

Apple said to be prepping smart home software platform for WWDC - JumpCrisscross
http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/26/apple-said-to-be-prepping-smart-home-software-platform-for-wwdc-reveal/

======
bengoodger
It will be interesting to see how much of this relies on the presence of
existing hard wired systems, many of which are controllable over the network
(e.g. Lutron, many security systems, etc). Writing to other peoples' APIs has
not typically been Apple's strong suit. At the same time, wired-in
infrastructure in a home is nothing like as disposable as the consumer
technology Apple focuses on. There is no way I would want a closed system
baked into my house. Hard-wired infrastructure is something you're stuck with
for decades.

Relevant to me as I'm in the rough-in phase of a whole-home remodel project. I
struggled a lot with what level of control to use, before settling on a
minimal Lutron system for some areas of the house, comfortable in the
knowledge that if I get tired of the Lutron interface, I can create my own &
poke it over the network. I understand most people aren't interested in this
level of control, but they might be concerned when their interface becomes
dated in 5 years and can't be replaced due to an incompatibility with the
hard-wired infrastructure. I see this as a downside of closed systems like
Control4.

~~~
zippergz
I have Control4 in my house. I don't think it's really accurate to say it's
hard-wired. There are some devices that take an ethernet connection (some of
the touchscreens, for example). But most of it (and everything I have)
communicates over Zigbee. The light switches and dimmers connect in to exactly
the same way a regular light switch or dimmer does, which I think is the same
as Lutron. And then it talks wirelessly to a little black box that sits in the
closet. There's no extra wiring or anything required.

I don't disagree that it would be a hassle to replace all of my switches and
stuff if I wanted to go to a different system. And I'd prefer there be a
standard around this stuff. But using the term "hard-wired" think gives the
impression that it's much more involved than it really is.

~~~
bengoodger
You're right that traditionally Control4 has not been hardwired - but note
they're moving into panelized lighting control now, and my assumption was that
system would only be controllable from their frontends unless you reverse
engineered the protocol.

------
dang
We changed the url from [http://on.ft.com/1w8mTkI](http://on.ft.com/1w8mTkI),
which is the original source but behind a paywall.

I hate to do this, because HN strongly prefers original sources. Of course,
people sometimes post a Google search url that one can click through to read
the OP. But we can't make that the official URL for the post.

If anyone has a suggestion to solve this problem, please let us know.

~~~
natch
Sites like HN apparently follow an unwritten rule that says there can only be
one official URL associated with a post.

Maybe that rule doesn't need to be followed. Maybe it's just a common pattern
sites follow, and it can be tweaked.

There could be official metadata URLs such as cache links or non-paywall
links, that appear alongside the main links.

Certainly you've thought of this and some of the possible dangers of doing it:
For instance, there could be blowback from sites if they think you are
systematically circumventing their attempts to charge for content.

But perhaps some mild flavor of it could be done, to address a subset of the
use cases. For instance, content could be cached privately by HN, with the
cache link hidden at first. Then if the content became unavailable, depending
on the reason for that unavailability, HN could reveal the cache link or not,
based on HN policy about which reasons for content unavailability are cases
where it is desirable to provide a cache link.

~~~
ajanuary
There's already a precedent for this on HN with scribd for pdf links.

------
k-mcgrady
It would be interested to see how the market would change if Apple got
involved in this. As cool as home automation tech is it's never taken off.
Apple could potentially jump start the market - or it could be a total flop.

Another interesting side effect of this will be how it effects Apple's
'coolness'. The only people willing to spend the money on home automation tech
are those who own homes or who don't plan on moving any time soon - i.e. not
young people.

~~~
avar

        > The only people willing to spend the money on home automation
        > tech are those who own homes or who don't plan on moving any
        > time soon - i.e. not young people.
    

Doesn't that depend a lot on the specifics of the home automation system?

Sure anything that requires a permanent installation is less likely to be
installed by anyone but the home owner, but can't you automate a lot of things
in your home without permanently installing anything?

~~~
k-mcgrady
True. One thing that comes to mind is lighting. However how many people will
spend £50 for a single bulb? [1] Maybe Apple has found a way to make it work.
Then again maybe this is just a simple app with an API for developers to hook
their stuff into and isn't going to be a 'flagship' feature of iOS 8 (kind of
in a similar vein to iOS in the car - cool and useful but irrelevant to most
people).

[1] [http://store.apple.com/uk/product/HA780ZM/A/philips-hue-
conn...](http://store.apple.com/uk/product/HA780ZM/A/philips-hue-connected-
bulb-single-pack)

------
LeoPanthera
Registration required. Here's a CNET article: [http://www.cnet.com/news/apple-
reportedly-readying-new-smart...](http://www.cnet.com/news/apple-reportedly-
readying-new-smart-home-platform/)

and here are others: [https://news.google.com/news/rtc?ncl=dFL-
vXhTfGbu2BMocXtQJZ9...](https://news.google.com/news/rtc?ncl=dFL-
vXhTfGbu2BMocXtQJZ9oLx6xM&authuser=0&topic=tc&siidp=261d66d3d8e968bfefef18c4ff221a2a08be)

------
Tiktaalik
I'm not sure my ~600 sq ft apartment really needs automation. It's pretty
simple and manageable. Maybe Apple has dreamed up a delightful solution for a
problem I don't realize I have.

