Apple heads for home: Why HomeKit may not bring an 'iLight' or 'iLock,' but a new Apple TV

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 77
    paul94544paul94544 Posts: 1,027member
    The answer is automation , not so much voice commands, most of the arduous stuff like the home sensing when you are about to enter , garage opening as the car approaches would be great to have but the rest meh I'm not so sure about, as a prev poster said a light sensing when you are in the room is great , but of course it needs to be over ridden easily, for example when studying or gasp reading a book. Some voice commands would be good , like raise the temp by 5 degrees , it has to be designed sensibly not a whole load of useless features. I trust Apple will make a better job of it than most. Automate as much as is realistic and it must be secure enuf from hackers
  • Reply 22 of 77
    mstone wrote: »
    I'm also undecided on the actual usefulness of all this home automation. It might be beneficial for a large modern home, but the current worldwide trend is increased population density with strict regulations by associations and management companies that are quite restrictive about what you can and cannot install in your small living area. I don't have any exact numbers but I would guess that a large majority of people in the world today who currently have an iOS device live in less than 100m2 apartments (1076 ft2) where very little automation is needed due to compactness of the living space. I just don't see the mass market appeal of home automation.

    I have a large home so I might be interested in some automation but it is somewhat of a hassle to install all new appliances and lighting for a marginal convenience upgrade.

    So in summary, you're not sure how useful home automation is, therefore Apple shouldn't bother with it. But, Apples kit will work with many products that real people have bought because they had a need that was met by it. And this will lay the path for more ingenuitive ideas in the future.
  • Reply 23 of 77
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Paul94544 View Post



    The answer is automation , not so much voice commands, most of the arduous stuff like the home sensing when you are about to enter , garage opening as the car approaches would be great to have but the rest meh I'm not so sure about, as a prev poster said a light sensing when you are in the room is great , but of course it needs to be over ridden easily, for example when studying or gasp reading a book. Some voice commands would be good , like raise the temp by 5 degrees , it has to be designed sensibly not a whole load of useless features. I trust Apple will make a better job of it than most. Automate as much as is realistic and it must be secure enuf from hackers

    Exactly. Overridden easily means that the automation is getting in the way. When I come home for lunch, I don't park in the garage, I park in the driveway. If I want the garage door open I'll press the remote opener button. How hard is that? Same thing with the lights. If the baby is sleeping and I just want to quietly go check on him, I don't want the lights to turn on when I enter the room. Like MS clippy. Stop helping me! I know what I'm doing.

  • Reply 24 of 77
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by daveinpublic View Post



    So in summary, you're not sure how useful home automation is, therefore Apple shouldn't bother with it. But, Apples kit will work with many products that real people have bought because they had a need that was met by it. And this will lay the path for more ingenuitive ideas in the future.

    I'm not so sure it is anything more than a knee jerk reaction to Google indicating they are interested in the home automation space. If it doesn't turn out to be all the popular, Apple might just drop it without any warning. 

  • Reply 25 of 77
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,527member
    Ahh ... IDK, the AppleTV seems to have more capability for the price:
    • Ax CPU/GPU
    • RAM
    • Flash Storage
    • WiFi
    • BTLE
    • IR
    • TV Connectivity
    • Programmability


    I suspect that a new 2014 model AppleTV will have an A7 or A8 class APU, and it will support Metal, H.264 encoding, 11ac WiFI -- and support console class games and other apps. Among these apps could be a controller for HomeKit devices.

     

    Do you need A7-class processing power to turn some lights on and off? I got one of those programmable light switches that's barely more processing power than a $29 Casio digital watch with multiple alarms. Even something like Raspberry Pi is overkill for an automation controller.

    Not so much the processing power ... Rather the programmability, additional I/O and ability to store/edit/display device schedules. These are built in to the $99 AppleTV. The $199 AirPort Extreme would require additional hardware (and cost) to accomplish the same results.
  • Reply 26 of 77
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,527member
    AI generated extraneous post
  • Reply 27 of 77
    theothergeofftheothergeoff Posts: 2,081member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post



    Home automation is coming. HomeKit can help it along. But it's not the magic bullet. If Apple can extend and build-out its ecosystem to include common household functions, others may eventually hook into it. The comparison to CarPlay is apt. I suspect the transition will be glacially slow. No one expects you to go out and buy a new HVAC, washing machine, refrigerator, or door locks just to use HomeKit today. But when you do finally need to replace those big-ticket items, wouldn't it be nice if they were HomeKit ready?

