The problem with home automation, as exemplified by the now ancient X10 system is that it's an add-on to the home. That means its a real pain to install and set up. Even if it does plug into a socket or replaces a light switch. It will become successful when home builders agree to serious standards, and build them into new homes and apartment buildings.
This is something that really needs to be part of the infrastructure of a building. WiFi and Bluetooth are great, and all that, but not really what is needed.
Once this is done, then Apple, and others , can hook into it for their own take. Otherwise, I believe it will always be something for the few. Some people here have mentioned the thermostat. But that's a basic device, mostly useful for just heating and cooling. It doesn't even come close to home automation. And it's pretty expensive. How many people here have one? I can afford it, but it's not really that much better than what I have now, and installed a few years ago. Cooler, yes. I suppose I could brag about having one, which I actually think is part of the sales appeal for the product.
But that doesn't really answer the more basic question: Why?
Setting aside the thermostat (having programmable thermostats her likely been a great improvement.) Why would I want home automation? What do I want to automate and control in this way?
Connected devices will become ubiquitous now that they don't need to be physcially connected. These include sensors for recording information, control devices, and media devices. These include printers/scanners, stereos, tv's, security cameras, lighting, temperature control, access control, audio/video communication, exercise equipment, etc.
You're still not answering why.
I'm getting answers for what and how, but little for why.
Why do I want this? What does it do for me? What do I gain from it? How is my life better because of it?
It seems like home automation is a solution looking for a problem (that doesn't exist.)
Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) has been awarded a patent for an Intelligent power-enabled communications port, which provides a new way to power homes. The new power supply method essentially makes it easier to plug in devices that operate on a direct current without the need for an AC-DC adapter. The port could also be used for data purposes like an Internet connection or local network
Apple doesn't need to buy companies? Where did multitouch and Siri come from?
Microsoft is unable to innovate? What are all their patents for?
Without question, Apple has bettered MS in launching innovative products and revolutionizing product categories. But absolute statements like MS not being able to innovate and Apple not needing acquisitions are destined to be absolutely wrong.
No one said that Apple doesn't buy companies. The difference is that Apple buys companies as frameworks and builds on them - and creates innovative products using that technology. Apple is also quite capable of creating innovative products on their own.
Careful there, Mel. Some of the regulars here like to cite the number of patents Apple files as a measure of innovation, which have included such notable achievements as a rectangular packaging box and a glass staircase.
Now here is a comment that's a textbook example of a cheap shot.
Careful there, Mel. Some of the regulars here like to cite the number of patents Apple files as a measure of innovation, which have included such notable achievements as a rectangular packaging box and a glass staircase.
Interesting point.
But did Apple patent the glass staircase, or did they patent the process used to make the glass staircase? Apple's obsession with building strong structures out of glass is probably because they can transfer this knowledge into making strong, lightweight screens for the their mobile devices.
Apple's obsession with building strong structures out of glass is probably because they can transfer this knowledge into making strong, lightweight screens for the their mobile devices.
That would be a first: they outsource their current screens for mobile devices.
I'm getting answers for what and how, but little for why.
Why do I want this? What does it do for me? What do I gain from it? How is my life better because of it?
It seems like home automation is a solution looking for a problem (that doesn't exist.)
Why is a good question re home automation. I have Indigo and a bunch of Insteon devices (formerly X10). It offers some convenience and security by controlling lights, but is it worth it? I have spent, over the last 10 years, probably a couple of grand on this stuff. And yes I use it all the time, but I could have just as easily not installed it and would be none the worse for wear. Not to mention that all these devices are vampire power suckers 24/7. So even if we built homes from the ground up to be automated and adhered to a standard, what good is it really doing in the grand scheme of things? For me it's a hobby and a minor convenience feature. Beyond that I don't see much value.
Yes, Apple buys Nest and Tony Fadell heads up Apple's fledgling new home automation division. That just sounds right! Apple's deep pockets and name recognition, together with Tony and other innovative engineers, I think could make a real impact upon that industry.
But WelshDog and MJ1970 do have a point in that is it something people really want? Same goes for smart TV's too (the so-called next big thing). But the iPad created an industry all by itself where there really wasn't a need, and look how successful that's been...you never know..?
The Nest has a really nice interface for programming (especially remote programming), but we've had to disable the learning function. With more than one set of preferences about temperature in a household with several members, in and out on a regular but complex schedule, it couldn't figure it out.
If you live alone or otherwise dominate the thermostat in your household, it probably works well.
Yes, Apple buys Nest and Tony Fadell heads up Apple's fledgling new home automation division. That just sounds right! Apple's deep pockets and name recognition, together with Tony and other innovative engineers, I think could make a real impact upon that industry.
While I don't necessarily expect such a move from Apple, I don't think Tony Fadell as Apple's next CEO is completely out of the realm of possibilities. I could see this even 10 years out (sooner if Tim Cook stumbles.)
It's logical. Microsoft is unable to innovate, so they have no choice but to buy companies. Apple, OTOH, is clearly able to innovate, so they don't NEED to buy companies for ideas.
Who do you think is going to win the bidding wars when both companies are involved?
I agree about Apple making intelligent acquisitions but MS innovating successfully? Microsoft haven't innovated 'successfully' in their entire existence. They have ripped off successfully but innovated successfully, not ever IMHO. Patents don't a product make.
Indeed, patents are not products. But patents are a measure of innovation far far more than products. Those who claim that innovation must include productization are shamelessly narrowing their definition to inflate the merits of their argument. Shamelessly but futilely.
Those $60 coloured lightbulbs from Philips are a joke. Hardly a real product at all. They're certainly not worth mentioning in the same context as real home automation system.
