←back to thread

280 points RyanShook | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.229s | source
Show context
xp84 ◴[] No.45144667[source]
The shameful part is that the only thing that even remotely (no pun intended) needs a server to even be online, is the out-of-home control, just for NAT traversal. It should be free to Google for these to have at least in-home smart functionality forever.

Well, that, and the moving target of updating an "app" every year for all the breaking changes Google and (especially) Apple do to the mobile OS. Although honestly I'd rather have a QR code that links you to a PWA hosted on the thermostat itself.

replies(2): >>45144891 #>>45144914 #
ryandrake ◴[] No.45144891[source]
This should be pretty much true for every "connected" device out there. They should all have a mode that works by directly connecting over the local LAN. Why do device manufacturers refuse to support this configuration?

If I want to change the volume of my "smart speaker" from my phone that's also on my LAN, it shouldn't require a round trip to a server on the Internet, or an account with credentials, or any of that nutty stuff.

replies(2): >>45145115 #>>45159521 #
1. lstamour ◴[] No.45145115[source]
It’s crazy that Sonos used to* have local wifi mesh networking and they decided “the cloud is better”.

* technically still does, but they tried to switch before they backpedaled