For the home, that same device would, more likely, be a hub or controller for WiFi Accessories, BLE accessories and inexpensive battery-powered iBeacons. The hub/controller can take advantage of what iBeacons can do easily and inexpensively ... determine inside/outside temperature, detect motion in the baby's room ...
This I still don't understand. How is the iBeacon detecting motion in the baby's room? The inexpensive iBeacon is dumb. It is only sending a BLE identifier. Not to be argumentative, but please link to such an iBeacon or explain how the iBeacon is detecting and communicating back to a central hub.
Wimoto wireless sensor system now offers motion detection and water sensing
Wimoto also added the Securimote, which features an infrared motion sensor and accelerometer, that can be configured to use as a security alert for monitoring a window or door, or set up to alert you when your mail drops in your mailbox, or perhaps even to keep tabs on whether your kids are still in bed or not.
The form factor of the sensors have also been standardized, and they all now measure just 35x35x13mm, which may make it simpler or more aesthetic to place them in and around the house.
Like all of the other Wimoto sensors, these new devices connect with Bluetooth SMART technology to a smartphone or tablet running the Android or iOS app, and can send push alerts directly to the app without using a wireless or cell signal, as well as sending the data to the cloud for storage and later analysis.
All of the Motes are on sale for $39 (USD) each (or as a multi-pack - 5 for $149) through Wimoto's Indiegogo campaign (which is $10 off the estimated retail price). After September 1st, they will also be available from Amazon's new Home Automation storefront in the U.S. and Canada for $49 each.
Wimoto SEN001 Sentry Bluetooth Smart Water Sensor
by Wimoto
Price: $49.00 & FREE Shipping. Details
This item has not yet been released.
You may pre-order it now and we will deliver it to you when it arrives.
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com. Gift-wrap available.
Infared motion sensor has a range of 16 feet. Accelerometer detects when the sensor itself is moved in any direction.
Relays information to Bluetooth 4.0 SMART Ready devices such as iPhone 4S/5/5C/5S and certain Android phones and tablets with up to 100ft range
Acts as a datalogger when no smartphone or tablet in range and records information periodically for up to a month at a time.
Runs for 1-3 years on a single battery (user changeable) and weather resistent
Integrates with Wimoto Cloud Cube for real-time, always-on updates via the Internet
› See more product details
Home Automation Products
This is not an either or situation. There will always be physical switches that override any home automation.
Yes and no.
It could involve a bit of home remodeling, though. In order for the physical wall switch to override the automation actions, you would need the equivalent of a three-way switch. This new functionality will probably involve somehow getting a new heavy duty custom switching mechanism crammed into a typical shallow residential switch box, which may already be quite full of wire nuts.
Retrofitting an existing residence is probably going to come with a lot of obstacles and expensive professional services.
This I still don't understand. How is the iBeacon detecting motion in the baby's room? The inexpensive iBeacon is dumb. It is only sending a BLE identifier. Not to be argumentative, but please link to such an iBeacon or explain how the iBeacon is detecting and communicating back to a central hub.
Wimoto wireless sensor system now offers motion detection and water sensing
If it's a dumb device it wouldn't, but a dumb device could still work in a smart home.
For example, you walk into a room and your iPhone detects you're within a specific proximity to an iBeacon that you set up in that room. You get no notification on your iPhone/iWatch, it just registers the iBeacon ID which it then forwards to your Home Hub. This could be for adjusting lights, just keeping a database of movement patterns for some complex algorithm for temperature control, or whatever else you can think of, but the iBeacon itself would still be a dumb device.
I thought of that but apparently there is some security measures that only allows the HomeKit appliance to be operated when the HomeKit app is in the foreground. So I imagine it would have to push notify you and then you would need to confirm the preprogrammed operation.
mas o menos ...
According to WWDC info: When you are at home using the iPhone, to control the HomeKit accessories, the app has to be running in the foreground ... Except, with HomeKit, you can set triggers, that automatically run in the background???
Then, there is the claim that you can control your HomeKit accessories from offsite, using your iPhone via something they called Apple Connectivity. For example you could be at the office and set the air conditioning (thermostat) at your main home or at the beach house ...