    Door locks are easy, and if you're a sane person, they should be changed every time you move into a property, and every time a child/family member moves out (trust me on that;-).

     

    smart thermostats are now around $70 bucks.  That's all the HVAC you have to swap out.

     

    Lights... you swap out now every 2-7 years.

     

    Toss in a couple motion/occupancy(PIR) detectors, and there is a cost benefit to heating cooling lighting.    I'm saving 20-40 a month (I've got an old house that we have 3 zones for heating and cooling.  If we are in one, we turn off the HVAC (with random fan) in the others, and it's all done automatically, with an device and iPhone app override.   

     

    Last winter paid for most of the devices, and my wife Hates me less because I can check door status and lock and unlock remotely.

  • Reply 28 of 77

    I was really struck by how prescient the speech by Steve Jobs was in 2001 after the introduction of os X.  I looked it up because I forgot exactly when he made the presentation.   He was talking about how he saw the Mac as a digital hub way back then.  I think the how of what Apple does with home automation tech is way more important than the choice of device.  Apple laid the groundwork for a bunch of new devices at the developer conference this year.  The software is the key.  The device is merely a way of having the right package of options for your software to run on.  You can expect all of the rumored devices to make their way to market pretty soon after all this groudwork is in place. 

  • Reply 29 of 77
    theothergeofftheothergeoff Posts: 2,081member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post





    Not so much the processing power ... Rather the programmability, additional I/O and ability to store/edit/display device schedules. These are built in to the $99 AppleTV. The $199 AirPort Extreme would require additional hardware (and cost) to accomplish the same results.

    There will be a need to constantly monitor and communicate state, and execute the realtime conditional logic..  my guess is another box needs to do that, especially for non IP devices.  The Apple end (TV or mac mini) is all about interface and database, and executing 'external' communications (email, tweets, sms, phone, web, other) , and querying the state engine, which is focused on operating the 'plant'

  • Reply 30 of 77
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post



    Not so much the processing power ... Rather the programmability, additional I/O and ability to store/edit/display device schedules. These are built in to the $99 AppleTV. The $199 AirPort Extreme would require additional hardware (and cost) to accomplish the same results.

     

    The current AirPort Extreme already has a dual-core Cortex A9 (Broadcom BCM53019) and 32MB of flash storage and 512MB of DDR3. Elite enough for you?

    If glorified digital watches can control a light switch with multi-day programming (including a "solar timetable" that uses your home's longitude and latitude to calculate sunrise and sunset during the year), the AirPort Extreme should be overkill already.

  • Reply 31 of 77
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,527member
    Not so much the processing power ... Rather the programmability, additional I/O and ability to store/edit/display device schedules. These are built in to the $99 AppleTV. The $199 AirPort Extreme would require additional hardware (and cost) to accomplish the same results.

    The current AirPort Extreme already has a dual-core Cortex A9 (Broadcom BCM53019) and 32MB of flash storage and 512MB of DDR3. Elite enough for you?
    If glorified digital watches can control a light switch with multi-day programming (including a "solar timetable" that uses your home's longitude and latitude to calculate sunrise and sunset during the year), the AirPort Extreme should be overkill already.

    I didn't know what was controlling the Airport Extreme ... Thanks for the info.

    Certainly the CPU is programmable and could do the job. But the 32 MB of flash storage indicates to me that it can store minimal device schedules, device monitoring apps, and device logs.

    While the Current AppleTV is $100 less -- it has 8GB flash storage, 1GB RAM and a single-core A5 APU, Bluetooth and IR (in addition to WiFi).

    This gives the AppleTV advantages:
    • it can connect to IR devices.
    • it connect to BT devices (Inexpensive thermometors, humidity sensors, iBeacons, etc.)
    • it has adequate flash and RAM to realistically monitor and control a household full of devices

    But the biggest advantage is that the AppleTV is a legitimate (though locked-down) iOS device. That means that the entire Xcode, iOS, App store ecosystem is potentially available to the AppleTV -- not so, the Airport devices.

    That means that apps written for HomeKit will be able to run on the AppleTV when Apple opens it up (to more than a few, select developers). Netflix, MLB, WatchESPN are a few non-Apple iOS apps already running on the AppleTV.

    With the recent Xcode enhancements such as Storyboards, Autolayout, Swift Language and Playgrounds you can interactively develop, test and debug HomeKit apps -- using a simulator to control HomeKit devices that don't exist yet.

