Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#281

Post by lgleason » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 8:47 PM UTC

andrewksl wrote: post #113

lgleason wrote: post #51

Zigbee is already an open standard, but some Zigbee devices don't work with others. Yet, with Z-Wave they all tend to work and there isn't that much of a price difference (between Zigbee and Z-Wave devices). The biggest problem with Zigbee is that is uses 2.4 GHZ which doesn't travel long distances or through walls very well. Z-Wave uses a lower frequency that does. (edited for clarity)

I have about 20 Z-Wave switches in my home, spread across 4 models and 2 brands. There were noticeable differences in response time, both from the physical button and over Z-Wave, when comparing brands. And even the most reliable brand for me (Aeotec) has had issues with the network being a little laggy. That's still a success in my books, though; I have bought Z-Wave devices that do not play nicely at all. On the ot…

I agree that the lag time is a bit higher on Z-Wave, partially because of the slower transmission speed. Plus does help that a bit. The number of hops can affect it as well, though they are limited in Z-Wave vs Zigbee which allows for more.

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#282

Post by lgleason » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 8:49 PM UTC

huseyinkeles wrote: post #89

lgleason wrote: post #51

Zigbee is already an open standard, but some Zigbee devices don't work with others. Yet, with Z-Wave they all tend to work and there isn't that much of a price difference (between Zigbee and Z-Wave devices). The biggest problem with Zigbee is that is uses 2.4 GHZ which doesn't travel long distances or through walls very well. Z-Wave uses a lower frequency that does. (edited for clarity)

In a real situation this usually doesn't cause issues. Most of the zigbee devices that you're gonna have (such as light bulbs) are also acting like a zigbee router and it creates a mesh network. You can even visualise the network if you're using zigbee2mqtt with zigbee2mqtt/bridge/networkmap

That is true provided that you have devices that correctly act as routers. Sometimes it requires extra repeaters to make the network function correctly as well. Then there is the interference issue from WIFI and Bluetooth devices.

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#283

Post by yegle » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 8:57 PM UTC

I buy zwave smart switches instead of WiFi ones because I know those devices won't be able to snoop my LAN. Home automation over IP is a step backwards IMO.

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#284

Post by wongarsu » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 8:58 PM UTC

blackguardx wrote: post #216

baybal2 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It reminds me of the old "FireWire vs USB." Firewire was an originally open standard, but there came Apple and demanded to exact a symbolic 1$ per device payment. Despite FireWire being an indisputably better standard from technical standpoint, that 1$ completely ruined the mood with OEMs, and they lost the market. USB on the other hand, was not really open, but Intel's central leadership in it guaranteed that there…

Margins on most consumer electronics are extremely small. $1 per device may seem symbolic, but it starts looking like real money at scale.

I own many USB gadgets that I bought for less than $10. Paying 10% of the retail price for the privilege of using a specific port/protocol seems out of the question. Even for low-end computers (~$300) $1 for a license is a lot of money.

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#285

Post by zokier » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 9:18 PM UTC

oflannabhra wrote: post #45

zokier wrote: post #21

How will this relate to 6lowpan, the already existing IP standard for IoT? Or will CHoIP sit on higher level (like eg mqtt)?

6lowpan only addresses running IPv6 over 802.15.4 PHYs. It defines how to compress IPv6 headers to fit into 802.15.4 MTUs. CHoIP will define application-layer messaging that runs over IP, regardless of PHY. So, you can run CHoIP over 6lowpan (this is essentially what CHoIP on Thread would be).

6lowpan is also used for ipv6 over bluetooth le

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7668

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#286

Post by etxm » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

pkulak wrote: post #211

paulgerhardt wrote: post #199

10 years in the trenches here. Apple’s smart home protocol famously does not support multiple users. Amazon is choosy on what features you can implement (turn on alarms but not turning them off, locking doors but not unlocking them). Google loves using radio hardware no one else supports. Zigbee has delightful legacy security vulnerabilities and consortium drama. I look forward to these groups putting aside their dif…

> Amazon is choosy on what features you can implement Allowing someone to holler into an open (or recently broken) window to open my front door sounds terrifying.

If they broke your window they’d probably crawl through it.

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#287

Post by outworlder » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 9:31 PM UTC

stefan_ wrote: post #215

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A camera requires orders of magnitude more bandwidth and power than other devices that might be connected over a low-power, low-cost radio network. It needs to transmit that payload 24/7. Currently, home automation typically uses a variety of custom protocols built on IEEE 802.15.4 (not 802.11*). It's a simple protocol that can be implemented by a cheap 8-bit microcontroller from 2 decades ago. Devices from one manuf…

This is a very Hacker News answer, in that you wrote three dense paragraphs that are all technically correct, yet also completely divorced from our practical reality that has smart home cameras in it. What is the obvious implementation out there? They just have both . They have the cheap 8-bit microcontroller from 2 decades ago transmitting on the low-bandwidth home automation network, and when it is decided that the…

Yeah, there's no reason to saturate the control channel with high bandwidth data.

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#288

Post by AnthonyMouse » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 9:38 PM UTC

Avamander wrote: post #271

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to have a pairing mode that allows the device to be paired with a control device (e.g. your phone) via wireless while you're in the same room as it. That would only have to be done once when it's installed and require pressing a physical button on the device while being in wireless range so that nobody can hack it remotely.

Out-of-band pairing is a better idea, e.g. some key on the bulb has to be entered or scanned or read on the device.

The trouble with that is that you can't change it in case e.g. some temporary visitor to your house snaps a picture of the key.

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#289

Post by sjwright » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 9:42 PM UTC

spsful wrote: post #265

ArmandGrillet wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trivia: I had never seen this Apple logo used before, looks like the name of the company using a San Francisco font. I wonder if it's official or just a workaround due to the fact that all the other logos have names and not just an icon like the standard Apple logo.

I feel like this violates Apple's brand guidelines..

On the contrary, by not using the brand at all it ensures that third parties are not in a position to violate Apple’s brand guidelines.

Re: Amazon, Apple, Google, and the Zigbee Alliance to develop connectivity standard

#290

Post by AnthonyMouse » Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 9:45 PM UTC

istillwritecode wrote: post #280

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to have a pairing mode that allows the device to be paired with a control device (e.g. your phone) via wireless while you're in the same room as it. That would only have to be done once when it's installed and require pressing a physical button on the device while being in wireless range so that nobody can hack it remotely.

I will no longer install apps on my phone to pair devices. The reason is that then everyone wants to link my phone number to the device and create an account. There is nothing that intrinsically says they have to, but companies cannot resist asking for a unique identifier that happens to be linked to everything else in your life. No thank you.

So who says you should need their app? It should be a published protocol, and then you use whatever app you want that speaks the protocol instead of some heinous dreck from the manufacturer.