The problem is that they didn't define Apple Connectivity. Connectivity to what? Are you going to send a command, in the clear? Any sniffer would like to know that info. But Apple says the commands are secure (encrypted) ... Does your door lock or light switch have the gravitas * to receive, decrypt, execute, verify the command and return a response?
* Sol, that's Polish sausage
Hah! There's gotta be some intelligent controller in the home to do all that, execute triggers, schedules, send push notifications. IMO, that device is the AppleTV.
The current 3rd-generation AppleTV could do it without a sweat -- but I suspect that Apple will announce a new one with console-quality gaming (among other things).
And here's the biggie, IMO -- to the user, the (AppleTV) HomeKit Controller is platform agnostic.Apple and others can sell accessories, controllers and remotes (iDevices) into Windows, Chrome or Linux households/offices.
Why not? I thought HomeKit was designed to work with other vendors and I see no reason why iBeacons can't be added to pretty much anything.
Just saying it isn't using either of those protocols. There are tons of proprietary home automation products out there. I just asked for an example of an iBeacon that did all the stuff like motion detection, humidity, temperature, etc. As far as I know, iBeacons do only one thing, send out BT identifiers. I'm not saying you could not add on an iBeacon, but the iBeacon is not integrating with any of those other communication and detection tasks as far as I know.
Just saying it isn't using either of those protocols. There are tons of proprietary home automation products out there. I just asked for an example of an iBeacon that did all the stuff like motion detection, humidity, temperature, etc. As far as I know, iBeacons do only one thing, send out BT identifiers. I'm not saying you could add on an iBeacon, but the iBeacon is not integrating with any of those other communication and detection tasks as far as I know.
That's correct. iBeacon was designed to be a simple protocol. I can see some additional features being added in time but I think it works because it is meant to be a simple "lighthouse" type device.
This I still don't understand. How is the iBeacon detecting motion in the baby's room? The inexpensive iBeacon is dumb. It is only sending a BLE identifier. Not to be argumentative, but please link to such an iBeacon or explain how the iBeacon is detecting and communicating back to a central hub.
[SIZE=16px]Wimoto wireless sensor system now offers motion detection and water sensing[/SIZE]
In other words, not iBeacon and not HomeKit.
Aw, C'mon ... HomeKit is just over a month old -- not even Phillips had a Hue ready. The Wimoto is a Bluetooth 4.0 Smart device -- AKA, the Apple low-level BLE protocol. All Wimoto has to do is refresh (over BLE) their existing devices to add iBeacon protocol.
There were lots of BLE devices which preceded theApple iBeacon announcement. There was a mad scramble to add iBeacon support so they could take advantage of the market defined by Apple.
What Wimito does now is use the lower-level BLE protocol -- it's more robust than iBeacon protocol, but more difficult to program.
An iPhone app that recognizes a nearby iBeacon will often ask the user if they want more information, e.g. the current temperature, If nothing else is available, the app will use the lower-level protocol to dialog with the iBeacon device. More likely, the app will use WiFi to connect with a more robust device than the iBeacon.
Even if Wimoto and others choose not to implement the iBeacon beacon protocol, they still can conform to HomeKit standards -- and be accessible to HomeKit apps ... why wouldn't they?
Just saying it isn't using either of those protocols. There are tons of proprietary home automation products out there. I just asked for an example of an iBeacon that did all the stuff like motion detection, humidity, temperature, etc. As far as I know, iBeacons do only one thing, send out BT identifiers. I'm not saying you could add on an iBeacon, but the iBeacon is not integrating with any of those other communication and detection tasks as far as I know.
That's correct. iBeacon was designed to be a simple protocol. I can see some additional features being added in time but I think it works because it is meant to be a simple "lighthouse" type device.
... Reminds me of the old fog joke about Bull Halsley and the Lighthouse ...
Yes, when acting as an iBeacon a device says: "I'm over here, and my name is Lindissima."
Just like meeting that pretty girl and getting her name.
Big deal, if that's all there is!
But, that iBeacon is also running BLE protocol (iBeacon protocol is built upon it)
So, you can ask Lindissima (using BLE protocol): "What other things should I know about you?"
