Expired Hot Deals

[Amazon.com] Wemo WiFi Smart Dimmer - Save $40 - Amazon USA

  • Last Updated:
  • Sep 18th, 2017 5:07 pm
Deal Addict
Sep 29, 2008
1151 posts
1022 upvotes
Toronto - Markham/Sc…
vkizzle wrote: If you're specifically speaking about light switches and dimmers only, yes, I agree.
Once you add other devices, you're going to have a hell of a hard time opening and closing multiple apps for the different devices; on a daily basis.

Ex: my home automation setup consists of a garage door, door lock, sensors and hvac all controlled via ST; otherwise it is 4 different apps!
You missed my point.

If you have all of your devices going through a hub and it fails, you lose all those devices.

If they can still work without a hub you can use their respective apps to still function them.

I mentioned Alexa and Google Home. There are devices that work directly with that device without a need for a hub to consolidate them.
Deal Expert
Aug 22, 2011
34038 posts
19910 upvotes
Ottawa
amkorp wrote: You missed my point.

If you have all of your devices going through a hub and it fails, you lose all those devices.

If they can still work without a hub you can use their respective apps to still function them.

I mentioned Alexa and Google Home. There are devices that work directly with that device without a need for a hub to consolidate them.
You missed my point, where I said I can either use 4 individual apps or one via ST!
Member
Aug 18, 2011
254 posts
211 upvotes
North York
amkorp wrote: If you have all of your smart devices connected to a hub, that's a single point of failure. Nothing will work if that hub crashes.

Whereas if you have non hub reliant devices, if something fails, you can still use all of your other devices without any issues either through a central control like Alexa or Google Home or if that fails through the individual device's application.

I find hubs also cause configuration and communication problems on occasion. One less networked device to troubleshoot is always a good thing.
If your internet or router fails, you've got yourself the same single point of failure....
Deal Addict
Sep 29, 2008
1151 posts
1022 upvotes
Toronto - Markham/Sc…
HoRRo wrote: If your internet or router fails, you've got yourself the same single point of failure....
2 points of failure with a hub on your network.

Now you're just being silly.
Deal Addict
Sep 29, 2008
1151 posts
1022 upvotes
Toronto - Markham/Sc…
vkizzle wrote: You missed my point, where I said I can either use 4 individual apps or one via ST!
So Smartthings would never fail? It's fail proof?

If it stops working, how are you accessing your devices?
Member
User avatar
Aug 29, 2001
415 posts
179 upvotes
Toronto
On one hand, I believe wemo smart devices will continue to run schedules during an Internet outage or total WIFI loss.
In such cases, turning on and off the switch would be limited to physically pressing the switch to control it.

On the other hand, a centralized hub can help perform brand agnostic automation and control.

Everybody wins at the Internet!
Deal Expert
Aug 22, 2011
34038 posts
19910 upvotes
Ottawa
amkorp wrote: So Smartthings would never fail? It's fail proof?

If it stops working, how are you accessing your devices?
Nothing is fail proof, as ST runs off the cloud.
The smart tstat and GDO have their own apps, whereas the smart lock and sensors would require either ST or Wink.
Deal Addict
Aug 18, 2009
1615 posts
947 upvotes
Toronto
amkorp wrote: You missed my point.

If you have all of your devices going through a hub and it fails, you lose all those devices.

If they can still work without a hub you can use their respective apps to still function them.

I mentioned Alexa and Google Home. There are devices that work directly with that device without a need for a hub to consolidate them.
I definitely would not avoid a hub just because it's a potential single point of failure. First of all, hubs generally do not fail that often. Even so, that "disadvantage" is easily offset by all the advantages of a hub. For people serious about home automation, a hub is a must as there are way more options in terms of hub compatible sensors/devices. In addition, a hub consolidates everything into a single interface (application) as well as providing the ability to set triggers without having to rely on something like IFTTT (not very reliable and not always supported).

