IFTTT - really?

[digitaltrader]

The consumer based hubs already exist. They just need to be integrated into C4 in as far as they aren't yet.

Again, WHY would C4 create all these things, reinvent what's already out there (and take all the risks for a much smaller market) - when it is far more sensible to take all these things and make them work with/under control4.

That would require drivers. What did Control4 buy again recently?

Just speculating of course...

Great point. Let's hope they do exactly that

[turls]

If you want, I can pick something different? Geolocation tracking on IFTTT is actually quite accurate. It wouldn't require a beacon. If people are successfully getting tracking by room INSIDE their homes (or at least they claim they are) with difference GEO services, then I am pretty sure I can get it to function from my driveway to the street. 

 

 

The IFTTT Geolocation seems to be better then that of the currently available options within C4

 

 

Please give more details on what people are using to get within 10 foot or room by room geolocation without beacons.  I guess I have an idea of how this would work (some type of proximity by signal strength) but I haven't heard of this actually being done.  This would be huge if this worked.

[cdepaola]

I didn't say 10' or room by room. However the geolocation within IFTTT Appears to work better then that which i use in C4.

I still want C4 to develop beacons

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[turls]

I didn't say 10' or room by room. However the geolocation within IFTTT Appears to work better then that which i use in C4.

I still want C4 to develop beacons

 

Understood, we've agreed on that point before.  But IFTTT is just an aggregator.  It only depends on other apps/hardware for geolocation (or for anything it provides really), and I'm curious which ones you are talking about.  

[cdepaola]

The funny thing is it's still the ios geolocation, but testing side by side the one within IFTTT fires more reliably. The user interface is also far nicer then entering a distance in the c4 driver.

So while a lot of the perceived difference is in ease of use and in its interface it has just worked more reliably.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[badjesus]

The consumer based hubs already exist. They just need to be integrated into C4 in as far as they aren't yet.

Again, WHY would C4 create all these things, reinvent what's already out there (and take all the risks for a much smaller market) - when it is far more sensible to take all these things and make them work with/under control4.

That would require drivers. What did Control4 buy again recently?

 

Just speculating of course...

 

Great point Cyknight. 

 

I could see that being a lot more beneficial for them.

Not sure on stability (and how secure it is for that matter with an open API) but with IFTTT and SmartThings connection with Logitech Harmony, there is also now options for media support with these smaller hubs. I was surprised to see that last night, where I can now control my video matrix with Smart Things. Also, the Arduino bridge opens up a whole new market for a different (more experienced) type of DIY'er. (The sort of person that would actually DIY C4 if they had access to it). 

I think that if C4 DOESN'T embrace the third party hubs coming out, we are going to see a slow BlackBerry death. 

 

I am excited to try out Smart Things. I was looking last night, and while in my ideal world I would rather have WINK I am excited to get a Smart Things hub and see if I can purchase the driver to have it in C4. Because I am finishing the basement still and don't have my C4 gear, I would LOVE to not spend $100 a light switch for rooms I will barely use. 

 

Also, Smart Things is already simple to enable on IFTTT... I would rather use that than messing around in C4. 

 

 

What do you say Pstuart... interested in someone beta testing the driver in C4?

[AK1]

Now imagine if all the devices in your C4 project could be integrated into IFTTT as IFTTT Triggers and Actions. The integration possibilities would be endless. Of course the security side of this integration is worthy of another discussion. We do have the ability today with the various C4 and third party drivers to replicate aspects of this functionality, but it is piecemeal and complicated in terms of keeping up with the different drivers, capabilities, versions, updates and so on. And a platform like IFTTT is far more accessible.

[moirons]

Whilst I don't pretend to understand IFTTT etc, I do understand the Betamax, Blackberry and even C-Bus experience where the best ultimately fail by being too clever or aloof.   There is of course the Apple Computer experience where despite all of the hype and marketing, Apple barely hold 15 percent of the (enormous) pc market (yeah my heart bleeds too).  Furthermore, last time I looked Crestron were the Apple of the HA community and even they have recently launched Pyng which they cleverly claim is Automation built from the App up.  One wonders what opportunity they see in this domain that C4 cant see?

 

For some time many have accused C4 of trying to be too much within itself.  For a long, long time C4 had the opportunity to become THE OS for home automation, even open itself up for Microsoft or Apple to acquire (which is not a bad thing) but it seems the opportunity to make well over a thousand dollars for a touch screen that has a fraction of the intelligence of say a $300 iPad mini was simply too attractive so gouge they do.

