
Emberlight is shutting down, bricking all previously sold hardware - fps
https://www.emberlight.co/blogs/glow/emberlight-is-shutting-down
======
awalton
Proving yet again that the "Internet of Things" won't work until the "Local
Area Network of Things" works. If the "thing" requires the Internet to work,
these kinds of failures will continue plaguing them for eternity.

Sadly the "IoT" market is practically predicated on selling some hideously
expensive service that you don't want or need on top of a piece of hardware
that would be perfectly happy working against a home edge gateway rather than
"the cloud". Approaching a VC asking for money for digital lightbulbs and
dimmers that work against a local server running on a Wifi-router-like-box?
Using a standardized protocol, so you don't need 10 different home edge
gateways to orchestrate different tasks? Get out, we don't even want to hear
it...

Accessing the Internet should _add features_ \- not having the Internet should
not burden or brick the device.

~~~
jasonlaramburu
Except consumers want the ability to control/check their IoT devices when they
are not at home. Most homes in the US do not have a static IP address. Yes,
you could set up OpenVPN on a router and use DDNS, but you would still be
reliant on a 3rd-party DDNS provider that could always go out of business.
Also most home routers supplied by broadband providers do not support OpenVPN.

An admittedly expensive solution would be to use the Ethereum main network to
communicate with the IoT device.

~~~
RpFLCL
A middle ground is have a local-first control, that the company exposes to the
internet via the customer's account.

For example, a local administration page that can be accessed within the LAN,
and which can then be proxied by the provider. In the case that the provider
goes out of business you lose the remote control (unless setting up your own
VPN) but the device won't be bricked.

Unfortunately, I imagine some companies intentionally avoid doing this to
require customers to pay a subscription fee.

~~~
fps
Most of these companies don't have any subscription fees. They just provide
the "free" cloud service for as long as it takes to make a whole bunch of
sales, then shut it down and suddenly all the devices stop working. if you're
selling a $50 device that people have to wire into their home, with an
expected lifetime in years or decades, it's pretty negligent to not provide
for a sustainable service.

~~~
jasonlaramburu
You’re saying it would be more responsible to charge a monthly fee? How could
you compete against those firms that do not charge fees?

~~~
fps
I'd prefer they just let you run the hub/central service yourself, with an
option to have them run it for a fee, yes.

I think we'll start to see regular consumers harmed by some of these start-ups
destroying hardware when they go out of business, and perhaps people will stop
buying them unless there's some protection. Then the "free" solutions will be
looked at suspiciously and hopefully discounted by the tech press and
retailers. Alternately, retailers might be held liable for refunding purchases
of products that stop working before the legally mandated warranty date (such
as in the EU) or by credit card companies in the US, so they'll stop selling
any cloud required garbage.

~~~
jasonlaramburu
It’s possible but sounds pretty optimistic. More likely that the big 5 tech
companies (who can pay for cloud services to function indefinitely) will
consolidate the smaller IoT plays, and offer users a limited feature set for
free, with premium tiers as well.

Also remember that if you’re maintaining the hub yourself it won’t get
security updates.

------
reaperducer
This seems to be a recurring problem in the IoT industry.

I've had dozens of lightbulbs affected by TCP Lighting and Homebrite choosing
not to support them anymore. They can't be accessed from the internet anymore
and their schedule can't be changed.

The worst, though, is TCP. Someone reverse engineered the API to the home hub,
and shortly after TCP pushed a software update to everyone's hub encrypting
the software. Then they terminated the service. So, they bricked the device in
slow motion.

This is why when I buy new bulbs, I'm only going with HomeKit stuff. Apple's
not going anywhere. And while it likes you to have the latest, greatest stuff
it at least provides updates for its iOS devices for five years. Hopefully
that's an indication of the longevity of HomeKit connectivity.

------
BoorishBears
The title strongly implies the hardware is intentionally being bricked.

Being put out of commission by downed servers is still pretty terrible, but
intentionally bricking the devices is a separate further step to me (and has
been done by other companies).

~~~
wlesieutre
They could always have designed their product in a way that doesn't turn into
a brick when the servers disappear.

Call it "negligent bricking"?

~~~
dozzie
No, the proper term is "IoT-grade architecture".

~~~
MrMorden
The "S" in "IoT" stands for security.

------
duckwheat
$30 - $50 plus a paid subscription seems expensive for what is basically a
wifi on/off switch, especially if you wanted to do a whole house.

~~~
_rpd
They did a lot of things right. It seems like they just couldn't compete with
copycats. Maybe they overestimated demand at that price point?

~~~
duckwheat
At $50 a bulb, it would cost me $1550 to do every permanent fixture in my
1600sqf house. $1100 if I skipped the bathrooms and closets. Another $250 for
lamps. I think I was mistaken about the subscription fee, there wasn't one.
Regardless, that is crazy expensive.

~~~
_rpd
Their competitors don't appear to be much cheaper ($40 per bulb), and their
pitch materials cite home lighting automation kits that start in the thousands
(possibly wired?). They seemed to think that they had a significant price
advantage.

Well, hopefully we'll get a more detailed post-mortem than "we ran out of
capital."

------
llamataboot
SmartThings recently announced support for some local control of devices even
if the internet is down, which is a good step from a big player.

In the current IoT landscape, I feel like you have to either go with the
biggest players that have the best chance of surviving or hack everything
together yourself to work locally.

~~~
jasonlaramburu
_> I feel like you have to go with the biggest players that have the best
chance of surviving_

Both Nest and Logitech have bricked old products.

I think the only way the industry survives is if consumers understand that
they are not just buying the ‘thing,’ but also a license to the software that
powers it. Some SW licenses are open source, some require a monthly fee, and
some are sold ‘as-is.’