And Lindissima responds (using BLE protocol): "I have an address and phone number."
You say: "Give me both!"
Lindissima responds: "Take it a little slower -- my phone number is 555-1213."
You say: "Great, I'll give you a call and we'll go from there!"
Lindissima: "Bye'"
You: "Bye."
That's making a connection, that could be the start of something big.
Our motion detector, running as an iBeacon broadcasts 2 16-bit fields in addition to the unique identifier.
The use of those bits is undefined. They could easily be the timestamp of the last motion detected.
The iPhone or HomeKit controller could easily log and monitor changes. Even better, the motion detector, likely, logs when it detects a motion and transmit the log to the controller when asked, using BLE protocol.
Once transmitted, the motion detector clears all but the last log entry, and uses that as its current broadcast timestamp ...
Even if Wimoto and others choose not to implement the iBeacon beacon protocol, they still can conform to HomeKit standards -- and be accessible to HomeKit apps ... why wouldn't they?
I think they should and probably will, but it has nothing to do with iBeacons.
To summarize, I am sticking to my narrative that:
iBeacon does only one thing, sends out BT identifiers. It is not connected to the Internet or communicating with the receiving device or a server.
HomeKit needs to be in the foreground to issue any commands and in my opinion it is generally going to be more trouble than it is worth to turn on a simple light using your iPhone and an iBeacon rather than just turning on a switch.
I still fail to see how iBeacons offer any useful functionality in a typical home.
Retrofitting a residence for automation is going to be a lot more expensive than many people think.
Security is going to be a major challenge for any remote access to appliances and the setup/configuration of a home-based digital hub, router or automation appliance will likely be a complex task.
The current crop of automation devices use the cloud and the developers' servers. Any commands that you want to send to your device have to be issued from the developers' server by way of the device polling the server for messages, probably on port 443. Otherwise the communication isn't likely to make it through the WiFi security settings.
Although an iOS app can communicate directly to the device through BT, communicating to a device over a private network is also problematic because default WiFi security settings do not allow devices to connect to one another on the private network, although custom configurations could override that default.
Without special port forwarding network protocols like iMessage, FaceTime and Back to my Mac, direct access to appliances from a remote location will not work due to default security configurations, DHCP and dynamic IPs on typical home WiFi.
I would imagine those types of protocols are similar to the way it will probably work under HomeKit.
But it is all just a guess since Apple has revealed very little so far.
[CONTENTEMBED=/t/181347/apples-first-ibeacon-hardware-revealed-in-fcc-application/40#post_2563568 layout=inline]Even if Wimoto and others choose not to implement the iBeacon beacon protocol, they still can conform to HomeKit standards -- and be accessible to HomeKit apps ... why wouldn't they?[/CONTENTEMBED]
I think they should and probably will, but it has nothing to do with iBeacons.
To summarize, I am sticking to my narrative that:
iBeacon does only one thing, sends out BT identifiers. It is not connected to the Internet or communicating with the receiving device or a server.
HomeKit needs to be in the foreground to issue any commands and in my opinion it is generally going to be more trouble than it is worth to turn on a simple light using your iPhone and an iBeacon rather than just turning on a switch.
I still fail to see how iBeacons offer any useful functionality in a typical home.
Retrofitting a residence for automation is going to be a lot more expensive than many people think.
Security is going to be a major challenge for any remote access to appliances and the setup/configuration of a home-based digital hub, router or automation appliance will likely be a complex task.
The current crop of automation devices use the cloud and the developers' servers. Any commands that you want to send to your device have to be issued from the developers' server by way of the device polling the server for messages, probably on port 443. Otherwise the communication isn't likely to make it through the WiFi security settings.
Although an iOS app can communicate directly to the device through BT, communicating to a device over a private network is also problematic because default WiFi security settings do not allow devices to connect to one another on the private network, although custom configurations could override that default.
Without special port forwarding network protocols like iMessage, FaceTime and Back to my Mac, direct access to appliances from a remote location will not work due to default security configurations, DHCP and dynamic IPs on typical home WiFi.