 

Had C4 made a corporate decision to be a company that made little more than a dedicated HA Server and OS, then focus on rapid software development whilst opening up development of hardware and interfaces to the NESTS of the world, this debate would not have any legs.  See also the thread about the $800 door station or take a look at Windows domination of the PC Market despite only developing Software these days.  True, they too started out as a Hardware/Software developer but made a corporate decision that seems to have worked for them.

 

Had C4 worked with third party developers to develop (and prove) third party hardware interfaces as they recently tried to do with Integra and now Sony for amps, they may have flourished. Instead they went off trying to develop their own Matrix Switches, Multi Room Audio and goodness only knows what next, despite there being a dearth of good units to choose from in the market place longing to be universally controlled. 

 

And lets face it who would want to work with a company to further develop your own products when recent history suggests the aforementioned partner would simply release their own competitive product shortly thereafter if they thought they could make a product they could gouge with!

 

It really is about integrity and partnering not instant gratification and greed!

[dogdvr]

Whilst I don't pretend to understand IFTTT etc, I do understand the Betamax, Blackberry and even C-Bus experience where the best ultimately fail by being too clever or aloof.   There is of course the Apple Computer experience where despite all of the hype and marketing, Apple barely hold 15 percent of the (enormous) pc market (yeah my heart bleeds too).  Furthermore, last time I looked Crestron were the Apple of the HA community and even they have recently launched Pyng which they cleverly claim is Automation built from the App up.  One wonders what opportunity they see in this domain that C4 cant see?

 

And PYNG is just trying to be more like C4. Employing items that C4 has had for years

 

For some time many have accused C4 of trying to be too much within itself.  For a long, long time C4 had the opportunity to become THE OS for home automation, even open itself up for Microsoft or Apple to acquire (which is not a bad thing) but it seems the opportunity to make well over a thousand dollars for a touch screen that has a fraction of the intelligence of say a $300 iPad mini was simply too attractive so gouge they do.

 

C4 lets you use that 300 ipad mini they make touch screens that are dedicated to one job but allow you to use the 300$ ipad mini.  How is that gouging? use the one you want.

 

Had C4 made a corporate decision to be a company that made little more than a dedicated HA Server and OS, then focus on rapid software development whilst opening up development of hardware and interfaces to the NESTS of the world, this debate would not have any legs.  See also the thread about the $800 door station or take a look at Windows domination of the PC Market despite only developing Software these days.  True, they too started out as a Hardware/Software developer but made a corporate decision that seems to have worked for them.

 

Had C4 worked with third party developers to develop (and prove) third party hardware interfaces as they recently tried to do with Integra and now Sony for amps, they may have flourished. Instead they went off trying to develop their own Matrix Switches, Multi Room Audio and goodness only knows what next, despite there being a dearth of good units to choose from in the market place longing to be universally controlled. 

 

And Yet again C4 has partnered with Denon Sony Integra for years they have not recently tried this. Sony even put controllers in their receivers. You are not proposing anything they have not done.

 

C4 did not develop their own Matrix, They contacted a well known manufacter (based in Australia) and then put their name on it. NO development cost.

 

 

And lets face it who would want to work with a company to further develop your own products when recent history suggests the aforementioned partner would simply release their own competitive product shortly thereafter if they thought they could make a product they could gouge with!

 

It really is about integrity and partnering not instant gratification and greed!

 

Other than your lack of knowlege, this is a wordy post

[moirons]

Thanks for your flame red response, and I apologise for not knowing everything as you clearly do.  (How about answering a few of my tricky questions in other threads, now that would impress me)

 

I applaud your blind loyalty to C4 and I too have invested significantly in my belief in the product however, I do share the concerns of so many others, many of who would prefer not to endure sarcastic and vacuous, trolling responses such as yours for having the audacity to express any misgivings they may have.

 

You are correct, PYNG is dancing in the C4 domain and doing things C4 have done for years, and more, faster and cheaper (doesn't that even set of the smallest chime for you?) (and what's the bet there is an upgrade path to Crestron?

 

Despite your suggestion, C4 does NOT allow Tablets to fully integrate (intercom?) and unless you still use a Motorola Microtac, Sony Walkman and Kodak Instamatic your dedicated device argument is passé and went out years ago.    BTW, you can buy an iPad and Wall frame for dedicated usage for a quarter of the price and believe it or not, it will do a few more things.

 

Partnering since 2010 is relatively recent and you act as if I didn't mention it.   I did actually forget to mention Sony and searching their web page for their Control4 products think I know why. They do have a really cute remote however (RM-EZ4/BC2).

