←back to thread

Nest 1st gen and 2nd gen thermostats no longer supported from Oct 25

(community.hubitat.com)
280 points RyanShook | 5 comments | 05 Sep 25 21:33 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
briHass ◴[06 Sep 25 01:31 UTC] No.45145753[source]▶
I got burned recently by Ecobee in the same way. The problem with 'smart' interfaces for traditionally mechanical devices is that the useable lifetime (support period) of low-end microprocessors and software, especially online APIs, is often far shorter than the mechanical device it's attached to.

Similar to how people that keep cars around for 10+ years are stuck with dated and worthless 'infotainment' systems, Google and Ecobee can't even honor their product for long enough to outlast the HVAC units.

What burns me is that it wouldn't be much of an ask for them to push one final (optional) update that would open LAN-only access to core functionality. I and many others in the HA/ESPHome community have written hardware integrations to devices over RS485/UART with unpublished/black-box protocols, so a simple HTTP API would have an integration within days.

It would maybe cost an engineer at Nest/Ecobee a day or two of work, and the goodwill would make me far more likely to purchase a newer model. As it is, I've committed to avoiding (where possible) devices that aren't local-first.

replies(11): >>45145799 #>>45145931 #>>45146011 #>>45146180 #>>45146556 #>>45146647 #>>45146754 #>>45146922 #>>45147255 #>>45147650 #>>45150597 #
dare944 ◴[06 Sep 25 02:43 UTC] No.45146180[source]▶
As an early Nest employee who worked on the first-gen thermostat I can tell you definitively that you're way off base here. That doesn't mean that Google shouldn't have done more to keep these units alive (and indeed that's one of the reasons I left Google). But these devices were designed in 2010-11. Even keeping the Linux kernel up to date with the latest version is a major undertaking. Adding major functionality like Matter compatibility, or even a simple (but secure!) local API, would take a seasoned engineering team a considerable amount of time.

That said, investing in devices that are local first is certainly good advice, provided the APIs are open and well supported.

replies(8): >>45146253 #>>45146377 #>>45146476 #>>45146706 #>>45146721 #>>45146737 #>>45147643 #>>45147709 #
h2zizzle ◴[06 Sep 25 03:01 UTC] No.45146253[source]▶
Recent extreme frustration with Google products in mind, I'm tempted to read the crux of this post as, "Google engineers/designers are incompetent." It might be unfair, but on a day when Google Search, Youtube History Search, and (whaddya know) my Nest Thermostat have all failed me, the temptation is strong.
replies(4): >>45146276 #>>45146297 #>>45146744 #>>45146792 #
1. JustExAWS ◴[06 Sep 25 05:15 UTC] No.45146792{3}[source]▶
If I’m a Google engineer, what motivation do I have to make decisions that keep a device running for a decade?

Even more pertinent, when it gets time to go through the promo process and when I need to prove “impact” and make sure what I’m doing is aligned with the department wide OKRs, why would I want to be on a project supporting old legacy tech that I can’t spin to show how it helped the company’s revenue?

I’ve never worked for Google. But incentives based on the promo culture is endemic to all of BigTech.

And even worse, every company is focused on “AI” these days. If you aren’t part of an initiative that can be said to be AI adjacent, if you care about your career and comp, you shouldn’t touch it with a 10 foot pole.

https://www.warp.dev/blog/problems-with-promotion-oriented-c...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31261488

replies(2): >>45146860 #>>45146862 #
2. lodovic ◴[06 Sep 25 05:29 UTC] No.45146860[source]▶
I would expect a thermostat to last 15+ years across multiple home owners - it should be an improvement over a mechanical one, after all. If that's not adding to Google's bottom line, they shouldn't have "disrupted" that market in the first place.
replies(1): >>45146971 #
3. RHSeeger ◴[06 Sep 25 05:30 UTC] No.45146862[source]▶
> If I’m a Google engineer, what motivation do I have to make decisions that keep a device running for a decade?

Empathy and being a good human being in relation to society. Making devices that look good at first and cause pain later, when it's too late to do anything about it... is bad.

> I need to prove “impact” and make sure what I’m doing is aligned with the department wide OKRs

Fair, and that's a reason to _not_ put in the effort to make longer lasting devices.

> But incentives based on the promo culture is endemic to all of BigTech

And we should be calling them out for it. It's bad in the same way that forced ranking systems are bad; they promote the wrong things.

replies(1): >>45146961 #
4. JustExAWS ◴[06 Sep 25 05:59 UTC] No.45146961[source]▶
Say the employee did want to work on the product in spite of it not being in their best interest. How are they going to get the buy in and the team to make the change and the support to get it pushed to devices in the field?

And no one works for a privacy invading ad tech company because they want to make the world a better place. It’s purely about making a shit ton of money.

> And we should be calling them out for it. It's bad in the same way that forced ranking systems are bad; they promote the wrong things.

Despite the newest LP about being the best employer, Amazon has been the shittiest of the BigTech employer as long as I can remember. Their reputation hasn’t changed anything about their profitability or stock price.

Before you ask if I knew that, why did I work there. I was 46 at the time, it was my 8th job out of 10 and it was purely remote and a “field by design role” that was remote until a year after I left. It was purely a money and resume play.

5. JustExAWS ◴[06 Sep 25 06:00 UTC] No.45146971[source]▶
https://killedbygoogle.com/