Apple has proven me wrong about HomeKit

https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/3/16083996/internet-of-shit-wrong-about-homekit

187 71 9 years ago

leeoniya3• 9 years ago

works well if you're living the iLife in Apple's walled garden. and here i am hoping for https://www.openhab.org/ to become bigger and better. i want automation without vendor lock-in (hardware or software), and without relying on closed-source and third-party services for the pleasure.

i was doing some research recently about having wifi-connected smoke alarm/CO listening device that can recognize [1] off-the-shelf alarm beeps (which are standardized) and send me an SMS & email. this turned out to be surprisingly difficult to achieve. ideally, i could hook up a microphone to a BeagleBoard of Raspberry Pi, run some daemon that monitors audio, does beep recognition and lets me hook into notifications.

instead, there are proprietary listening devices (ok, fine) that all work by sending notifications via third-party service (not fine) to some android or iphone app (not fine).

[1] https://github.com/benjaminchodroff/alarmBeepDetect

moftz• 9 years ago

Why not just monitor the actual beeper's voltage and alert when its going off? It seem's a lot more difficult to analyze audio and listen for specific sounds and patterns than it is to just trigger an interrupt when a beeper turns on. Program an ESP8266 to fire off a message whenever the interrupt pin is driven high [1]. You might even have enough room to fit the thing inside the alarm and power it using the onboard power supply. The alarm might even have a signal that is always active when the alarm is going off versus pulsing to active the beeper. It might be cheaper and more adaptable to have just one device listening for any beeps but it's going to be much more complex than just adding modems to all your devices that you care to listen to that fire off messages to a home server that would forward alerts if need be. You could even just make the modems use all the same code and refer to them by MAC address when they are sending out alarm messages to your server ("alarm a0:b1:c2 is activated").

[1] https://techtutorialsx.com/2016/12/11/esp8266-external-inter...

leeoniya3• 9 years ago

hmmm, i wonder if i can MITM a Roost Smart Battery, so i dont have to use their apps or servers. i guess IFTTT would be okay, and it does support this.

microcolonel• 9 years ago

Here in Ontario, it seems the government doesn't think too kindly of modifying smoke detectors[0], not sure about CO detectors. I suspect that wiring directly to the beeper is grey or black in many places. I guess you could do it if it's a redundant detector.

[0] http://www.mcscs.jus.gov.on.ca/english/FireMarshal/MakeitSto...

tzs• 9 years ago

The listening approach is, perhaps, more complex overall, but most of the complexity is in software. The hardware is simple commodity hardware.

The put an ESP8266 in each device approach puts the complexity in hardware, and in interfacing the hardware to the smoke detector. If you ever replace a smoke detector with one from a different manufacturer you may have to change the interface method.

In addition to that, the ESP8266 approach is harder to manage. Whenever you change your wifi network in a way that requires updating login parameters you have to update the firmware on all your smoke alarm monitors.

With the listening approach, you just have to change login parameters on the device that is doing the listening (if it is using wifi...I'd probably actually have it on ethernet)

Furthermore, the listening approach can be expanded to listen for other things besides smoke detectors just be changing software. You could add listening for your doorbell, or your telephone, or your dog barking, or glass breaking.

windlep• 9 years ago

I was originally considering openhab, but then I discovered Home-Assistant (https://home-assistant.io/) and I've been hooked since. It ticks off a bunch of check-boxes that made it a great home OSS solution:

Pro's

- No internet required, can run entirely on a Rasberry Pi

- Integrates with most everything thanks to the huge component library (https://home-assistant.io/components/)

- Easy to write your own Python component to integrate with new stuff

- Can use existing SmartThings/etc hubs or Z-wave usb stick to talk to most anything

- Fairly easy to write automations

- Well written Python 3 code-base that's fairly easy to read and see what's going on yourself

Con's

- Definitely more for the DIY tinkerer

- Need to write YAML for the automations, though a new GUI makes this easier for many cases

Setting up an SMS to me when a motion sensor tripped was pretty easy, my automation was:

    - alias: Alerting on bedroom motion
           initial_state: False
           trigger:
             platform: numeric_state
             entity_id: sensor.bedroom_burglar
             above: 0
           action:
             - service: notify.aws_sns
               data: 
                 message: "Bedroom alarm sensor has been tripped!"
                 target: HassAlert

I've had it running for over a year now, and it's been quite nice.

leeoniya3• 9 years ago

sounds pretty nice. thanks, i'll check it out.

ryukafalz• 9 years ago

I second the Home Assistant suggestion - I've also been running it for a while now, and it's pretty easy to get the hang of once you've been using it for a while.

