Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

HomeKit

developer.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 146 posts

Re: HomeKit

#91

Post by CHY872 »

Frozenlock wrote: post #46

Dear Apple, please use industry standards. BACnet is a ISO, ASHRAE and ANSI protocol.

That's fantastic, but says nothing about the relative merits of BACnet. It's an industry standard, yes, as I understand it typical of a modern business unit, but that does not mean that it should be the one used by any new adopter. Indeed, BACnet's been around for so long now (and has such poor takeup in the consumer space) that one might wonder whether a newer protocol is necessary.

As I understand it, BACnet has a number of drawbacks that make it unsuitable for this kind of thing. In particular, BACnet is not really plug-and-play (and is not designed to be), supports a relatively small number of transport protocols (one could imagine this Apple system eventually encompassing BlueTooth, ZigBee etc). Furthermore, it's not really a secure standard as I understand it - access to the WiFi network would essentially give control of all the devices. Current solutions aren't really much better, but it needs to be the primary concern (and I suspect that Apple have considered it). As one example, BACnet best practice is currently to have parts of the network that have to be in userspace (temperature sensors, door sensors (as opposed to lifts, aircon)) is to place them on separate physical networks.

Even moreso, it's kinda usually implemented right above the link layer (which violates the hourglass principle, if nothing else), and there are issues that will come up in the near future with the alternatives (BACnet/IPv6 being an issue (i.e. most BACnet/IP devices will stop working as networks switch to IPv6)).

BACnet is probably fine in the enterprise domain, where everything is installed at building construction time, there are people who manage this stuff for a living, and things like airgaps are desirable as well as necessary. In the home domain, it's at least overkill, and makes things incredibly difficult for users. It's entirely fair for Apple to go their own way.

Trying to do a standards-based approach at the moment would be a horrendous idea - firstly I know a large number of companies to be trying to come up with their own solution at the moment, but secondly it would just end up being a standard by committee (with no real implementers). Let the competitors hash it out for a few years, and then standardise the best one.

Re: HomeKit

#92

Post by natem345 »

aroch wrote: post #81
wting wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you feel compelled to mention Google Hangouts, you should note that Google abandoned XMPP federation after 8 years (2005 - 2013) since other companies built walled gardens and leeched users instead. http://www.zdnet.com/google-moves-away-from-the-xmpp-open-me... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Talk

Yeah, that doesn't matter. They continued to use XMPP so long because it was still profitable for them to, not because of some implied ethical stand on open software. Android is "open" because it is more profitable for Google to give it away and make the ad/Play/certification money than it is for them to personally get into the hardware market like Apple.

So if Google doesn't do the right things _for the right reasons_ (based solely on your judgement), they're just as bad as anyone else to you?

Re: HomeKit

#93

Post by rwallace »

wwweston wrote: post #51
general_failure wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very myopic view. Technology needs to advance in all fronts. Once these things are integrated as part of your daily life you wont notice them anymore and will take them for granted. These things will actually end up conserving energy in great amounts.

> This is a very myopic view. Technology needs to advance in all fronts Citation, please. Or at least a clarification of what you mean by "advance." If you like, here's an example from writer Wendell Berry: "To make myself as plain as I can, I should give my standards for technological innovation in my own work. They are as follows: 1. The new tool should be cheaper than the one it replaces. 2. It should be at least…

That list of standards is ridiculously unreasonable and unrealistic. If we had consistently followed them, we'd still be arguing about whether to start banging the rocks together. Anything as daring as the printing press or electricity would be utterly unthinkable.

I don't know whether home automation will take off, but I think the deciding factor will be the same as it was with most of the other things we've invented since we came down from the trees: whether the benefits on the whole exceed the costs.

Re: HomeKit

#94

Post by scrumper »

eevilspock wrote: post #86
aroch wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that doesn't matter. They continued to use XMPP so long because it was still profitable for them to, not because of some implied ethical stand on open software. Android is "open" because it is more profitable for Google to give it away and make the ad/Play/certification money than it is for them to personally get into the hardware market like Apple.