Even if someone was ONLY looking at light switches with no intention to integrate other Smart home devices I would still argue that WiFi switches are inferior to ZWave. The key advantage with Zwave is that they do not operate in the crowded WiFi bands and they work together to create a mesh network. WiFi switches need strong WiFi coverage across your whole house (more routers/wifi repeaters) and may interfere with other WiFi devices.
Deal Addict
Aug 18, 2009
1615 posts
947 upvotes
Toronto
amkorp wrote: So Smartthings would never fail? It's fail proof?

If it stops working, how are you accessing your devices?
If your WiFI router/modem fails, how are you accessing your devices? You're right, a hub "may" fail. But so could a lot of other things. Simply removing 1 point of failure among several is not really that big of an advantage!
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jan 23, 2009
5242 posts
2103 upvotes
OP, posting in the title SAVE $40 is BS, post actual price and people will not bother to even read "deal" like this
Jr. Member
Jul 10, 2017
120 posts
148 upvotes
amkorp wrote: 2 points of failure with a hub on your network.

Now you're just being silly.
If my router/Internet goes down, my Insteon hub is still accessible via any Insteon switches/remotes. So more like 1.5 points of failure. Insteon offers lots over Wemo although I can't say that I've been 100% thrilled with Insteon since recently getting started with it. I'd like more control (like ISY-994) though I'm not spending any more money on automation at this time.
Deal Addict
Sep 29, 2008
1151 posts
1022 upvotes
Toronto - Markham/Sc…
VertigoM wrote: If your WiFI router/modem fails, how are you accessing your devices? You're right, a hub "may" fail. But so could a lot of other things. Simply removing 1 point of failure among several is not really that big of an advantage!
IF you've got 2 points of failure (hub and router) vs. 1 point of failure (just router) that's a huge advantage. Anyways, I never said hubs are not good. All I was saying is that if you have a choice between hub only functionality vs. independent (which will allow hub connectivity) functionality. The latter is the better option.
Deal Addict
Aug 18, 2009
1615 posts
947 upvotes
Toronto
amkorp wrote: IF you've got 2 points of failure (hub and router) vs. 1 point of failure (just router) that's a huge advantage. Anyways, I never said hubs are not good. All I was saying is that if you have a choice between hub only functionality vs. independent (which will allow hub connectivity) functionality. The latter is the better option.
You realize there's more than just 1 or 2 points of failure though, right?

1. Failure of Cable/DSL Modem
2. Failure of WiFi router/extender(s)
3. Failure at your internet provider
4. Power failure
5. Cell phone failure

Any of the above can cause you to lose connectivity with your devices if you're not at home.

I see what you're saying with the hub vs independent choice but in this case the only "independent" choice for a light switch means WiFi. And I believe there are significant disadvantages to WiFi switches which i mentioned in my previous post.

Anyway, we can agree to disagree :)
Deal Addict
Sep 29, 2008
1151 posts
1022 upvotes
Toronto - Markham/Sc…
VertigoM wrote: You realize there's more than just 1 or 2 points of failure though, right?

1. Failure of WiFi Modem
2. Failure of WiFi router/extender(s)
3. Failure at your internet provider
4. Power failure
5. Cell phone failure

Any of the above can cause you to lose connectivity with your devices if you're not at home.

I see what you're saying with the hub vs independent choice but in this case the only "independent" choice for a light switch means WiFi. And I believe there are significant disadvantages to WiFi switches which i mentioned in my previous post.

Anyway, we can agree to disagree :)
How about we keep going? Failure of neighborhood grid, failure of government, failure of human kind.

Like I said before, we are strictly talking about internal network components that you have direct control over. So you've got the hub, and any LAN network devices. Most people have the hub and a router. Remove 1 device and you've lowered your fault risk by half.

Again, independently accessible devices that can also work on a hub are preferred.

I agree.
Deal Addict
Aug 18, 2009
1615 posts
947 upvotes
Toronto
amkorp wrote: How about we keep going? Failure of neighborhood grid, failure of government, failure of human kind.

Like I said before, we are strictly talking about internal network components that you have direct control over. So you've got the hub, and any LAN network devices. Most people have the hub and a router. Remove 1 device and you've lowered your fault risk by half.

Again, independently accessible devices that can also work on a hub are preferred.

I agree.
My point was we're talking about sub 1% failure rates. Halving it is not a meaningful advantage.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)