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

Smartphone ≠ smart home

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–76 of 76 posts

Re: Smartphone ≠ smart home

#71

Post by untog »

coldtea wrote: post #37
untog wrote: post #12

Smartphone controlled anything never feels great to me. If I have to type in code to unlock my keypad, then wait for an app to launch, just to change the temperature on the thermostat, it's already over. On a similar note, I wanted to love the Chromecast, but I found the phone to be a terrible controller. Now I use a Roku, which has a great remote. Instead of my girlfriend and I crowding ourselves around a tiny smart…

> Smartphone controlled anything never feels great to me. If I have to type in code to unlock my keypad, then wait for an app to launch, just to change the temperature on the thermostat, it's already over. For one, newer smartphones will mostly come with fingerprint sensors. So no code typing there. Second, apps launch almost instantly in any recent iOS or Android phone. It's not like you'll wait 1 minute for he app…

Third, "it's already over" over typing and app-launching wait time? Oh, the humanity.

My point isn't that it's difficult, it's that existing solutions are already better than the smartphone-based ones.

Re: Smartphone ≠ smart home

#72

Post by untog »

coldtea wrote: post #38
lelandbatey wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet all of those actions pale in comparison to just picking up a remote with nice tactile buttons and using it immediately, no weird navigation, no apps, nothing. I mean, I'd still use my smartphone as a remote for other reasons. But the parent does make a good point.

So, instead of the phone (which for most people is always with you), have an extra task-specific remote, to feed with batteries, lose, and go fetch from another room when you need it. Plus "nice tactile buttons"? 2005 called. Of all the things one would need those for, setting a thermostat (which takes like 5 seconds) is very low in utility...

The remote is always exactly where you need it, in front of the TV. As for batteries.. when was the last time you changed your remote batteries? How about the last time you charged your phone? I'll take my once-every-six-months battery replacement over the chance that I'll need to plug my phone in to charge while I'm also trying to use it as a remote.

And if you think that tactile buttons are somehow "over", you're wrong. They're tremendously useful.

Re: Smartphone ≠ smart home

#73

Post by tmuir »

polynomial wrote: post #62
tmuir wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the first world problems of HN users using technology are beyond the pale. I was arguing mouse vs remote/phone for playing media on a media server, and someone's retort was that a mouse would require them to have a surface upon which to use the mouse at their couch. I've spent way too much time envisioning this mythical surfaceless couch and person.

Not that I spend a lot of time on couches, mine or others, but even if there is a "usable" surface nearby (I have no surfaces near my couch) it's usually a coffee table with terrible ergonomics for use as a controller plane. But this doesn't seem like a major issue, since it really seems a tablet (or just your phone) solves the problem.

Wait, what are these unusable surfaces? I have a $25 logitech wireless mouse and keyboard that I use roughly 8ft from the usb receiver. Besides the screen of my monitor, I actually cannot find a surface in my direct vicinity that my mouse doesn't track extremely well upon. This includes jeans, shirt, skin, paper towel, microfiber, drywall, carpet, rug, whiteboard, a glass coffee table (surprisingly), and books.

How can the capabilities of something as cheap, commoditized, and refined as a computer mouse vary so much that some people's mice are only usable on a small and inconvenient set of surfaces, while other mice have completely mastered the process to the point that nearly every surface imaginable works flawlessly?

Re: Smartphone ≠ smart home

#74

Post by MrQuincle »

dangrossman wrote: post #36

Instead of a $99 custom button, what about a sub-$99 Android tablet? You can put them anywhere you'd put the button, and leave your home control app running with the screen set to never turn off. Turning on/off a light with a touch will then be no more effort than flicking a light switch -- there's nothing to take out of your pocket, no waiting for an app to open. This is how my home works. I built the app that runs…

Absolutely!

I think it's lack of imagination about where you can use a smartphone for. You don't necessarily need to use the smartphone that's in your pocket!

http://www.bemo.io/ shows that you can have a thermostat with a nice display.

This is a personal opinion, but I consider most of the smartphone apps better designed than for example the graphical user interface of my microwave, thermostat, or laundry machine. I can't wait till these producers are gonna finally give up and:

1.) start to use technology from the smartphone hardware industry with respect to high-resolution screens

2.) start to use the technology from the smartphone software industry with respect to applications and catering to third-parties (app developers) with much better track record in nice interface design

That would really give the home automation stuff a swing!

Some other examples:

* http://www.getmyrico.com/ for security

* https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/xentry-transform-your-spa... for a smart door, but they didn't think it through w.r.t. charging, oops! :-)

* the best one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4Dno6FMD3E the laundry machine from Samsung

Re: Smartphone ≠ smart home

#75

Post by polynomial »

tmuir wrote: post #73
polynomial wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I spend a lot of time on couches, mine or others, but even if there is a "usable" surface nearby (I have no surfaces near my couch) it's usually a coffee table with terrible ergonomics for use as a controller plane. But this doesn't seem like a major issue, since it really seems a tablet (or just your phone) solves the problem.

Wait, what are these unusable surfaces? I have a $25 logitech wireless mouse and keyboard that I use roughly 8ft from the usb receiver. Besides the screen of my monitor, I actually cannot find a surface in my direct vicinity that my mouse doesn't track extremely well upon. This includes jeans, shirt, skin, paper towel, microfiber, drywall, carpet, rug, whiteboard, a glass coffee table (surprisingly), and books. How c…

Indeed, perhaps I am being fussy about what kind of surface I prefer to use, and how precise I like the tracking to be.

I am inspired by your reply however to try to find another mouse which works well on glass, that would literally be a game changer.

Re: Smartphone ≠ smart home

#76

Post by bbcbasic »

jpindar wrote: post #70
twald wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't be possibly talking about a light switch, right? :) That's exactly what I'm talking about. I want something as simple as a light switch to control the colors of my lifx, Hue or control my sonos speakers.

http://www2.meethue.com/en-us/the-range/hue-tap/

This is literally a toy.
Post reply on HN