It takes 5 cloud services to hear my doorbell

Post by mrb » Mon, Aug 31, 2026, 10:05 AM UTC

throw234259 wrote: post #133

mrb wrote: post #49

I am super sensitive to over engineering. For my doorbell I wanted something that lets me play a custom bell sound. You would be surprised that 99% of the solutions out there are complete over engineered stacks that depend on wifi devices, Internet access, connecting to various cloud services... So I built my own: a basic wireless button sends a radio 433 MHz signal, and my receiver is plugged inside the house and tr…

> You would be surprised that 99% of the solutions out there are complete over engineered stacks that depend on wifi devices, Internet access, connecting to various cloud services... Interesting context you live in. Here in east europe, 90% of devices you find on eshops are cheap chinese buttons with AAA batteries, that emit signal and another reciever device that plays sound. The sound is not customizable, but it is…

Post by mrb » Mon, Aug 31, 2026, 10:11 AM UTC

whstl wrote: post #148

mrb wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be over engineered if one could design a system providing similar functionality using less hardware and less software. I challenge you to design a wireless doorbell that has a user-configurable chime, in a way that uses less software or less hardware than mine. You couldn't. In fact, if you did market research like me you would find that 99% of similar products have vastly more complex hardware or software o…

Challenge accepted: "Similar functionality" here is the same doorbells that have existed for over a century. Done. :) If the requirements and constraints come from you, then saying "those are the requirements" doesn't settle anything. And is the same excuse people use for the over-engineered solutions you don't seem to like. It is over-engineering compared to a regular doorbell, period.

Post by whstl » Mon, Aug 31, 2026, 10:23 AM UTC

mrb wrote: post #164

whstl wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Challenge accepted: "Similar functionality" here is the same doorbells that have existed for over a century. Done. :) If the requirements and constraints come from you, then saying "those are the requirements" doesn't settle anything. And is the same excuse people use for the over-engineered solutions you don't seem to like. It is over-engineering compared to a regular doorbell, period.

You completely missed the part that the chime needs to be user-configurable, ie. play a custom MP3 file. You don't provide that.

Post by abc123abc123 » Mon, Aug 31, 2026, 10:55 AM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #145

sdcfgy wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a former embedded systems engineer, my door bell is two long bits of wire, a bell, a push button and two C cells. My light switches are similarly complicated.

As a former embedded systems engineer, my door bell is two long bits of wire, a bell, a push button and two C cells. I know a guy who lives is a 1700's-era house. His is a bell, a pulley, and a string.

Post by swiftcoder » Mon, Aug 31, 2026, 10:58 AM UTC

ifwinterco wrote: post #126

ezfe wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's video surveillance, it makes it more likely they'll go elsewhere. That's literally the whole point of Ring.

Physical stuff (window bars and a security door) is much, much more effective for that logic. Burglars know they’ll probably be on CCTV somewhere anyway but nobody in their right mind is trying to smash through a security door or saw through some window bars when there’s a house up the street that doesn’t have them. Obviously there are downsides (cost, aesthetics) but those solutions actually work, I’m skeptical that…