

Meet the Nest Protect smoke and CO alarm - DavidChouinard
http://nest.com/blog/2013/10/08/meet-the-nest-protect-smoke-and-co-alarm/

======
dingaling
> I lay in bed, sleepless as usual, watching the smoke alarm blink. It blinked
> and blinked and I realized I had no idea what that meant.

Whereas this new device glows green, or sometimes yellow. Or other colours.
What does that mean? I'll have to check the manual anyway, or wait for the
'human voice' to explain.

The beauty of smoke detectors is that they are a minimal set of electronics
required to perform the task. This minimises chances of failure, since the
circuitry is sufficiently simple that it can be understood. Perhaps it can
even be formally proven? Not sure if that has been done for any end-user
device.

Once you start building an ARM computer, OS, wifi, SMS etc into such a device
the complexity and failure conditions balloon.

Edit: this device _might_ have an isolated, decoupled sensor unit but it still
has to interact with the more complex upper-level functions in order to signal
an alarm.

~~~
Qworg
"Perhaps it can even be formally proven?"

That is the whole purpose of standards organizations and testing
organizations. UL has been in this business for a long time:
[http://www.ul.com](http://www.ul.com)

------
cpenner461
I bought a Nest thermostat last year and in general have been pretty happy
with it. We have 2 HVAC units in our house (upstairs/downstairs), but I've
only only bought one for the downstairs primarily b/c of the up front cost.
This problem seems to be exacerbated with a smoke alarm where most (or at
least a lot of?) people will require multiple smoke alarms. My two-story house
should have 3 or 4 detectors to cover all the living/sleeping areas, but even
just one detector is enough of an investment to think twice before plunking
down $130 per unit vs several of the $7.50 Kidde linked by jeanjq
([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6514777](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6514777)).
With the thermostat there's at least potential cost savings over time, but
that doesn't exist with a smoke detector. Granted, the benefit of potentially
saving your life in the event of a fire is priceless, but I think that
convincing folks of the value here is going to be harder than with the
thermostat.

Also, sensors in _any_ smoke detector "expire" after some length of time (8-10
yrs -
[http://www.usfa.fema.gov/citizens/home_fire_prev/alarms/](http://www.usfa.fema.gov/citizens/home_fire_prev/alarms/)),
so this is a semi-recurring cost. Also discussed in that article is the type
of detection technology. This is using a photo-electric sensor vs a more
traditional ionization sensor. Both have their benefits/tradeoffs, the ideal
scenario seems to be to include both (slow smoldering fires vs hot and fast).
(I've been researching these a bit lately for our house, would happily defer
to an actual expert in the field though).

I love (and am tempted by) the technology and polish/ease of use that they've
done here, but the cost seems to be more significant when compared to the
current alternatives.

------
raldi
My prediction for Nest's next product: a home security system.

If your home is already equipped with Nest thermostats and smoke alarms, all
their motion sensors are commandeered by the central unit. No new wiring
necessary.

Edit: Come to think of it, there's probably no need for a central unit,
either.

~~~
themstheones
It would be great if your security system could detect an intruder, then make
the house uncomfortably warm, thereby encouraging the intruder to leave.

~~~
derekp7
Sounds good, but most of the time a burglary is over with in a few minutes.
Not quite enough time to get the house warm. Now a high pitched whine with
strobing lights and cutting out regular lights might work, although it could
be a safety thing that would get you sued.

How about playing a recording of some old farmer's voice saying get out of
here, with the sound of a shotgun getting cocked, etc. Or, for an outside
perimeter alarm, turn on the lawn sprinklers.

------
jeanjq
I wonder what battery life is like on this? A typical smoke alarm battery can
last years but this appears to have a lot of functions and WiFi and a light.

BTW Why do smoke alarm batteries die at night? Because temperature drops and a
weak battery's voltage output drops with temperature.

~~~
uptown
According to the site - for the battery-powered version:

"6 AA Energizer Ultimate Lithium batteries Long-life batteries designed for
multi-year operation"

and for the wired version:

"3 AA Energizer Ultimate Lithium backup batteries Long-life backup batteries
designed for multi-year operation"

I suppose it depends how much you use its features like lighting-up your
hallway, but that's more-than reasonable in my opinion.

~~~
raverbashing
I really wished they had innovated in that sense

For example with a wireless energy transmitter (it doesn't need to be too
powerful).

Or "solar powered" with a good set of (rechargeable) batteries.

------
raldi
If you have any doubt that is a desperately-needed product right now, go read
the Amazon reviews for literally any other smoke detector on the market.

Frustratingly, this news arrives just weeks too late for us.