I would imagine those types of protocols are similar to the way it will probably work under HomeKit.
But it is all just a guess since Apple has revealed very little so far.
It is very Apple-like to release a new technology then enhance it later ... We can easily remember when the only way a developer could write iPhone apps was as browser apps.
Apple was rumored/expected to enhance/update iBeacon tech at WWDC 2014 ... Nada!
You are correct, that currently an iBeacon is limited to what it can do -- basically identify itself and supply a rudimentary distance (signal strength) from to the receiver. The distance lets the receiver calculate how close he is to the iBeacon. This is of little value unless the receiver knows the geo-coordinates of the iBeacon.
Here is a simple, optional, enhancement that Apple could make to the protocol -- lets call it iBeacon 2. In addition to the identifier and 2 16-bit data fields, Apple could broadcast the granular parts of longitude and latitude -- maybe another 8-16 bytes.
The longitude/latitude would be stored in the flash of the iBeacon when it was setup or moved.
Then, any receiver would be able to trilaterate his geo-location from three nearby iBeacons and know where he is within 4-8 feet. If the iBeacons were in a shopping mall, campus, hospital, airport, etc. the receiver could access a rudimentary layout over nearby WiFi and display a map/floorplan of the facility -- showing where the user is and how to get to nearby destination ... granular, indoor turn-by-turn navigation.
Not bad, eh?
Other, inexpensive iBeacons in the home/office could use these additional bytes * to Broadcast things like time-stamped motion activity (our motion detector), time-stamped temperature (room thermometer), time-stamped moisture level (garden soil/rain/flood detection).
* these iBeacons wouldn't need to broadcast their geo-location as the iPhone or controller knows where they were placed when they were set pup.
Most (if not all) current iBeacon devices have an ARM CPU, some flash memory, sensors, and a <$2 battery that will last 2 years. An enhanced broadcast stream might require require a larger <$4 battery.
It is interesting to note that some iBeacons do not offer replaceable batteries ... Their stance is that the tech is advancing so fast that you are likely to replace the iBeacon for a better model before the battery dies.
Your point about WiFi connections on the same network is well taken. I've read that Apple may use NFC and/or BLE to facilitate these connections -- including ToouchID for authorization.
Some final thoughts:
Apple bought PrimeSense IR motion detection (Kinect, and 3D mapping chip, IR and Cameras)
Apple bought WiFiSlam WiFi motion detection (indoor mapping and tracking)
Either or both of these technologies can be used in HomeKit (or BusinessKit/EnterpriseKit) along with iBeacons. As described above, iBeacons can refine the indoor location/mapping tracking process by providing inexpensive lighthouses at known locations along the way.
If you already have installed expensive/complex sensors and controllers retrofitting the residence might be a problem ... but it will less of one as time/tech progresses. The new devices will be faster, cheaper, more sophisticated/simpler ... now, where did I put all those CDs
Your point about current automation devices using/requiring 3rd-part web servers is valid. The WWDC HomeKit presos emphasized security and privacy as integral parts of Apple's solution. If you have intelligent devices at both ends (offsite iPhone talking to HomeKit controller), nothing need be sent unencrypted or in the clear. In fact you could send tokens representing actions known only to both ends ... and these could be randomized by a key known only to both ends ... and the randomizing key could be periodically reset ...
It doesn't make sense to do this on inexpensive, specialized iBeacons or HomeKit accessories -- but it's a natural for the iPhone and an AppleTV class HomeKit controller.
In re setting up HomeKit devices. The tool that Apple provides to developers is drop-dead easy.
For example to add an accessory you enter:
Accessory Name : You specify (must be unique within the home)
Manufacturer: Printed and/or (barcode) on the accessory/packaging
Model Number: Printed and/or (barcode) on the accessory/packaging
Serial Number: Printed and/or (barcode) on the accessory/packaging *
You can send a command to the accessory to identify itself -- flash, buzz, vibrate
It's as easy, if not easier than setting up the Phillips Hue.
Even better, the Accessory manufacturers can provide automatic setup apps -- where you run the app on your iPhone, scan the barcode on the package and it fills in the rest -- even suggesting unique names.