Who said anything about real home automation system? This company has an Android App that talks to Crestron equipment. Crestron is the real automation provider here and the App is just an App. These guys would have to have one hell of a product line under development to be of any real value beyond buying application developers.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
The problem with home automation, as exemplified by the now ancient X10 system is that it's an add-on to the home. That means its a real pain to install and set up. Even if it does plug into a socket or replaces a light switch. It will become successful when home builders agree to serious standards, and build them into new homes and apartment buildings.
This is something that really needs to be part of the infrastructure of a building. WiFi and Bluetooth are great, and all that, but not really what is needed.
Once this is done, then Apple, and others , can hook into it for their own take. Otherwise, I believe it will always be something for the few. Some people here have mentioned the thermostat. But that's a basic device, mostly useful for just heating and cooling. It doesn't even come close to home automation. And it's pretty expensive. How many people here have one? I can afford it, but it's not really that much better than what I have now, and installed a few years ago. Cooler, yes. I suppose I could brag about having one, which I actually think is part of the sales appeal for the product.
But that doesn't really answer the more basic question: Why?
Setting aside the thermostat (having programmable thermostats her likely been a great improvement.) Why would I want home automation? What do I want to automate and control in this way?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifij775
Connected devices will become ubiquitous now that they don't need to be physcially connected. These include sensors for recording information, control devices, and media devices. These include printers/scanners, stereos, tv's, security cameras, lighting, temperature control, access control, audio/video communication, exercise equipment, etc.
You're still not answering why.
I'm getting answers for what and how, but little for why.
Why do I want this? What does it do for me? What do I gain from it? How is my life better because of it?
It seems like home automation is a solution looking for a problem (that doesn't exist.)
Too Late MSFT
And this article is BS
Read below:
Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) has been awarded a patent for an Intelligent power-enabled communications port, which provides a new way to power homes. The new power supply method essentially makes it easier to plug in devices that operate on a direct current without the need for an AC-DC adapter. The port could also be used for data purposes like an Internet connection or local network
No one said that Apple doesn't buy companies. The difference is that Apple buys companies as frameworks and builds on them - and creates innovative products using that technology. Apple is also quite capable of creating innovative products on their own.
Microsoft? Not so much. In fact, not at all.
deleted
Now here is a comment that's a textbook example of a cheap shot.
deleted
Why? They can do that by license, like AirPlay. Look what B&O did with that license:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Careful there, Mel. Some of the regulars here like to cite the number of patents Apple files as a measure of innovation, which have included such notable achievements as a rectangular packaging box and a glass staircase.
Interesting point.
But did Apple patent the glass staircase, or did they patent the process used to make the glass staircase? Apple's obsession with building strong structures out of glass is probably because they can transfer this knowledge into making strong, lightweight screens for the their mobile devices.
That would be a first: they outsource their current screens for mobile devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
You're still not answering why.
I'm getting answers for what and how, but little for why.
Why do I want this? What does it do for me? What do I gain from it? How is my life better because of it?
It seems like home automation is a solution looking for a problem (that doesn't exist.)
Why is a good question re home automation. I have Indigo and a bunch of Insteon devices (formerly X10). It offers some convenience and security by controlling lights, but is it worth it? I have spent, over the last 10 years, probably a couple of grand on this stuff. And yes I use it all the time, but I could have just as easily not installed it and would be none the worse for wear. Not to mention that all these devices are vampire power suckers 24/7. So even if we built homes from the ground up to be automated and adhered to a standard, what good is it really doing in the grand scheme of things? For me it's a hobby and a minor convenience feature. Beyond that I don't see much value.
But WelshDog and MJ1970 do have a point in that is it something people really want? Same goes for smart TV's too (the so-called next big thing). But the iPad created an industry all by itself where there really wasn't a need, and look how successful that's been...you never know..?
The Nest has a really nice interface for programming (especially remote programming), but we've had to disable the learning function. With more than one set of preferences about temperature in a household with several members, in and out on a regular but complex schedule, it couldn't figure it out.
If you live alone or otherwise dominate the thermostat in your household, it probably works well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1983
Yes, Apple buys Nest and Tony Fadell heads up Apple's fledgling new home automation division. That just sounds right! Apple's deep pockets and name recognition, together with Tony and other innovative engineers, I think could make a real impact upon that industry.
While I don't necessarily expect such a move from Apple, I don't think Tony Fadell as Apple's next CEO is completely out of the realm of possibilities. I could see this even 10 years out (sooner if Tim Cook stumbles.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
It's logical. Microsoft is unable to innovate, so they have no choice but to buy companies. Apple, OTOH, is clearly able to innovate, so they don't NEED to buy companies for ideas.
Who do you think is going to win the bidding wars when both companies are involved?
Waze
Siri
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
So Microsoft bought the company that Apple was RUMORED might be interested in...
I wonder where the rumour came from. R2 studios perhaps, It'd increase the interest from the "also ran" companies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilution
I wonder where the rumour came from. R2 studios perhaps, It'd increase the interest from the "also ran" companies.
Well, what better way to maximize the offer from Microsoft than to have a rumor current that Apple and Google are also trying to buy you.
Indeed, patents are not products. But patents are a measure of innovation far far more than products. Those who claim that innovation must include productization are shamelessly narrowing their definition to inflate the merits of their argument. Shamelessly but futilely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Those $60 coloured lightbulbs from Philips are a joke. Hardly a real product at all. They're certainly not worth mentioning in the same context as real home automation system.
Who said anything about real home automation system? This company has an Android App that talks to Crestron equipment. Crestron is the real automation provider here and the App is just an App. These guys would have to have one hell of a product line under development to be of any real value beyond buying application developers.
Kudos to Microsoft
Ok.
Only one problem: Ballmer decides what happens.
Good luck with that.