My garden however is a complex mess that could benefit from automation.

~~~
prawn
I'm with you on that. I have three $70ish irrigation timers that are battery
powered, not always predictable and an absolute pain to schedule.

Wish I had the skillset or contacts to create a wirelessly controlled
irrigation timer. Track watering history, pause schedules if rain is forecast,
etc.

I even wondered if you could recharge a system like this by a little low-
friction turbine after the valve? And solar as a back-up?

------
JimmaDaRustla
Home Automation needs to be one of those things that is open - end points
controlled and monitored from an independent system. I'd be upset if I went to
buy a home and it wasn't compatible with my phone!

------
Geee
I don't think it's a 'home automation system' (like many in this thread
assume), but just a standard way for any device to be smarter and connected.
There are already smart devices such as ovens, microwaves and washing machines
which are connected and controllable with an app. What I think Apple is trying
to do is just to push a standard way to do this, so it's easier for everyone
involved. Makes sense.

For example, your oven publishes a simple API via BLE which the iControl
software understands and translates into a nice remote control UI. From there,
you can get/set the oven temperature, set timers etc. There's also a
possibility that anyone could write an 'oven' app, which can then control any
oven. That way, it's up to third-party software how smart or automated your
home becomes.

~~~
statictype
_What I think Apple is trying to do is just to push a standard way to do this,
so it 's easier for everyone involved. Makes sense._

 _There 's also a possibility that anyone could write an 'oven' app, which can
then control any oven. That way, it's up to third-party software how smart or
automated your home becomes._

I dunno, that doesn't really sound like Apple to me.

------
amirmc
I don't trust Apple to do this well.

Firstly, they cannot (or will not) make their devices multi-user, which is a
problem in the home environment (eg an Apple TV that's tied to only my account
- and already exposes more info than I'd like).

Secondly, Apple has a habit of abandoning things and shutting them down when
it doesn't suit them. This is mostly ok for some services but would be
disastrous for me as a user if I've put bought into the system.

Finally, Apple doesn't play nice with others. Perhaps they've learned to be
better since they've had to interface more due to the App Store but for the
most part I don't see them caring about an ecosystem other than their own.

~~~
yalogin
Interesting. I thought Apple really supports their ecosystem (hw + sw) for a
long time. For example, they support old ipods even now. May be you are
talking about it from an SDK perspective. Can you be a little specific about
which functionality was dropped/abandoned?

I am not sure making it multiuser is really needed in the home automation
case. If it all links back to the touchID on the phone it will meet all
requirements of user separation.

~~~
niels_olson
> Apple supports their ecosystem for a long time

Do you think they'll support a thermostat for 30 years?

~~~
coldtea
Those kind of thermostats are not for 30 years. To make it a viable market for
large companies (as opposed to niche providers) you'd have to change it every
3-5 years. Heck, Nest shut its business in less than 5 years.

So, it'd be you know, like a DSLR is not for life, whereas a film camera was.

In exchange, you'd get innovation faster, and they'd have to keep you occupied
with cool new stuff. Don't know how much you can add to a thermostat, but this
kind of "market share" could lead to "the house of tomorrow" kind of future in
10-20 years (like mobile phones have completely changed personal
communications in the past 20 years).

------
bluedevil2k
One issue I see with this is that most home automation solutions (not all) run
with a central hub, a server that talks to the other devices, and relays
messages to/from them. This hub has an IP address that is reachable from home
or away, so you can control it via your smartphone. The devices do not have
individual IP addresses that are reachable. This would mean that to get a home
automation system working, Apple would have to sell another device into the
home. That's sometimes a hurdle for them. (Home automation server = new Apple
TV??)

Yes, I know some home automation devices have the server built into every
device (every plug, every camera, every light is a standalone "thing" in the
Internet of Things), but this adds significantly to the cost. On the other
hand, with some good software, it makes controlling everything without a
central hub possible.

~~~
chockablock
Back to my Mac already does a great job of building a private IPV6 VLAN for
each Apple ID tht connects all the logged in devices.

In terms of dedicated hardware, what you are describing sounds a lot like an
airport express/extreme wifi base station.

~~~
niels_olson
Yeah, they can easily leverage any other device already in the house: I would
think the Airport or Apple TV would be the logical choice though. People get
more creeped out thinking that their laptop might be exposed.

------
natch
I've read many of the posts here saying how they don't see how home automation
could be of interest to more than a handful of super geeky type people.

However, there is another side to this, and that is monitoring.

Home monitoring technology opens up a much larger group of interested
consumers for this.

My point is we shouldn't just be talking about automation here. Automation is
only part of the story. Monitoring may be a much bigger part.