My understanding of iBeacon is that the user needs a dedicated app that is programmed to respond to a certain identifier being broadcast by an iBeacon. The app along with location services can send a push notification to the users phone. This is a one way communication from the iBeacon to the phone. The iPhone does not send any communication back to the iBeacon and the iBeacon is not connected to the Internet or the private network.
Now that I think about it though, perhaps, if the app receiving a signal from the iBeacon is Apple's own HomeKit app and it was in communication with a home-based digital hub over WiFi, then it should be able to send commands to a device within the home. Depending on the action required, it does sound a bit convoluted though. If you just wanted the lights on you could just say "Hey Siri, turn on the lights." That way at least you are still in control in case you didn't want the lights to come on automatically.
If the iWatch were something that one would wear 24/7, in addition to monitoring your movement during sleep to track how well you're sleeping, it could interact with iBeacons in your home to detect when you get out of bed in the middle of the night. The iWatch would then notify The HomeKit app on your iPhone which you might have configured to turn on floor lighting in your vicinity to allow you to safely navigate your way to the bathroom or perhaps to the kitchen to get a drink of water. As you move about in the darkened home, the appropriate floor lights would be switched on and off. Just one of many use cases that I could imagine.
So iBeacons can have WiFi and be connected to a network? I did not know that. Do you have any links to these intelegent iBeacons?
Not necessary or desireable. They need only be connected to an iOS device inside the home. Your iPad, for example, which could then wake up and initiate actions through its connection to the world through wifi.
We need to keep in mind this may never get launched. Does anyone else remember the smaller than the 3rd gen AppleTV that ended up at the FCC a couple years back that never went on sale?
We need to keep in mind this may never get launched. Does anyone else remember the smaller than the 3rd gen AppleTV that ended up at the FCC a couple years back that never went on sale?
It was only a year. How time flies.
Apparently it was to use the A5X, so I’ll bet that’s why it was never released. I imagine the next Apple TV will use the A8 to have h.265 and parity with the rest of their lineup.
Remember, it’s still using the A5r2 die shrink put in late model iPad 2.
[CONTENTEMBED=/t/181347/apples-first-ibeacon-hardware-revealed-in-fcc-application#post_2563509 layout=inline]The app is HomeKit.[/CONTENTEMBED]
Status monitoring: Some inexpensive iBeacons are quite intelligent. They can measure temperature, moisture, humidity, movement, etc -- and send that information to a central HomeKit Controller.
So iBeacons can have WiFi and be connected to a network? I did not know that. Do you have any links to these intelegent iBeacons?
I'm not sure he is correct in his phrasing. Bluetooth LE Beacons can transmit data in the beacon signal. There are many on the market that can do this. Apple's iBeacon data format does not really support that. It only sends two numbers and a beacon GUID. The numbers allow for relevant information to the app. You could have a beacon stuff real-time data in those fields, but I have not seen one that does that. They would normally be something like Store # and department in a retail example. The Bluetooth LE Beacons of course just send the data via BT and don't typically connect via Wifi.
Apparently it was to use the A5X, so I’ll bet that’s why it was never released. I imagine the next Apple TV will use the A8 to have h.265 and parity with the rest of their lineup.
Remember, it’s still using the A5r2 die shrink put in late model iPad 2.
“I didn’t know h.265 was rumored for the A8.”
A man can dream, can’t he?
1) Thanks on the time frame. I did only guess on that.
2) I suspect we need to see H.265 decoding HW to be available at or before we get 4K UHD video from iTS and playback on Macs and Apple TVs.
I am amazed that you even bothered to make a comment like that.
Look... I stopped reading the article when they went into describing what iBeacon is... because I already knew that. Sorry.
Had I read a little but further... I would have found my answer. But Foad answered my question anyway... without the condescending tone.
Forgive me for causing you to take time out of your busy schedule to point out my mistake. You can now go back to whatever it is you do here... hopefully with some tact.
Guess those who know it already don't feel an obligation to actually read the whole thing. Not to be unduly harsh, but is it too much to expect that prior to making a comment, one should RTFA?