~~~
jeanjq
What is wrong with the $7.50 Kidde?

[http://www.amazon.com/Kidde-Sentry-Battery-Operated-
Ionizati...](http://www.amazon.com/Kidde-Sentry-Battery-Operated-Ionization-
Compact/dp/B00002N865)

Reviews seem good.

~~~
raldi
We have this exact brand in our apartment. They (like almost all ionization-
based smoke detectors) go off at the drop of a hat. And they're ear-
splittingly loud. The kill switch is hard to press, and needs to be pressed
every few minutes if you're, say, burning incense. And one day, when the
battery gets low, they'll start chirping in the middle of the night, leading
to a game of "Which one is it?!" as they somehow manage to make noise
frequently enough to prevent sleep but infrequently enough to thwart
identification of the dying one.

(Smoke detectors' low battery alerts always go off at night because battery
output sags when the temperature goes down.)

~~~
danparsonson
A smoke alarm being very loud and very sensitive is a feature to me, not a bug
- I'd rather be annoyed from time to time than die of smoke inhalation in my
sleep. As for 'hunt the low battery' \- how many smoke alarms do you need in
one area?

~~~
raldi
False dichotomy. With an extra ten cents' worth of technology, the smoke
detector could do its initial chirping quietly and during daylight hours. If
you ignore them, then later it can escalate to around-the-clock 85-decibel
alerts.

Ditto sensitivity. At the first wisps of a problem, give a gentle sound. If it
gets worse, or 60 seconds pass, _then_ get shrill.

Re: "how many do you need in one area?" the last three words do not apply. The
low-battery chirp is loud enough that a dying battery anywhere in the house
can wake you up. For the record, though, we were required to put one in every
bedroom and two in our small hallway -- and that's just on our upper level.

~~~
danparsonson
Have you seen how quickly an actual house fire takes hold? There are videos of
fire department demonstrations on YouTube
([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUh4rCjuYDA](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUh4rCjuYDA)
for example). In sixty (or even ten) seconds of gentle sounds, you'd probably
be dead. Not to mention that smoke can take time to rise up to smoke detector
level - crucial seconds that you could be using to escape rather than
comfortably waking up.

As for the low battery chirp, it _should_ be annoying - that way you attend to
it rather than leaving it until later. And chirping only during the daylight
hours - how is that helpful if you're out at work? The battery will be dead
before you even know about it.

Smoke alarms _should_ be intrusive when they need your attention. That's how
they save lives.

P.S. as for the last point - I was actually referring to how difficult it is
to work out which smoke detector is chirping. Thus my question - I can't see
how it's difficult unless you have lots of smoke alarms. Badly explained on my
part, sorry.

~~~
raldi
_> In sixty (or even ten) seconds of gentle sounds, you'd probably be dead._

Which is why I also said that, if the problem gets worse that just a few
wisps, the detector should immediately escalate to full alarm.

 _> And chirping only during the daylight hours - how is that helpful if
you're out at work? The battery will be dead before you even know about it._

Again, it can _start_ quiet and polite, and then escalate to more aggressive
notifications if you ignore it.

~~~
danparsonson
> Which is why I also said that, if the problem gets worse that just a few
> wisps, the detector should immediately escalate to full alarm.

Indeed, but personally I don't want a dumb electronic device to make that
judgement for me - I'd like to do it myself. I'll know instantly whether or
not the house is on fire and I'd like to know instantly whether or not it
seems like it might be. False positives are, as I said earlier, infinitely
preferable to "he'd have made it out if he'd heard the alarm earlier".
Besides, how do you decide what's "house fire smoke" vs "burnt toast smoke"?
if the fire isn't adjacent to the detector then smoke may only reach the
detector slowly.

I get the drive to make devices more intelligent and thus more convenient but
I strongly disagree that this philosophy should apply in all cases. Sometimes
'basic' really is better. Not to mention that there's less to go wrong.

~~~
raldi
_> Indeed, but personally I don't want a dumb electronic device to make that
judgement for me_

But ultimately, you have no choice. Even the ideal smoke detector that you
have in mind is going to be a dumb electronic device that has to make a
judgement for you.

It'll have some sort of threshold before the loud alarm goes off. I'm not
suggesting that be changed.

What I'm suggesting is that, _in addition to that_ , at an even _more_
sensitive threshold, there be a quieter alarm, too.

------
hemancuso
I love the Pathlight feature - an integrated motion controlled nightlight is a
great idea. A nice example of an incremental feature that helps tell a story
about the product and justify the relatively hefty price tag. Something you
can talk about when you need to justify a $130 smoke/co alarm to your wife.