    I can't over stress the importance of this -- it's in the wheelhouse of a device like the AppleTV, and it's available to developers today!

    To get an Airport device up to speed they'd need to add an Ax APU, iOS, flash and RAM ... why reinvent an inferior wheel that costs more money and does less?
  • Reply 32 of 77
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post



    Actually, i question the entire notion of the 'integrated automated' home - if that is indeed what HomeKit is all about. is it really worth the trouble?



    in fact, for most of everyday life, old school manual/built it controls remain the easiest sufficient UI of all.

    I'm also undecided on the actual usefulness of all this home automation. It might be beneficial for a large modern home, but the current worldwide trend is increased population density with strict regulations by associations and management companies that are quite restrictive about what you can and cannot install in your small living area. I don't have any exact numbers but I would guess that a large majority of people in the world today who currently have an iOS device live in less than 100m2 apartments (1076 ft2) where very little automation is needed due to compactness of the living space. I just don't see the mass market appeal of home automation.

     

    I have a large home so I might be interested in some automation but it is somewhat of a hassle to install all new appliances and lighting for a marginal convenience upgrade.


     

    Me too. And isn't life too convenient these days? Isn't diabetes a global epidemic? Seems to me that we need to get off our fat arses and have a less convenient life. 

     

    However, I like the thrust of the article. That seems to be Apple's strategy for the car - provide the software and let the car manufacturers take care of the hardware. Maybe that will be the case with the fabled iWatch - Apple will provide a template or universal OS, and let the watchmakers incorporate it into their hardware as needed; or maybe Apple are designing the hardware in league with the watchmakers.

  • Reply 33 of 77
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post



    Actually, i question the entire notion of the 'integrated automated' home - if that is indeed what HomeKit is all about. is it really worth the trouble?



    in fact, for most of everyday life, old school manual/built it controls remain the easiest sufficient UI of all.



    they are located, of course, where the activity is happening - appliances for example. why bother to use an app or voice UI to deal with my refrigerator or dish washer? i still have to open the doors, move things in and out of them, etc. their button controls are simple and quick. same with thermostats, lights, garage opener, and the rest. it is not like you car, where a hands free UI is mandatory. and you can use inexpensive motion sensing switches now, for example, to turn lights on/off when you enter/leave a room, so why bother with a voice UI?



    there certainly are exceptions. for example, i cannot figure out our drip irrigation system control box. its UI is a total mess. there is no diagram of the system, and all the adjustments you want to make to its zones - how much water, when, etc. - are bizarrely difficult to enter. boy, could that ever use an app.



    which highlights the point that where timers and complex adjustments are useful there might be a real role for home automation. fancy lighting perhaps, and maybe your HVAC, but few other things.



    but even then, dedicated apps (and web based controls) are superior to any generic UI system. the several brands of home security systems, for example, include very detailed information and varying capabilities to display and UI. plus you don't need a HomeKit to just add geofencing to them. and new smart lightbulbs like the Hue are easy to control via their own app - and much more flexible to locate exactly where desired than any built-in lights at modest cost could ever be.



    "Home automation" is already happening - some of it very well done. the gadget-head holy-grail of a "master" UI to somehow control it all via a single voice UI interface - like a sci-fi movie - sounds very cool, and Apple, Google, and others are working on it i guess.



    but maybe it will wind up being like all those universal TV remotes that are never as easy to use as promised to control your entire AV set up and never quite as good as the remotes that came with each gizmo.



    the smartphone/tablet has already solved this real problem. IMHO a single portable hand held device with multiple specific optimized UI apps for each gizmo is actually the best UI of all. nothing else really needs to be standardized. i really don't care if all my appliance clocks are synced to the second - that's utterly trivial.

    The threshold of 'automation' is when you do or say one thing, and an orchestration of activities in your home is executed.  otherwise, you're just putting one thousand remotes in your pocket.   

     

    The interface is important, you're correct.  But having the logic of many things in one UI is better, and then 'learning' how you want your home is the next level (I program mine with python, using Indigo), and the next level is the 'cloud sourcing' of information (weather for me... I don't want to be watering through a thunderstorm, or 20 minutes before a thunderstorm, and/or I want to close the windows before the rains hit).