Comments
Wimoto wireless sensor system now offers motion detection and water sensing
http://www.treehugger.com/gadgets/wimoto-adds-motion-and-water-sensors-wireless-sensor-system.html
http://www.amazon.com/Wimoto-SEN001-Sentry-Bluetooth-Sensor/dp/B00ES5BJOO/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1405272518&sr=8-7&keywords=wimoto
There are other, similar devices in various stages of production/development ... they're coming!
Yes and no.
It could involve a bit of home remodeling, though. In order for the physical wall switch to override the automation actions, you would need the equivalent of a three-way switch. This new functionality will probably involve somehow getting a new heavy duty custom switching mechanism crammed into a typical shallow residential switch box, which may already be quite full of wire nuts.
Retrofitting an existing residence is probably going to come with a lot of obstacles and expensive professional services.
Wimoto wireless sensor system now offers motion detection and water sensing
In other words, not iBeacon and not HomeKit.
Why not? I thought HomeKit was designed to work with other vendors and I see no reason why iBeacons can't be added to pretty much anything.
mas o menos ...
According to WWDC info: When you are at home using the iPhone, to control the HomeKit accessories, the app has to be running in the foreground ... Except, with HomeKit, you can set triggers, that automatically run in the background???
Then, there is the claim that you can control your HomeKit accessories from offsite, using your iPhone via something they called Apple Connectivity. For example you could be at the office and set the air conditioning (thermostat) at your main home or at the beach house ...
The problem is that they didn't define Apple Connectivity. Connectivity to what? Are you going to send a command, in the clear? Any sniffer would like to know that info. But Apple says the commands are secure (encrypted) ... Does your door lock or light switch have the gravitas * to receive, decrypt, execute, verify the command and return a response?
* Sol, that's Polish sausage
Hah! There's gotta be some intelligent controller in the home to do all that, execute triggers, schedules, send push notifications. IMO, that device is the AppleTV.
The current 3rd-generation AppleTV could do it without a sweat -- but I suspect that Apple will announce a new one with console-quality gaming (among other things).
And here's the biggie, IMO -- to the user, the (AppleTV) HomeKit Controller is platform agnostic. Apple and others can sell accessories, controllers and remotes (iDevices) into Windows, Chrome or Linux households/offices.
Why not? I thought HomeKit was designed to work with other vendors and I see no reason why iBeacons can't be added to pretty much anything.
Just saying it isn't using either of those protocols. There are tons of proprietary home automation products out there. I just asked for an example of an iBeacon that did all the stuff like motion detection, humidity, temperature, etc. As far as I know, iBeacons do only one thing, send out BT identifiers. I'm not saying you could not add on an iBeacon, but the iBeacon is not integrating with any of those other communication and detection tasks as far as I know.
That's correct. iBeacon was designed to be a simple protocol. I can see some additional features being added in time but I think it works because it is meant to be a simple "lighthouse" type device.
Aw, C'mon ... HomeKit is just over a month old -- not even Phillips had a Hue ready. The Wimoto is a Bluetooth 4.0 Smart device -- AKA, the Apple low-level BLE protocol. All Wimoto has to do is refresh (over BLE) their existing devices to add iBeacon protocol.
There were lots of BLE devices which preceded theApple iBeacon announcement. There was a mad scramble to add iBeacon support so they could take advantage of the market defined by Apple.
What Wimito does now is use the lower-level BLE protocol -- it's more robust than iBeacon protocol, but more difficult to program.
An iPhone app that recognizes a nearby iBeacon will often ask the user if they want more information, e.g. the current temperature, If nothing else is available, the app will use the lower-level protocol to dialog with the iBeacon device. More likely, the app will use WiFi to connect with a more robust device than the iBeacon.
Even if Wimoto and others choose not to implement the iBeacon beacon protocol, they still can conform to HomeKit standards -- and be accessible to HomeKit apps ... why wouldn't they?
... Reminds me of the old fog joke about Bull Halsley and the Lighthouse ...
Yes, when acting as an iBeacon a device says: "I'm over here, and my name is Lindissima."
Just like meeting that pretty girl and getting her name.