How can the word "ethical" ever describe a company that gets all of its money from advertising, the business of deception and manipulation, and then deepens its pact with the Devil by trading all of our privacy for more profit and control, a company whose CEO says things like, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."? https://news.ycombinator.com/…

Well I'm downvoting you for your edit, which is simultaneously childishly whiny and quite funny in its lack of awareness: read your original again, and then ask yourself if you don't think you might be coming across as a bit of an ideologue yourself.

I disagree with your original argument because it's a straw man. 'Ethical' was used by the parent to refer to the consideration to use XMPP, not to Google as a corporation. The parent simply posited that Google's decision to use XMPP was not motivated by ethical concerns. Supporting, in a way, your own point.

Re: HomeKit

#95

Post by lstamour »

aroch wrote: post #60
krschultz wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely doubt that Apple will. Look at AirPlay. Look at AirDrop. Look at iMessage and Facetime. Even their original content formats were not all that portable. Some of those are for technical/licensing reasons, but many are not.

Or at Google...Hangouts, their AIO messaging framework, is not either

Funny how proprietary technologies Apple make can be copied by Google if they take off? (And vice versa.) Personally I expect this to be like browser wars initially -- you'll just have to write code twice until a common standard (or wrapper) can be agreed upon.

Re: HomeKit

#96

Post by noblethrasher »

rwallace wrote: post #93
wwweston wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a very myopic view. Technology needs to advance in all fronts Citation, please. Or at least a clarification of what you mean by "advance." If you like, here's an example from writer Wendell Berry: "To make myself as plain as I can, I should give my standards for technological innovation in my own work. They are as follows: 1. The new tool should be cheaper than the one it replaces. 2. It should be at least…

That list of standards is ridiculously unreasonable and unrealistic. If we had consistently followed them, we'd still be arguing about whether to start banging the rocks together. Anything as daring as the printing press or electricity would be utterly unthinkable. I don't know whether home automation will take off, but I think the deciding factor will be the same as it was with most of the other things we've invente…

Well, that was largely the state of affairs for computers for a while: From 1998–2007, I could reasonably expect 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 with respect to both desktops and laptops.

We do seem to have regressed because of the phenomena of “worse hardware through software”, and the over-dependence on cloud services.

I'm also much more skeptical that software version n is unambiguously better than version n-1, having been burned a few too many times (that's also why sites like this exists: http://www.oldversion.com/).

Re: HomeKit

#97

Post by eevilspock »

scrumper wrote: post #94
eevilspock wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can the word "ethical" ever describe a company that gets all of its money from advertising, the business of deception and manipulation, and then deepens its pact with the Devil by trading all of our privacy for more profit and control, a company whose CEO says things like, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."? https://news.ycombinator.com/…

Well I'm downvoting you for your edit, which is simultaneously childishly whiny and quite funny in its lack of awareness: read your original again, and then ask yourself if you don't think you might be coming across as a bit of an ideologue yourself. I disagree with your original argument because it's a straw man. 'Ethical' was used by the parent to refer to the consideration to use XMPP, not to Google as a corporati…

I'm agreeing with the parent. Neither of us subscribes to the commonly held belief around these parts that Google is special and lives by its "Don't be evil" tag line. I don't understand why you call my point a straw man.

Tell me why I come across as an ideologue? My opinion is strong and critical, yes, but it is not rooted in zealotry. Are people who decry the NSA's lying to Congress about its illegal collection of private data ideologues?

Why is my comment childish? Is it not childish to name-call a legitimate argument "childish" rather than addressing the point?

Is it possible that Upton Sinclair's words apply to you?

[I think it's hilarious that I keep getting new downvotes (at least 3) and upvotes to match. Sad really. Downvotes should be used to bury junk, not legitimate replies. Instead of an intelligent discussion, we have this. Maybe it could turn into an intelligent discussion on intelligent discussion. :P]

Re: HomeKit

#98

Post by Frozenlock »

CHY872 wrote: post #91
Frozenlock wrote: post #46

Dear Apple, please use industry standards. BACnet is a ISO, ASHRAE and ANSI protocol.