Admittedly I'm definitely a tinkerer myself, but I honestly like the config just being a bunch of YAML files. It's really easy to back up that way.

xdissent• 9 years ago

Home-assistant also has a great homebridge plugin (https://github.com/home-assistant/homebridge-homeassistant) to easily bridge devices to HomeKit. I got home-assistant talking to zwave and zigbee with a Linear HUSBZB-1 stick (new version does both) and finally threw my wink hub in the garbage. Even through Home app -> homebridge -> home-assistant, everything is super fast and 100% local, unlike most of the commercial hubs.

Fnoord• 9 years ago

What would be the steps you'd take when you receive the SMS "Bedroom alarm sensor has been tripped!"?

seanalltogether• 9 years ago

I've been contracting with a major iot company for a couple years and their new product for the past year has been working on becoming homekit compatible. I can't say so far that I've been impressed with how things work on the Apple side. The concept of device vs service has been creating confusion for both our custom app as well as how devices are displayed in the Home app.

The review process is very cumbersome as well, the company I work for wants users using the Home app, but apple requires we create a homekit compliant app to certify the hardware. I don't understand why Apple can't certify the products with their own Home app.

Lastly there is no way to make our hub present itself for remote connections in Homekit, despite Apple requiring us to use chips certified to their standard. The user has to have an ipad or apple tv in the house to act as a gateway. This is a confusing concept to explain to users if they've been using our protocol for the last 2 years and now want to migrate to Homekit.

verelo• 9 years ago

This! I made my entire house HomeKit, only to rip it all out and replace it with SmartThings. An expensive mistake but HomeKit is terrible; slow, expensive, limited functionality and compatibility and a massive lack of devices that connect to it.

fishywang2• 9 years ago

I never tried HomeKit (not really in Apple's ecosystem), but I do like SmartThings. I won't say I "love" SmartThings, there are many things I can complain about it, but the bottom line is SmartThings provided a very powerful platform, you can write Groovy code to achieve most of the goals you have, even though the process of writing such code might be painful (for example, their web IDE is, let's just say, not the best). You can even add incompatible devices into SmartThings (for example I added my MyQ garage door control into SmartThings with customized device handler).

megraf• 9 years ago

You shou

IBM• 9 years ago

Apple got the fundamentals correct from the beginning and I've always been mystified by the hot takes claiming it was a failure.

It's designed with security in mind, so your HomeKit fridge isn't going to take part in a DDOS attack [1], and it doesn't require an internet connection. Some people viewed this as the same ol' Apple focused on devices while the world moves on to cloud services, but it turns out that's a big advantage too [2].

[1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/10/doubl...

[2] http://www.businessinsider.com/nest-thermostats-go-down-2016...

Shank2• 9 years ago

For me, the details matter. HomeKit means that Siri can answer a question like "Are my lights on?" whereas the Amazon Echo can only send commands like "turn off" or "turn on" (with no knowledge of system state) to my lights. It's a very minor detail, but it makes me appreciate the HomeKit protocol that much more.

watty• 9 years ago

I don't follow. I just tested with my Google Home and it correctly told me my Coffee Maker was "off". Is this just a limitation of Echo?

Semiapies• 9 years ago

Failure is a safe hot take, because most things fail. It's the cold reading of tech news or business news.

