simply use the built-in Hubitat Child Device Drivers as much as possible, wherever possible. This has simplified my support efforts on several integrations that I created in the past.
It does result in much more simplified child devices, though. However, just how much detail does one need for a leak or contact sensor? Let the UniFi Protect app provide additional details to the user, like battery levels, etc... I prefer to focus on just the attributes that Hubitat needs to accomplish the automations I want, like turning on/off lights, closing a water valve, etc...
3 Likes
I think its great we are seeing more LoRa gear. Sensors in Unifi with some distance will be nice for Protect. The more players like Ubiquiti and Shelly offering LoRa the more we will see.
Considering I already have a lot of child drivers created (more for the Network side than the Protect side though) it was more rhetorical than anything. I would use the built-in drivers if they matched up well enough. I am just not counting on it yet. 
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
