1. 62
  1. 6

    Nice article, I especially enjoyed the sarcastic side-comments.

    1. 7

      Remember, S in IoT stands for Security.

    2. 2

      So basically, the world of IoT is immature and there’s lots of product churn as companies try to differentiate themselves? Seems quite an exciting time to me, not sure why the author is so snarky (but maybe some people enjoy this writing style).

      1. 5

        The problem isn’t quite that they try to differentiate themselves, but that they do so using closed ecosystems and proprietary solutions.

        In an ideal world, you’d have an IoT device use Bluetooth or broadcast a wireless network during setup, move over to actually use a dedicated network, expose itself over documented HTTPS REST endpoints, and optionally phone home if possible to the value-add service that the manufacturer might want. And that’s it, other than maybe providing a mechanism for uploading custom SSL certs.

        That way, even if your company went out of business the consumer could still do neat stuff with the device and also find ways of orchestrating it.

        Unfortunately, that’s not the way the market has evolved.

        1. 3

          If you’re willing to go with the “grandpa” gear then you can use fairly well documented (albeit painful) standards. With some elbow grease (setting up home assistant, doing some RasPi interop) you can get a perfectly controlled setup. Then for the folks that don’t want to think about it, they can use closed protocols and apps.

      2. 2

        I would +2 this if I could. It’s funny and has a lot of useful comparisons across product and protocol lines. Sweet.

        1. 2

          I couldn’t help but read it in FPS Russia’s voice.