Earlier quoted context omitted.
have you heard of HASS? https://www.home-assistant.io/ it seems like the perfect fit for you.
Hass translates to hate in german
i know, I'm German myself. It's just the acronym used for the service.
Update on Mozilla WebThings
61–64 of 64 posts
Re: Update on Mozilla WebThings
#62Something that worth to be mentioned too, is that the gateway project has been designed to be extensible with addons. The community took off with more than hundred of adapters to support new devices or protocols and even online services.
Myself I wrote a couple of them and use them to push further than the regular smarthome use cases.
For the curious ones watch demos:
Re: Update on Mozilla WebThings
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's also OpenHAB https://www.openhab.org/
OpenHAB is still a bit user unfriendly from my experiences working with it. My existing stuff will talk to Google or Amazon's assistants, but getting OpenHAB to talk back and forth with those devices and Google/Alexa is proving to be a pain in the ass.
I like that cloud access is free, and Alexa integration works for me, although I prefer to keep my automation stuff relatively simple.
For me, I like the OpenHAB scripting, I personally found HomeAssistant to be too complicated to do some things because it was focused on being easy to use. I spent a long time trying to figure out how to get HomeAssistant to do what I wanted with my zwave smart locks, and it was much easier to do it on OpenHAB. So obviously, YMMV based on your preferences and requirements.
I see a lot of people using NodeRed also, which I guess is cool, but I found NodeRed incredibly frustrating compared to writing a script from scratch.
Re: Update on Mozilla WebThings
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Specific to the software discussed here: Bit weird criticism of software that obviously is not intended to run on end-devices with MCUs, but on a more powerful gateway. (But yes, there is overall too much focus on that part compared to the bits that run closer to the hardware)
They were specifically advertised as something that can run on MCUs
The Web of Things direct integration pattern [1] (running a web server directly on a device) is not a good fit for MCUs, with a few very high end exceptions (e.g. ESP8266 and ESP32 for which the WebThings Framework works perfectly well).
For constrained devices like MCUs the gateway integration pattern is a better fit, which means using some other low power communications mechanism on the device itself and having a gateway bridge the device to the Internet and the Web of Things.
It's also within the charter of the Web Thing Protocol Community Group to explore a more lightweight CoAP+CBOR alternative to the default HTTP+JSON sub-protocol, which may help in some cases.
1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H3coHbb3Bwd02_NJi4KEBONB...