     

    your 'utterly trivial' example is utterly trivial.  The better example is I want to turn off the alarm system, unlock the door, turn on the hall lights, and set the temp for 'occupied' when I issue a single command... or even better, when my location and motion indicates that I'm approaching my door.  20 apps for 10 lighting types, 3 motion systems, Sound monitors, video systems,  my HVAC, my alarm system, my water sensors, my water valves, my Home theater system, my intercom, my irrigation system, my curtain control system and my weather monitor isn't 'automation'

     

    It's Babel.

     

    Much like CarPlay, I'm anticipating new homes, retrofits to be wired (WiFied) for home automation.   My guess there will be 4 or 5 players in the game for central controllers (Honeywell, Tyco/DSC, Elk are there now) .   Apple can be one of them, or talk to all of them.   And unlike TVs, the market isn't saturated.  And the home automation 'interface' requires half a EE Ph.D and half a CS degree, with serious knowledge in industrial engineering.    Sort of like programming DVRs and HTs, and TVs, and Cable boxes together.  

     

    If Apple can solve AppleTV,  they can solve this.  Profitably.


     

     

    I'm not convinced. To take your example - turning off my alarm, unlocking my door, turning on my hall lights and setting my thermostat take me next to no time; I'm not interested in automating them.

  • Reply 34 of 77
    berndogberndog Posts: 90member
    alfiejr wrote: »
    Actually, i question the entire notion of the 'integrated automated' home - if that is indeed what HomeKit is all about. is it really worth the trouble?

    in fact, for most of everyday life, old school manual/built it controls remain the easiest sufficient UI of all.

    they are located, of course, where the activity is happening - appliances for example. why bother to use an app or voice UI to deal with my refrigerator or dish washer? i still have to open the doors, move things in and out of them, etc. their button controls are simple and quick. same with thermostats, lights, garage opener, and the rest. it is not like you car, where a hands free UI is mandatory. and you can use inexpensive motion sensing switches now, for example, to turn lights on/off when you enter/leave a room, so why bother with a voice UI?

    there certainly are exceptions. for example, i cannot figure out our drip irrigation system control box. its UI is a total mess. there is no diagram of the system, and all the adjustments you want to make to its zones - how much water, when, etc. - are bizarrely difficult to enter. boy, could that ever use an app.

    which highlights the point that where timers and complex adjustments are useful there might be a real role for home automation. fancy lighting perhaps, and maybe your HVAC, but few other things.

    but even then, dedicated apps (and web based controls) are superior to any generic UI system. the several brands of home security systems, for example, include very detailed information and varying capabilities to display and UI. plus you don't need a HomeKit to just add geofencing to them. and new smart lightbulbs like the Hue are easy to control via their own app - and much more flexible to locate exactly where desired than any built-in lights at modest cost could ever be.

    "Home automation" is already happening - some of it very well done. the gadget-head holy-grail of a "master" UI to somehow control it all via a single voice UI interface - like a sci-fi movie - sounds very cool, and Apple, Google, and others are working on it i guess.

    but maybe it will wind up being like all those universal TV remotes that are never as easy to use as promised to control your entire AV set up and never quite as good as the remotes that came with each gizmo.

    the smartphone/tablet has already solved this real problem. IMHO a single portable hand held device with multiple specific optimized UI apps for each gizmo is actually the best UI of all. nothing else really needs to be standardized. i really don't care if all my appliance clocks are synced to the second - that's utterly trivial.
    This thread is obviously not for you. But speaking for the CDO (compulsive disorder obsessive) crowd clocks out of sync is just the tip of the iceberg! And most non-apple UI is awful.
  • Reply 35 of 77
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    berndog wrote: »
    But speaking for the CDO (compulsive disorder obsessive) crowd clocks out of sync is just the tip of the iceberg! And most non-apple UI is awful.

    Is that OCD but with the letters arranged in the proper, alphabetical order?
  • Reply 36 of 77
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post



    Not so much the processing power ... Rather the programmability, additional I/O and ability to store/edit/display device schedules. These are built in to the $99 AppleTV. The $199 AirPort Extreme would require additional hardware (and cost) to accomplish the same results.

     

    The current AirPort Extreme already has a dual-core Cortex A9 (Broadcom BCM53019) and 32MB of flash storage and 512MB of DDR3. Elite enough for you?

    If glorified digital watches can control a light switch with multi-day programming (including a "solar timetable" that uses your home's longitude and latitude to calculate sunrise and sunset during the year), the AirPort Extreme should be overkill already.