Bartweiss3• 9 years ago

I'm not really convinced they got the fundamentals correct in the beginning, though. From a designer's perspective, the hardware requirement alone is a fatal error - it's a totally unacceptable level of initial lock-in and expense. Fixing that actually looks like a major change to the merits of the device.

derefr• 9 years ago

Fundamentals from the perspective of a consumer: if you buy a HomeKit-certified device, you'll be getting something pretty good. There might not be any HomeKit-certified devices because the development process is/was onerous, but that's a separate question from what consumers get in the end from the devices that do make it through that obstacle course.

freehunter• 9 years ago

A lot of IoT stuff is complete junk, though. People make complaints about Apple products being overpriced but the expectation is reverse of reality. This is what it costs for a quality product. Sure you can make things cheaper, but you have to cut somewhere. Is having your living room lights being part of a botnet worth saving 10% off the purchase price?

Just because item 1 is cheaper than item 2 doesn't mean item 2 is overpriced.

GeekyBear• 9 years ago

Using high level encryption standards seemed to be the sticking point in early devices. Standard chips ran the authentication protocols too slowly.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/07/22/homekit-market-hel...

However, getting the fundamentals correct definitely includes using high level encryption protocols, and we've seen what happens with devices that do not do so.

miheermunjal• 9 years ago

spot on - I feel they could have used more of that cash hoard to actually sponsor more consumer products. Frankly surprised they didn't go after more hardware partners from the initial launch date. Despite being a "kit" its almost a second tier one compared to others.

Just part of "apple needs to connect more with its (3rd party) devs" I guess.

bgentry2• 9 years ago

I'm confused. Despite this line in the article:

At WWDC in May, Apple quietly announced that it planned to relax some of those restrictions. The biggest change was the introduction of software-based authentication. In other words, you won’t have to replace your stuff to make it Apple-compatible going forward, and you’ll get HomeKit’s lauded security thrown in for free — provided the device maker actually goes in and implements it.

The linked HomeKit FAQ says that software authentication is only for non-commercial devices, and that commercial/shipping products are still required to use the hardware authentication chip. So Apple's own docs clearly refute the notion that non-HomeKit hardware can receive a software update to become HomeKit compatible.

Ikea Tradfri is an exception here. They plan to add HomeKit support via a software update, but they do in fact already ship their hardware with an MFI HomeKit authentication chip.

It is possible to add a software authenticated device to a HomeKit network, though you get warned when doing so. This is not new (though official support for it is). But it still sounds like commercial products can't just add HomeKit compatibility via software without breaking Apple's terms.

givinguflac2• 9 years ago

I'm pretty sure they just haven't updated the FAQ because all this stuff is coming with fall updates and is not live yet.

bgentry2• 9 years ago

I don't think there was ever a mention of non-hardware authentication in the FAQ in the past (or even an FAQ at all). There was also never a public PDF of HAP until this year's WWDC, and the link to that PDF also explicitly states that it is for non-commercial products:

https://developer.apple.com/homekit/specification/

Edit: also confirmed this in the WWDC video at 28:20 https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2017/705/?time=1...

And let's say you come up with a really cool prototype? And now, you want to develop a HomeKit accessory for commercial sale. You need to join the Apple MFi Program. You need to join the Apple MFi Program and go through self-certification before you can begin your manufacturing or sale of your accessories. And this is really exciting.

givinguflac2• 9 years ago

HomeKit has been great for us at home. It was a saving grace for Hue because even their revamped software is god awful. Personally I'll take security over openness any day. Not saying you can't have both, just not today with current offerings by anyone.

ancorevard2• 9 years ago

Thanks to HomeKit, my dumb window AC units are now smart. Based on several HomeKit temperatures and humidity sensors in my home, they now turn on and off as desired.

jrullman• 9 years ago

I've been wanting to do the same thing! Mind sharing which sensors/devices you used to accomplish this?

ancorevard2• 9 years ago

I have two HomeKit temperature sensors, and a humidity sensor from the Ecobee thermostat I have (we have central heater, but not central AC).

But you can just pick up a standalone sensor like: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/HL232LL/A/ihome-control-i...

For the two dumb window AC units, I plugged them into a HomeKit smart plug like: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/HKEH2VC/A/elgato-eve-ener... With that plug you also get actual energy use and cost in real-time/historical as well.

