Re: Stupid design decisions

From	Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.arch.embedded
Subject	Re: Stupid design decisions
Date	2017-02-03 10:14 -0700
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<o72dmb$hgt$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(6 earlier) <o6v5f3$r9n$1@dont-email.me> <43c79cd9j3mcmkikno8v9n8h04mcqavbro@4ax.com> <o70jvf$fus$1@dont-email.me> <1jb89cl5h0jli3naf1cnadr6bb3b44ga3u@4ax.com> <o71vmm$qm1$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2/3/2017 6:18 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> The combination smoke+CO alarms seem to be more in the $40-60 range.
>> The Nest Protect (smoke+CO+WiFi) is $99.
>
> Hasn't Google essentially savaged Nest already? I just read a thing
> about it a year or so back and wrote the entire line off.

Sounds familiar.  But, other players are entering the market for
other, more traditional, reasons.  (AFAICT, Google wanted a beachhead
to gather more "intelligence" about the customer; they might now have
realized that this is not the way to do so -- "media consumption"
is probably a more effective mechanism)

>> One of complaints about the whole IoT thing is not that I disbelieve
>> people are going to put WiFi (or something) ports on the back of
>> billions of items (I'm certain they are),
>
> Yeauuuugh....
>
>> it's that they'll be able to
>> charge big markups for something like that.  I'm pretty sure I won't
>> pay $99 for a smoke/CO2 detector.  So I suspect that we will have
>> billions of IoT devices, but the average BOM for the "IoT" bit is
>> going to be well under a dollar.
>
> In quantity, there's no reason to think the prices wound diverge that
> much.

For *wireless* devices, I imagine the cost difference will approach
zero.  "Quantity" is A Really Big Number for these sorts of devices.

> It's just that the deployment case for IoT devices isn't that
> clear because you have to then have other infrastructure in place. Just
> putting the SSID on all the lightbulbs in the house sounds exhausting.

The real issue is a lot bigger than the (physical) infrastructure
and "initial configuration".  These can all be addressed to minimize
their practical and virtual costs (TCO).

> I know that for remote light switches, the IoT version is twice or more
> the price of just a non-IoT version, and you have to use a phone to run
> 'em. I have a few of the non-IoT remote light switches, and they are
> at disposable price levels.

Exactly.  There have been numerous attempts at "remote control"
(even if "remote" is limited to just another room in the house)
over the decades.  None have "stuck" -- "remote control" isn't
worth much.

And, its a cognitive loading issue.

Think of what its like when you approach a bank of 4 light switches.
Even if you KNOW which switch controls which "light", there is an
inherent pause as your mind sorts out which light it *wants* to
illuminate/extinguish.

Now, put EVERY "switch" (control/sensor) in your house on a 5" diagonal
screen.  It's easier to WALK to the switch in question and  toggle it
than it is to drag out your phone, FIND the control for THAT
switch, inspect the current state of the "device/light" and
toggle it as appropriate.  Then, hope you NOTICE the fact that
someone else has turned it on in the time following -- but preceding
when you retire for the evening ("Ah, better check the lights again
to see which ones are on *NOW*...")

Yeah, you may find use for the feature if you live alone and want
to keep the indoor temperature, lighting, etc. in a "deep sleep"
sort of state until JUST before you return home from work/whatever.
But, it's unlikely that you'll want to do much more than "turn
the heat up" before heading home.  Or, turn on the spa so it is up
to temperature before you need it.

And, not likely that your schedule will vary significantly from
day to day that this couldn't be automated (minimizing the value
of "remote control").  What if you FORGET??

Scant few of us live in homes that are so large that it's easier
(more convenient) to open an app to verify that the garage door
is closed vs. just walking over to someplace where you can
directly/indirectly observe its state.

Thread

Stupid design decisions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-05 21:14 -0600
  Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-01-06 12:27 -0700
  Re: Stupid design decisions rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 14:51 -0500
  Re: Stupid design decisions Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-06 20:22 +0000
    Re: Stupid design decisions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-08 17:11 +0100
      Re: Stupid design decisions rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 17:10 -0500
        Re: Stupid design decisions Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2017-01-09 11:30 +0200
          Re: Stupid design decisions rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 04:58 -0500
            Re: Stupid design decisions Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2017-01-09 13:10 +0200
            Re: Stupid design decisions Clive Arthur <cliveta@nowaytoday.co.uk> - 2017-01-09 11:15 +0000
            Re: Stupid design decisions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-09 13:48 +0100
        Re: Stupid design decisions Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-02-08 17:40 -0500
      Re: Stupid design decisions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-10 21:42 -0600
  Re: Stupid design decisions Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-01-06 15:33 -0600
  Re: Stupid design decisions Ed Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 12:28 -0800
    Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-01-30 13:52 -0700
      Re: Stupid design decisions Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-30 20:55 +0000
        Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-01-30 14:18 -0700
          Re: Stupid design decisions Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-30 21:20 +0000
            Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-01-30 14:31 -0700
              Re: Stupid design decisions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-30 23:37 -0600
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-01-30 23:20 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Ed Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 22:29 -0800
                Re: Stupid design decisions rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 02:10 -0500
        Re: Stupid design decisions Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2017-01-30 22:30 +0100
        Re: Stupid design decisions rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 02:00 -0500
      Re: Stupid design decisions Ed Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 22:18 -0800
        Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-01-30 23:36 -0700
        Re: Stupid design decisions jladasky@itu.edu - 2017-01-31 16:01 -0800
          Re: Stupid design decisions Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-02-02 09:47 +0000
            Re: Stupid design decisions rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 06:35 -0500
              Re: Stupid design decisions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-02 16:26 -0600
                Re: Stupid design decisions rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 19:49 -0500
                Re: Stupid design decisions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-03 01:27 -0600
                Re: Stupid design decisions Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-03 07:18 -0600
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-03 10:14 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@highlandtechnology.invalid> - 2017-02-03 10:12 -0800
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-03 14:10 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-02-04 11:15 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-04 13:52 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-02-05 04:36 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-04 21:55 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-02-05 21:39 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-05 15:55 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-02-05 23:38 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-05 21:25 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-04 17:26 -0600
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-04 16:56 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-03 21:40 -0600
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-03 21:48 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-02-04 11:03 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-04 13:00 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-05 01:49 -0600
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-05 10:43 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-02-05 21:31 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-05 15:22 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-02-05 23:24 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-02-06 03:51 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 10:11 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 20:07 -0500
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-05 21:08 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2017-02-04 14:42 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-05 02:00 -0600
                Re: Stupid design decisions Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-05 09:11 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-05 03:51 -0600
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-05 11:10 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-05 22:22 +0000
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-05 16:01 -0700
                Re: Stupid design decisions Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-05 11:03 -0700
    Re: Stupid design decisions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-30 23:44 -0600

csiph-web