    The reason I think the AE is a better hub is that it has security - because it is already a router and firewall. Security is really the only job it would need to do. It would simply have a plist of the approved Apple IDs and match them up with the permissions to access the various devices. The iOS device will then communicate directly with the appliance. No middle man required in the control part. This is obvious to me because there is no way for the router/hub to know all of the capabilities of the appliance, how could it possibly be the one issuing commands?

     

    What I could see is an iOS app that organizes the collection of factory control softwares on the device so that your home automation is all in one screen.

  • Reply 37 of 77
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post



    Not so much the processing power ... Rather the programmability, additional I/O and ability to store/edit/display device schedules. These are built in to the $99 AppleTV. The $199 AirPort Extreme would require additional hardware (and cost) to accomplish the same results.

     

    The current AirPort Extreme already has a dual-core Cortex A9 (Broadcom BCM53019) and 32MB of flash storage and 512MB of DDR3. Elite enough for you?

    If glorified digital watches can control a light switch with multi-day programming (including a "solar timetable" that uses your home's longitude and latitude to calculate sunrise and sunset during the year), the AirPort Extreme should be overkill already.


    The reason I think the AE is a better hub is that it has security - because it is already a router and firewall. Security is really the only job it would need to do. It would simply have a plist of the approved Apple IDs and match them up with the permissions to access the various devices. The iOS device will then communicate directly with the appliance. No middle man required in the control part. This is obvious to me because there is no way for the router/hub to know all of the capabilities of the appliance, how could it possibly be the one issuing commands?

     

    What I could see is an iOS app that organizes the collection of factory control softwares on the device so that your home automation is all in one place.


     

    That sounds like what is happening with iOS 8. App developers will be able to link into the master Apple apps, which means you won't need to constantly turn to a separate photo editing app, for instance. It's already here to an extent: I bought a Tasks app today which lets me create reminders with custom repeats. Because it links in via iCloud with the Apple Reminders and Calendars Apps, it acts as a conduit, so I can still use the Apple apps. With iOS 8, I won't even necessarily need to leave the Apple apps, as the functionality will be linked in via the new APIs.

  • Reply 38 of 77
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    How about a line of automation-enabled devices that also include beacons so that your system can determine nearly exactly where you are within your home? And who else is home and where they are within the home. Of course this would assume that every member of the family is carrying their iPhone or wearing their iWatch at all times, but it opens the door to all kinds of possibilities.

    I nearly choked when I read others claim that a collection of dedicated apps for each 'gizmo' is the Utopia of home automation. Such a lack of imagination! I think that those suggesting that Apple TV will be the 'hub' of the whole system are also off-base. Apple TV will hopefully be able to participate in your home automation setup, and make it better, but I think it will do so as an optional member component of the system as opposed to its hub.

    Voice control will be a nice touch for adhoc requests, but the true magic will come from a system that learns our routines, anticipates what comes next and just does it (or offers to do it) - without having to ask for it! A system that works behind the scenes to maximize our energy savings. A system that can respond to combinations of multiple, possibly unrelated events - (like weather, temperature, a doorbell press, a motion detected, an alarm sensor triggered, a family member arriving or departing, a pet with a smart collar entering a room, my location within the house, who else is in the house and where they are within the house, an urgent e-mail arriving, etcetera, etcetera). The possibilities truly are endless and limited only be imagination! I personally can't wait to see what kind of smart-home solutions this technology enables.
  • Reply 39 of 77
    inteliusqinteliusq Posts: 111member

    So Homekit is basically a universal remote.

  • Reply 40 of 77
    froodfrood Posts: 771member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by InteliusQ View Post

     

    So Homekit is basically a universal remote.


     

    I don't see it that way.  There are many TV makers, and thousands of models.  The universal remote attempts to be the best compromise that tries to work with all of them.  Trying to find your specific 'code' is a pain in the butt procedure, and you usually end up with roughly 8473728291 buttons that you don't use for your system.

     

    Apple is kind of doing the same thing, except exactly the opposite.  They are defining what would be the best most awesome remote ever.  With that in hand they are telling the manufacturers 'You are free to build whatever devices you want, but it has to work with our remote and meet our defined standards.'

     

    Interesting to watch how this plays out.  Will they insist on 'Apple exclusivity' or would a lamp manufacturer be free to build a lamp that is compliant with both the Apple and Google systems?

Sign In or Register to comment.