Since they are all HomeKit all that sensor and state data is shared with all other HomeKit devices. So I created a HomeKit Automation that triggers the start of the window A/C units when temp triggers a certain threshold and during a certain time of day. Similar trigger to turn the AC off.

I found this HomeKit app to offer much more fine grained automation rules: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/home-smart-home-automation/i...

minimaxir• 9 years ago

HomeKit is amazing with Hue lights, with easy control, dimming, and color changing from the Control Center. With Siri, changing the lights works very reliably, which was not the case with the original non-HomeKit Hue lights.

Disclosure: Ex-Apple employee, but had no interaction with HomeKit.

miguelrochefort• 9 years ago

I don't understand why IoT and home automation has to be so complicated. Why don't we just make devices consume/expose some semantic description of the state of the world, and call it a day?

Below is an example using RDF, SPARQL, and some made-up ontologies.

Here's my kitchen light.

    @prefix rdf:       <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
    @prefix lightBulb: <http://example.org/models/lightbulb/> .

    <http://example.org/people/9876543210> _:me
    <http://example.org/things/0123456789> _:kitchen-light

    _:kitchen-light rdf:type <http://example.org/models/lightbulb>
    _:kitchen-light lightBulb:hasOwner _:me .
    _:kitchen-light lightBulb:hasName "Kitchen light" .

Let's turn it on.

    _:kitchen-light lightBulb:isOn true .

Which of my lights are turned on?

    SELECT ?light ?name
    {
        ?light rdf:type <http://example.org/models/lightbulb> .
        ?light lightBulb:hasOwner _:me .
        ?light lightBulb:isOn ?isOn .
        ?light lightBulb:hasName ?name
    }

Eridrus• 9 years ago

Now make it work remotely in NATed environments.

And make it work for low power/battery driven electronics which don't have the power budget for WiFi.

Oh and they don't have a whole lot of RAM and CPU cycles to spare, so pulling in an XML library isn't really the option of choice.

And how should authentication work, including initial setup?

It's a lot more complicated when you drill into the details. You might be willing to accept a bunch of trade-offs, but that will limit this to a niche product.

salgernon• 9 years ago

You might be willing to accept a bunch of trade-offs, but that will limit this to a niche product

Several years ago I was helping a guy that had a home automation product with a scriptable interface. This was when X10 was prevalent.

He was very proud of it and described all the behaviors he'd coded in loving detail. But one stuck out in my mind: "When I get into bed, the lights go out!" "But", I said, "what if you wanted to read in bed?" He glared at me: "The Bed is for SLEEPING."

These systems need to work for us, and not require us to bend to what they're capable of.

fenwick67• 9 years ago

The schema for representing device state is only one small piece of the problem.

nl• 9 years ago

Congratulations. You "solved" the easy part.

moflome• 9 years ago

FWIW, I'm working on an Arduino/Particle port [1] of the HAP protocol, trying to emulate the Home client using 32-bit C/C++ crypto libraries from the OSS WolfSSL [2]. The folks from Apple Home have been supportive, although their spec needs some help [3]...

[1] https://github.com/moflo/homekit-accessory-emulator [2] https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl [3] https://developer.apple.com/homekit/

Animats• 9 years ago

All your house are belong to us. - Apple.

Being tied to a cloud service is unacceptable. Cloud services only have lives of a few years before they disappear or change incompatibly. Houses need 20 to 50 years of support.

gaius• 9 years ago

It's like everyone forgot http://uk.businessinsider.com/googles-nest-closing-smart-hom...

dingo_bat• 9 years ago

If the article is accurate in stating that homekit devices do not require an internet connection to work, that's big. That's what iot should be, IMO. There should be zero dependence on any hardware out of my house, except electricity of course.

unfamiliar• 9 years ago

Can I implement the HomeKit protocol for my own Raspberry Pi gadget?

Rjevski2• 9 years ago

Yes. Check out Homebridge - it's already been done for you.

Apple has proven me wrong about HomeKit

Related Stories