iLuv launches Wi-Fi-enabled Rainbow8 bulb with support for Apple's HomeKit

Posted:
in iPhone
Accessory maker iLuv on Thursday opened up sales of the Rainbow8, a new HomeKit-ready lightbulb that connects via Wi-Fi without requiring a dedicated hub.




The bulb is rated at 800 lumens, and supports dimming as well as cycling between 16 million colors. While people can use iLuv's iPhone and iPad app, HomeKit compatibility enables centralized control through Siri, as well as the iOS and Apple Watch Home apps.

The bulb supports standard features such as grouping, scheduling, and scenes, along with location triggers when leaving and arriving.

Wi-Fi is generally preferable to Bluetooth for HomeKit devices, since it responds faster, often has better range, and offers a full range of features. Without a hub, Bluetooth accessories may not be reachable when an iPhone or iPad is away from home, and can otherwise find themselves limited.

Other Wi-Fi-capable lighting systems -- such as Philips Hue -- often use a hub to get around size and technical issues.

The Rainbow8 is now on sale for $49.99. The mobile app is a free download for devices running iOS 7.1 or later, but the latest HomeKit functionality -- including the Home app -- requires iOS 10.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    davendaven Posts: 397member
    I bought Phillips Hue as a birthday gift to myself thinking that if I like it great. If not, at least I received something for my birthday. ;-) I thought it would end up being a novelty but it actually is quite nice to be able to set the ambience in the TV room. I don't know what Rainbow8 will be like but I can say having mood setting lights in a movie room does a lot to get one through long winter nights.
    StrangeDaysjony0
  • Reply 2 of 13
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 11,912member
    Other Wi-Fi-capable lighting systems -- such as Philips Hue -- often use a hub to get around size and technical issues.



    Not quite.  Philips uses Zigbee which does not require a bridge,  it's a mesh network, but adding a bridge is useful because it allows the vendor to store 
    data (like configurations, scenes and integrations) in a centralized area.  

    Every system that is based on say bluetooth or wifi that does not have a bridge requires some device like an iPad or Apple TV to enable 
    remote. Basic networking tells us that moving from one protocol to another often requires a bridge to do the translation. 

    You really cannot beat Philips if you're selling bulbs at the same price.   Hue already works with HomeKit.  SmartBulbs from other companies need to be at 
    no more than $35 for a comparable bulb in color and no more than $10 for white.  


    evilution
  • Reply 3 of 13
    sog35sog35 Posts: 12,198member
    $50 for a bulb is friken ridiculous
  • Reply 4 of 13
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 28,978member
    WiFi controlled devices usually cost more than Bluetooth devices. So you're exchanging some functionality for price, and despite SOG35s amazement at pricing, these after all, aren't just bulbs. Many cost a lot more than these. I'd like to see a review. At 800 lumens, these are some of the most powerful networked bulbs around, which makes hem more useful than many others, particularly when using colors other than variations on white.

    i think I'll get one, and try it out.
    davenlolliver
  • Reply 5 of 13
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 28,978member
    Other Wi-Fi-capable lighting systems -- such as Philips Hue -- often use a hub to get around size and technical issues.



    Not quite.  Philips uses Zigbee which does not require a bridge,  it's a mesh network, but adding a bridge is useful because it allows the vendor to store 
    data (like configurations, scenes and integrations) in a centralized area.  

    Every system that is based on say bluetooth or wifi that does not have a bridge requires some device like an iPad or Apple TV to enable 
    remote. Basic networking tells us that moving from one protocol to another often requires a bridge to do the translation. 

    You really cannot beat Philips if you're selling bulbs at the same price.   Hue already works with HomeKit.  SmartBulbs from other companies need to be at 
    no more than $35 for a comparable bulb in color and no more than $10 for white.  