~~~
beedogs
Monitoring in what way? There are already _plenty_ of home security systems
which can handle video and audio monitoring.

~~~
philmcc
I don't mean this to be glib, but there were already plenty of phones that
could serve the internet, and various mobile tools. (in much the same way
there were already plenty of computers.)

Apple doesn't innovate by being first, they innovate by being best.

------
return0
And so begins the War of the Thermostats

~~~
mpweiher
And so begun the Thermostat War has.

------
confusedguy
let's see if Apple could help with home automation popularity, a couple of
months ago there were a couple of kickstart projects which gained quite a bit
popularity, it's a good time for an industry giant to join...

------
egypturnash
Oh man I really hope there's a reasonably open plugin architecture for this.

~~~
kmfrk
Deep down inside, you want to use iTunes. Search your feelings.

------
eddieroger
Between new MacBooks and iMacs, a refreshed AppleTV, watches, personal fitness
equipment and now home automation, the WWDC Keynote will be one of the longest
in a while.

~~~
fernly
Oooh? Am I gonna finally get my 4k Retina iMac? Please?

~~~
eddieroger
Get in line behind me, buddy.

------
nitrogen
I'm still upset that Apple bought PrimeSense and shut down OpenNI. Might this
be the reason?

------
icpmacdo
Do you think that they will open the home up to a app store like they did with
phones?

------
gondo
can't even open the article, asked for registration straightaway

------
Thiz
My bet is on smart tags, NFC and iBeacon.

Bring it on.

------
julianpye
Currently most home automation products are geared towards family fathers who
want to control every aspect of their families lives - control freaks. This is
a market that does not scale. Apple therefore has to present an entirely new
perspective. I have led several projects in this space and the one service
that has been the most promising and was accepted by several family members
was the anthropomorphization of the technology by presenting an addressable
assistant that takes care of your home while you're away.

~~~
harryh
Ya, I've been pretty skeptical of most products in this space to date. Sure,
it's neat that you can control every light in your home from a tablet but who
really cares? Is that really any better than regular old light switches?

Saying this makes me feel old or something, but I just don't get it?

~~~
arg01
The problem is it's a thousand little things not just one big thing.

The real power is that every item can be improved a little with automation.
Your dryer starts an hour before you wake up so that your clothes are dry,
your underwear is warm and toasty to face that cold winter's day. You can
check from the supermarket if there was anything you don't have at home for
the cake you're baking. The lights slowly dim to get your brain thinking it's
ready for bed. Your lights change colour to make the room feel warmer or
colder. The blinds slowly open just before you're supposed to wake up so that
you can be woken by light rather than an alarm clock. Your oven begins cooking
the roast to work around your schedule. Stopping the microwave from continuing
to nuke the popcorn from the other room so you can wait for it to cool without
getting up.

None of these are particularly brilliant and maybe you would look at it and
ask why spend an extra thousand on a fridge for this? An extra 50 a light-
bulb... A few thousand for installation of a base system just to have the
privilege. Another 500 for motors for blinds. And each of those is just for
one nice hardly noticeable difference in your day.

Maybe the cost for the value doesn't make sense. It won't for a lot of people.
Having said that it seems to me that what we're talking about here is
automating some of the duties of a butler/body servant type job, at a lower
cost than employing one for something that will be in place longer.

I'll also add some good old anecdotal stuff at the end about some of the silly
little contraptions I've found in my apartment in Japan and the difference
they make. I've got an automatic bath tub push a button and it fills to an
appropriate level at a temperature you set. It seems so silly to spend the
money to save yourself two minutes of faffing about with taps for something
you might do every other week or once a month. But without that two minutes
and without the pressure to not let it overflow I have nice relaxing baths
much more often because all I need to do is push a button and finish whatever
I'm doing before grabbing a book. There are also remotes for the lights. It's
great to walk in the door grab the one remote and walk through the place
turning on and off the lights on my way to the lounge to settle down all
without having to go slightly off towards one wall or another, this seems
small (or ridiculously lazy) but I honestly think I'll spend the money when I
move to keep this tiny freedom. Being able to turn the lights on and off from
bed and freely rearrange rooms without worrying about light-switches is an
added bonus as well as dimming by remote are all great and have made ever day
slightly more pleasant. There are a few other contrived convenience around
(there are others that I was used to that are missing here though) and I can
honestly say that quite a few of them are something that have made necessities
slightly easier or enjoyable things more accessible. I'll definitely be
hunting out these little conveniences when I've left. So there's my two cents.

~~~
harryh
I'd definitely like to be able to to tell if I have all the ingredients I need
for that cake I'm baking while I'm at the supermarket. I own, literally, four
bottles of paprika right now because several times I just couldn't remember so
I said "better safe than sorry."

Can we do that yet though? Some sort of smart inventory taking cabinet?

~~~
jkestner
Sure that wasn't a metaphor? With all the "little things" that we can get
individually, we have a bunch of ingredients that aren't really satisfying on
their own. But if they could be combined in many ways, they can be useful
enough to stock up on. But...

> The problem is it's a thousand little things not just one big thing.

Absolutely right. But we start with things that justify a purchase because
they complete a worthwhile task on their own. That reduces the barrier to
entry.