That's fantastic, but says nothing about the relative merits of BACnet. It's an industry standard, yes, as I understand it typical of a modern business unit, but that does not mean that it should be the one used by any new adopter. Indeed, BACnet's been around for so long now (and has such poor takeup in the consumer space) that one might wonder whether a newer protocol is necessary. As I understand it, BACnet has a…

Indeed, BACnet's been around for so long now (and has such poor takeup in the consumer space) that one might wonder whether a newer protocol is necessary.

Or one could consider that only very recently technology has become cheap enough to be a viable option. In fact, I'm still not convinced it's cheap enough to interest the average consumer. Tho Apple's team probably disagree.

What do you mean by not plug-and-play? Any BACnet device can be connected to a network and announce itself with a WhoIs, being instantly recognized by all the other devices.

(...) supports a relatively small number of transport protocols (...) BACnet has many official transport protocols, the 3 most popular being MS/TP, Ethernet and IP. Furthermore, nothing prevents the BACnet packets from being embedded into some other protocol.

And because you mentioned ZigBee: http://www.zigbee.org/Standards/ZigBeeBuildingAutomation/Ove... "The ZigBee Alliance joined forces with BACnet, the leading global building automation and networking protocol for building automation, to fully support BACnet over ZigBee Building Automation networks. Soon it will be possible to easily expand your wired BACnet-based building systems to new areas by using wireless ZigBee Building Automation products."

You are right about security, BACnet was not designed with security in mind (nor was the Internet). But this brings other questions:

1. Does the consumer space need security for thermostats?

2. If it does, why shouldn't this be handled by the network security?

3. If there's really a need for separated security, why not add the required changes in the next protocol version?

(i.e. most BACnet/IP devices will stop working as networks switch to IPv6)). No. No they won't. Firstly because most BACnet network are to remain inside the enterprise own intranet which will remain IPv4 for a long time. (Forever?) Secondly because IPv4 is a subset of IPv6.

BACnet is probably fine in the enterprise domain, where everything is installed at building construction time(...) Which is simply not true. Most buildings are many decades old. They are a (horrible?) mess of pneumatic systems, first generation electronics control with relays panel, and what we could call recent technology controls with micro-controllers.

In the home domain, it's at least overkill, and makes things incredibly difficult for users. I fail to see how using existing technology is 'overkill'. Was it overkill to bring Ethernet and IP to home users? Should we have come up with a different standard?

(...) Trying to do a standards-based approach at the moment would be a horrendous idea - firstly I know a large number of companies to be trying to come up with their own solution at the moment (...) How is many companies trying to come up with their own solution an argument against standard-based approach?

(...) but secondly it would just end up being a standard by committee (with no real implementers). You mean without the worldwide HVAC industry, right?

Personally, I find the BACnet protocol to be bloated. But is it a good enough reason to throw away everything?

Re: HomeKit

#99

Post by judk »

jasonpbecker wrote: post #22
gergles wrote: post #17

Here's hoping the "common protocol" they mentioned in the keynote is Z-Wave (strongly suggested base on Tim's use of the word "scenes" and the vendor list they put up) and not some Apple proprietary garbage. I'm still bitter about FaceTime being an 'open standard'.

Many are bitter about that, myself included. But it was an intellectual property issue, out of Apple's control.[0] [0]: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-20236114

A patent (troll, btw) doesn't stop Apple from letting other clients connect to the network. Those clients could decide if they want to deal with the risk of infringement judgments.

And Apple could have chosen to use one of many existing alternative session initiation algorithms.

Re: HomeKit

#100

Post by maxerickson »

Anderkent wrote: post #63
nmrm wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3 and 9 do not contradict, they just aren't universally consistent. Something that achieves 3 without sacrificing 9 is probably better (or at least more likely to be adopted) than something that achieves 3 but sacrifices 9.

No, 3 and 9 together mean you cannot ever replace something good with something better.

3 is talking about technology.

9 is talking about aspects of people's lives.

Post reply on HN