Big deal, if that's all there is!
But, that iBeacon is also running BLE protocol (iBeacon protocol is built upon it)
So, you can ask Lindissima (using BLE protocol): "What other things should I know about you?"
And Lindissima responds (using BLE protocol): "I have an address and phone number."
You say: "Give me both!"
Lindissima responds: "Take it a little slower -- my phone number is 555-1213."
You say: "Great, I'll give you a call and we'll go from there!"
Lindissima: "Bye'"
You: "Bye."
That's making a connection, that could be the start of something big.
Our motion detector, running as an iBeacon broadcasts 2 16-bit fields in addition to the unique identifier.
The use of those bits is undefined. They could easily be the timestamp of the last motion detected.
The iPhone or HomeKit controller could easily log and monitor changes. Even better, the motion detector, likely, logs when it detects a motion and transmit the log to the controller when asked, using BLE protocol.
Once transmitted, the motion detector clears all but the last log entry, and uses that as its current broadcast timestamp ...
I think they should and probably will, but it has nothing to do with iBeacons.
To summarize, I am sticking to my narrative that:
iBeacon does only one thing, sends out BT identifiers. It is not connected to the Internet or communicating with the receiving device or a server.
HomeKit needs to be in the foreground to issue any commands and in my opinion it is generally going to be more trouble than it is worth to turn on a simple light using your iPhone and an iBeacon rather than just turning on a switch.
I still fail to see how iBeacons offer any useful functionality in a typical home.
Retrofitting a residence for automation is going to be a lot more expensive than many people think.
Security is going to be a major challenge for any remote access to appliances and the setup/configuration of a home-based digital hub, router or automation appliance will likely be a complex task.
The current crop of automation devices use the cloud and the developers' servers. Any commands that you want to send to your device have to be issued from the developers' server by way of the device polling the server for messages, probably on port 443. Otherwise the communication isn't likely to make it through the WiFi security settings.
Although an iOS app can communicate directly to the device through BT, communicating to a device over a private network is also problematic because default WiFi security settings do not allow devices to connect to one another on the private network, although custom configurations could override that default.
Without special port forwarding network protocols like iMessage, FaceTime and Back to my Mac, direct access to appliances from a remote location will not work due to default security configurations, DHCP and dynamic IPs on typical home WiFi.
I would imagine those types of protocols are similar to the way it will probably work under HomeKit.
But it is all just a guess since Apple has revealed very little so far.
It is very Apple-like to release a new technology then enhance it later ... We can easily remember when the only way a developer could write iPhone apps was as browser apps.
Apple was rumored/expected to enhance/update iBeacon tech at WWDC 2014 ... Nada!
You are correct, that currently an iBeacon is limited to what it can do -- basically identify itself and supply a rudimentary distance (signal strength) from to the receiver. The distance lets the receiver calculate how close he is to the iBeacon. This is of little value unless the receiver knows the geo-coordinates of the iBeacon.
Here is a simple, optional, enhancement that Apple could make to the protocol -- lets call it iBeacon 2. In addition to the identifier and 2 16-bit data fields, Apple could broadcast the granular parts of longitude and latitude -- maybe another 8-16 bytes.
The longitude/latitude would be stored in the flash of the iBeacon when it was setup or moved.
Then, any receiver would be able to trilaterate his geo-location from three nearby iBeacons and know where he is within 4-8 feet. If the iBeacons were in a shopping mall, campus, hospital, airport, etc. the receiver could access a rudimentary layout over nearby WiFi and display a map/floorplan of the facility -- showing where the user is and how to get to nearby destination ... granular, indoor turn-by-turn navigation.
Not bad, eh?
Other, inexpensive iBeacons in the home/office could use these additional bytes * to Broadcast things like time-stamped motion activity (our motion detector), time-stamped temperature (room thermometer), time-stamped moisture level (garden soil/rain/flood detection).
* these iBeacons wouldn't need to broadcast their geo-location as the iPhone or controller knows where they were placed when they were set pup.
Most (if not all) current iBeacon devices have an ARM CPU, some flash memory, sensors, and a <$2 battery that will last 2 years. An enhanced broadcast stream might require require a larger <$4 battery.