 

Try telling Snap(Binary) - Neothings and Atlona that Control4 don't have their own products that is the point, not the R&D expenditure.

 

I genuinely want C4 to flourish, to become the standard and the product of choice but I fear with heads remaining in the sand and blind loyalties it will continue to arrogantly plod along until the investors jump on something who's have an exciting future.

 

Forgive me for having an opinion that differs to yours, in the mean time, I will continue looking forward.

[wappinghigh]

^ LOL. A bit of post buyer nerves and apprehension perhaps? Don't worry ...it will pass... Treat it like the domestic "washing machine" like appliance that it is and you will have inner peace. It's very robust: therefore awesome as a washing machine.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wappinghigh]

I just hope that if C4 goes belly up (and I'm not saying this is even a possibility) but if it does a "Squeezebox" ... That there will now be enough interested and passionate uses around to support an ongoing "community squeeze" like platform. Know what I mean?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AK1]

Whilst I don't pretend to understand IFTTT etc, I do understand the Betamax, Blackberry and even C-Bus experience where the best ultimately fail by being too clever or aloof. There is of course the Apple Computer experience where despite all of the hype and marketing, Apple barely hold 15 percent of the (enormous) pc market (yeah my heart bleeds too). Furthermore, last time I looked Crestron were the Apple of the HA community and even they have recently launched Pyng which they cleverly claim is Automation built from the App up. One wonders what opportunity they see in this domain that C4 cant see?

And PYNG is just trying to be more like C4. Employing items that C4 has had for years

For some time many have accused C4 of trying to be too much within itself. For a long, long time C4 had the opportunity to become THE OS for home automation, even open itself up for Microsoft or Apple to acquire (which is not a bad thing) but it seems the opportunity to make well over a thousand dollars for a touch screen that has a fraction of the intelligence of say a $300 iPad mini was simply too attractive so gouge they do.

C4 lets you use that 300 ipad mini they make touch screens that are dedicated to one job but allow you to use the 300$ ipad mini. How is that gouging? use the one you want.

Had C4 made a corporate decision to be a company that made little more than a dedicated HA Server and OS, then focus on rapid software development whilst opening up development of hardware and interfaces to the NESTS of the world, this debate would not have any legs. See also the thread about the $800 door station or take a look at Windows domination of the PC Market despite only developing Software these days. True, they too started out as a Hardware/Software developer but made a corporate decision that seems to have worked for them.

Had C4 worked with third party developers to develop (and prove) third party hardware interfaces as they recently tried to do with Integra and now Sony for amps, they may have flourished. Instead they went off trying to develop their own Matrix Switches, Multi Room Audio and goodness only knows what next, despite there being a dearth of good units to choose from in the market place longing to be universally controlled.

And Yet again C4 has partnered with Denon Sony Integra for years they have not recently tried this. Sony even put controllers in their receivers. You are not proposing anything they have not done.

C4 did not develop their own Matrix, They contacted a well known manufacter (based in Australia) and then put their name on it. NO development cost.

And lets face it who would want to work with a company to further develop your own products when recent history suggests the aforementioned partner would simply release their own competitive product shortly thereafter if they thought they could make a product they could gouge with!

It really is about integrity and partnering not instant gratification and greed!

Other than your lack of knowlege, this is a wordy post

And this post is unduly rude and demeaning. As dealers we would know the video matrix is a rebranded Leaf but a user should hardly be faulted for not knowing this. The OPs views are well expressed and certainly a reasonable contribution to this thread.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[badjesus]

Every DogDVR post is a dick response... it isn't a surprise.

[Cyknight]

Whilst I don't pretend to understand IFTTT etc, I do understand the Betamax, Blackberry and even C-Bus experience where the best ultimately fail by being too clever or aloof.   There is of course the Apple Computer experience where despite all of the hype and marketing, Apple barely hold 15 percent of the (enormous) pc market (yeah my heart bleeds too).  Furthermore, last time I looked Crestron were the Apple of the HA community and even they have recently launched Pyng which they cleverly claim is Automation built from the App up.  One wonders what opportunity they see in this domain that C4 cant see?

 

Apple holds less than 6% world wide, US sales are but a fraction of the whole picture. My heart won't bleed but to each his own.

PYNG does NOTHING to focus on DIY at all - it's an eased way for dealers to do Crestron with something similar to ComposerHE thrown in the mix. There's little for C4 to 'learn' there - they launched an app version of Composer for dealers at the same time, and it doesn't require additional hardware to work.

Also I really don't see how Crestron in any way compares to Apple? Just curious where you'd find that comparison.