    But those low cost bulbs are very dim. I've read reviews of a number of them, and they max out at about 400 lumens with white output. So they're good for incidental lighting, unless you use a number of them. Once you move to colors, they are really dim. If the 800 lumens in white hold up in testing, that would make these some of the brightest RGB bulbs out there.
  • Reply 6 of 13
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 2,635member
    sog35 said:
    $50 for a bulb is friken ridiculous
    Its not just a bulb. There are networking components, multi-color LED's, controllers, etc inside it. These are not your average $1 GE bulbs. 
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 7 of 13
    sog35sog35 Posts: 12,198member
    macxpress said:
    sog35 said:
    $50 for a bulb is friken ridiculous
    Its not just a bulb. There are networking components, multi-color LED's, controllers, etc inside it. These are not your average $1 GE bulbs. 
    but at the end of the day all they do is light up a room
  • Reply 8 of 13
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 1,100member
    sog35 said:
    macxpress said:
    sog35 said:
    $50 for a bulb is friken ridiculous
    Its not just a bulb. There are networking components, multi-color LED's, controllers, etc inside it. These are not your average $1 GE bulbs. 
    but at the end of the day all they do is light up a room
    At the end of the day all a Maserati does is get you from point A to point B -- just like a $2 bus fare, right?! 


    edited March 16 chiamacxpress
  • Reply 9 of 13
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 15,817member
    That looks exactly like the Xiaomi hub-less lights I saw mention of yesterday. I would not be surprised to find out they're one and the same. 
  • Reply 10 of 13
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 1,100member
    gatorguy said:
    That looks exactly like the Xiaomi hub-less lights I saw mention of yesterday. I would not be surprised to find out they're one and the same. 
    So you're, ah, saying Android did this first? I see a pattern here. 
    edited March 16 watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 13
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 15,817member
    gatorguy said:
    That looks exactly like the Xiaomi hub-less lights I saw mention of yesterday. I would not be surprised to find out they're one and the same. 
    So you're, ah, saying Android did this first? I see a pattern here. 
    LOL...

    No I'm,ah, saying Xiaomi may well be the manufacturer.
    No need for inserting "Android" into the discussion, too often a pattern for you and some others. ;)
    edited March 17
  • Reply 12 of 13
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 1,100member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    That looks exactly like the Xiaomi hub-less lights I saw mention of yesterday. I would not be surprised to find out they're one and the same. 
    So you're, ah, saying Android did this first? I see a pattern here. 
    LOL...

    No I'm,ah, saying Xiaomi may well be the manufacturer.
    No need for inserting "Android" into the discussion, too often a pattern for you and some others. ;)
    Actually I rarely mention Android. But you definetly do seem to steer things back to the Google/Android platform.
  • Reply 13 of 13
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 15,817member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    That looks exactly like the Xiaomi hub-less lights I saw mention of yesterday. I would not be surprised to find out they're one and the same. 
    So you're, ah, saying Android did this first? I see a pattern here. 
    LOL...

    No I'm,ah, saying Xiaomi may well be the manufacturer.
    No need for inserting "Android" into the discussion, too often a pattern for you and some others. ;)
    Actually I rarely mention Android. But you definetly do seem to steer things back to the Google/Android platform.
    I disagree. I'd wager I introduce them into a discussion even less often than you do. You'll be hard-pressed to find instances where I was the first to bring them up. On the contrary it's you and other Apple users here who are most likely to use "Google... LOL / but... but... ANDROID" to validate your own choices in Apple-specific threads that had nothing to do with any other OS. There's really no need to.

    Apple offers fine products and an excellent ecosystem to use them in. Period. They don't magically become better because of anything having to do with other systems. Yet in explaining the advantages of Apple it too drops into not-so-veiled insults directed towards other products (or commenters) who aren't even part of the discussion. 

    This is a very insightful read for those folks who tend to look for ways to favorably compare themselves, fairly often attempting to prove their own self-worth, by making light of others. 
    http://www.becomingminimalist.com/compare-less/

    edited March 19
Sign In or Register to comment.