It is interesting to note that some iBeacons do not offer replaceable batteries ... Their stance is that the tech is advancing so fast that you are likely to replace the iBeacon for a better model before the battery dies.
Your point about WiFi connections on the same network is well taken. I've read that Apple may use NFC and/or BLE to facilitate these connections -- including ToouchID for authorization.
Some final thoughts:
Either or both of these technologies can be used in HomeKit (or BusinessKit/EnterpriseKit) along with iBeacons. As described above, iBeacons can refine the indoor location/mapping tracking process by providing inexpensive lighthouses at known locations along the way.
If you already have installed expensive/complex sensors and controllers retrofitting the residence might be a problem ... but it will less of one as time/tech progresses. The new devices will be faster, cheaper, more sophisticated/simpler ... now, where did I put all those CDs
Your point about current automation devices using/requiring 3rd-part web servers is valid. The WWDC HomeKit presos emphasized security and privacy as integral parts of Apple's solution. If you have intelligent devices at both ends (offsite iPhone talking to HomeKit controller), nothing need be sent unencrypted or in the clear. In fact you could send tokens representing actions known only to both ends ... and these could be randomized by a key known only to both ends ... and the randomizing key could be periodically reset ...
It doesn't make sense to do this on inexpensive, specialized iBeacons or HomeKit accessories -- but it's a natural for the iPhone and an AppleTV class HomeKit controller.
In re setting up HomeKit devices. The tool that Apple provides to developers is drop-dead easy.
For example to add an accessory you enter:
Accessory Name : You specify (must be unique within the home)
Manufacturer: Printed and/or (barcode) on the accessory/packaging
Model Number: Printed and/or (barcode) on the accessory/packaging
Serial Number: Printed and/or (barcode) on the accessory/packaging *
You can send a command to the accessory to identify itself -- flash, buzz, vibrate
It's as easy, if not easier than setting up the Phillips Hue.
Even better, the Accessory manufacturers can provide automatic setup apps -- where you run the app on your iPhone, scan the barcode on the package and it fills in the rest -- even suggesting unique names.
It appears to be 2 inches in diameter.
Maybe less than 1 inch tall.
Smaller than a hockey puck.
If the iWatch were something that one would wear 24/7, in addition to monitoring your movement during sleep to track how well you're sleeping, it could interact with iBeacons in your home to detect when you get out of bed in the middle of the night. The iWatch would then notify The HomeKit app on your iPhone which you might have configured to turn on floor lighting in your vicinity to allow you to safely navigate your way to the bathroom or perhaps to the kitchen to get a drink of water. As you move about in the darkened home, the appropriate floor lights would be switched on and off. Just one of many use cases that I could imagine.
Not necessary or desireable. They need only be connected to an iOS device inside the home. Your iPad, for example, which could then wake up and initiate actions through its connection to the world through wifi.
It was only a year. How time flies.
Apparently it was to use the A5X, so I’ll bet that’s why it was never released. I imagine the next Apple TV will use the A8 to have h.265 and parity with the rest of their lineup.
Remember, it’s still using the A5r2 die shrink put in late model iPad 2.
“I didn’t know h.265 was rumored for the A8.”
A man can dream, can’t he?
I'm not sure he is correct in his phrasing. Bluetooth LE Beacons can transmit data in the beacon signal. There are many on the market that can do this. Apple's iBeacon data format does not really support that. It only sends two numbers and a beacon GUID. The numbers allow for relevant information to the app. You could have a beacon stuff real-time data in those fields, but I have not seen one that does that. They would normally be something like Store # and department in a retail example. The Bluetooth LE Beacons of course just send the data via BT and don't typically connect via Wifi.
1) Thanks on the time frame. I did only guess on that.
2) I suspect we need to see H.265 decoding HW to be available at or before we get 4K UHD video from iTS and playback on Macs and Apple TVs.
And what better place to introduce it than the A8?
Guess those who know it already don't feel an obligation to actually read the whole thing. Not to be unduly harsh, but is it too much to expect that prior to making a comment, one should RTFA?