~~~
ashergm
Seems like having a built in motion-detector could be a good entry into home
security as well.

------
robmcm
I just found out that in the UK you can get the fire department to come and
install free alarms [http://www.london-
fire.gov.uk/smokealarms.asp](http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/smokealarms.asp)

Lets home they have the budget to stretch to these :p

~~~
arethuza
I suspect that only applies to people who are at risk, from the same website:

"We only target our visits at people and places where we know there is a
higher risk of fire. This includes high risk individuals such as older people,
especially those living alone, those with mobility, vision and hearing
impairment, mental health services users and those liable to intoxication
through alcohol/drug use. A combination of these factors will significantly
increase the risk from fire."

~~~
robmcm
I expect they have a quota, a friend at work got them installed and they don't
meet that criteria. He said they got 10 year ones, that cost about £15 a pop.

------
hershel
There's this alarm[1],which costs half the price , offers talking warning,
photoelectric detection and in home wireless alarms through the house(if
there's a fire in the basement , you can know at the bedroom.

It would be pretty cheap for the company to offer small gateway that connects
the alarm to the net.

The major difference between this and the nest is design, but does it justify
doubling the price, especially when you need one for each room ?

[1][http://www.amazon.com/First-Alert-SCO501CN-3ST-
SCO500-Combin...](http://www.amazon.com/First-Alert-SCO501CN-3ST-
SCO500-Combination/dp/B000EVO7C2/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1381242086&sr=8-2&keywords=smoke+detector+wireless+talking)

------
akilism
"It’s time to love your smoke and carbon monoxide alarm."

lol what?

------
annnnd
I love the way they make usual objects look good and function properly.
Reminds me of Apple and its revolutions (iPhone, iPad, iPod) - but then again,
I heard the founders come from Apple?

~~~
jwarren
Yup, Tony Fadell was a VP there, he worked on the iPod and iPhone:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Fadell](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Fadell)

Matt Rogers was a lead software engineer there in the iPod division:

[http://www.linkedin.com/pub/matt-
rogers/3/8a2/866](http://www.linkedin.com/pub/matt-rogers/3/8a2/866)

------
mbell
Great design.

One word of caution before anyone runs out and replaces all your smoke
detectors: Ask your local fire inspector about it. Fire safety rules are very
convoluted and very region/state/city specific and I've run up against
seemingly irrational rules in various locales in multiple past lives. It's
better to find out the rules up front than to run into issues with an
inspection or even worse, get into a fight with an insurance company about it
if the worst does happen. I also highly doubt these detectors would fly at all
in an commercial settings, i.e. don't go replacing the detectors in your
office without a long chat with your fire inspector.

------
Udo
The "wave to cancel the alarm" function bothers me.

What if there's a fire _and_ there's movement in the room, for example because
the cat jumps in front of the sensor or something falls over?

~~~
cbhl
If it still detects smoke after a while, it elevates to "red" and starts
making the usual annoying loud noises.

~~~
Udo
Ah, OK, I didn't see that.

------
relaxatorium
$130 is a tough sell when comparison shopping for alarms, but it's probably a
much more interesting value proposition when your damn smoke alarm goes off
when you're sleeping/cooking/taking a hot shower, you try to deal with it, and
then you look to see if there are any alarms that exist which are not
completely inscrutable.

The value proposition vs. the thermostadt seems less "smart vs. dumb" or "ugly
vs. pretty" than "comprehensible vs. incomprehensible", or "infuriating vs.
not infuriating".

------
brianbreslin
I think the most interesting feature is the one at the end. How it talks to
your thermostat and can shut off your heater/furnace if it detects CO, which
is often the source.

------
jwarren
I think this is pretty smart. The fire alarm in my small rented flat is pretty
close to the kitchen, so I regularly have to try and fan smoke away from my
panicking alarm.

Looks like a well designed concept, well executed.

------
ape4
My alarms are connected to the house power -- no batteries. That seems like
the best way. Perhaps battery for power failures.

~~~
cbhl
The failure mode of that is when the fire is electrical in nature, and causes
house power to fail before the alarms notice.

~~~
a-priori
Yes, all such devices will have battery backups. You should use them for just
that situation.

------
ecopoesis
Looks nice but $130 is expensive. I have 9 detectors in the house to comply
with code. This is going to get expensive.

------
coldcode
Man this would be a great place to work.

------
codex
Is this product z-wave compatible?

------
pauletienney
So much opportunities out there.

------
apierre
Does it get Paul Graham's seal of approval?