 

For some time many have accused C4 of trying to be too much within itself.  For a long, long time C4 had the opportunity to become THE OS for home automation, even open itself up for Microsoft or Apple to acquire (which is not a bad thing) but it seems the opportunity to make well over a thousand dollars for a touch screen that has a fraction of the intelligence of say a $300 iPad mini was simply too attractive so gouge they do.

 

I'd have to agree with DDVR on this one - I don't see how they're gouging you? Use that 300 dollar iPad - pointing out intercom as gouging seems a bit of an overstatement. For all my hesitance about the whole setup there, no-one's forcing you to use C4's solution if it doesn't fit your bill. I wish there was a nicer, cleaner solution and several 3rd parties are working on one, and C4 is not stopping them, on the contrary - quite the opposite I'm told. Plus the true intelligence of the Apple iPad/iPhone is the needless new versions they push out every quarter or so with it's added marketing and consumer slavery. Mind you, other product manufactuerres do the exact same thing with Android if you aske me - I'm not targeting Apple specifically in this.

 

Had C4 made a corporate decision to be a company that made little more than a dedicated HA Server and OS, then focus on rapid software development whilst opening up development of hardware and interfaces to the NESTS of the world, this debate would not have any legs.  See also the thread about the $800 door station or take a look at Windows domination of the PC Market despite only developing Software these days.  True, they too started out as a Hardware/Software developer but made a corporate decision that seems to have worked for them.

 

Had C4 worked with third party developers to develop (and prove) third party hardware interfaces as they recently tried to do with Integra and now Sony for amps, they may have flourished. Instead they went off trying to develop their own Matrix Switches, Multi Room Audio and goodness only knows what next, despite there being a dearth of good units to choose from in the market place longing to be universally controlled. 

 

You can point the finger either way, they could open up, and 3rd parties could too. NEST is the perfect example - they have actively made (reliable) integration of their device difficult at best untill quite recently, when they worked WITH Control4 to create an API (and did a meager job of it, but that's it's own discussion). For all the comparison to Microsoft - they recently tried to re-enter the hardware market again! Apple still does it and has never been bigger, Google is starting to do it in order to better contend.

Control4's offering of hardware outside of controllers largely consists of lighting (which, while expensive is among the best out there), Audio distribution (when they started there was not much on offer to speak off, and the product has become a great quality piece for a reasonable price - and there is NO block on using anything else), and fairly recently an HDMI switch which main intention is to create an HDMI switch that updates by itself and/or with the system without requiring on-site work to do so (hardly a crime).

 

And lets face it who would want to work with a company to further develop your own products when recent history suggests the aforementioned partner would simply release their own competitive product shortly thereafter if they thought they could make a product they could gouge with!

 

The list of companies very happy to work with Control4 continues to grow, few (if any?) stopped. Sony built-in C4 receivers were ended for one very simple reason - they didn't sell well enough, Sony however still works with Control4 as a partner. Leaf still works with (even sells through!) Control4, the ONLY recent addition to hardware Control4 made. As do several other manufacturers of HDMI switches. I'm failing to see where this is coming from?

 

It really is about integrity and partnering not instant gratification and greed!

 

Understand that I'm really not trying to be rude, unfriendly or anything of the sort. Not even trying to push back really.

I'm truthfully trying to understand where the frustration is coming from - because I in all honesty do not see where your argumants are coming from, and truly, really, am asking you to elaborate.

Better understanding is ALWAYS the goal.

[wappinghigh]

The angst comes down to the "people don't buy platforms" vs "people buy and or get pushed an entire (C4) platform" does it not?

 

The big Q is has Control4 come to terms with the fact that yes... People don't buy entire HA platforms... ?

 

Sure they put them in (like I am doing for the second time now....LOL..call me crazy I guess...) as a backbone.. but *every* HA product in the entire chain as C4??

 

No company in their right mind would expect to have a handle on *every* product in the entire field of HA..

 

..  ie be able to be up to speed and produce the latest "state of art" TS, doorstation, lighting solution, TStat... etc etc all in house (or even rebadged) entirely themselves...

 

Surely not?? 

[wappinghigh]

^ So M's points about Clipsal cbus are a very good example.

 

If you know the history of this, it failed because of just that (they tried to do a bit of everything and did not embrace full integration)....

 

They did a bit of lighting, TS, alarms, AV control, TStats, wireless, etc etc.... but happened to not do each individual link in the chain very well... 

 

They also let their OS access sit there stagnant on Win XP for years until it was stone cold dead.. 

 

Credit where credit is due. That was a great example and C4 needs to be careful not to go down a similar path IMHO..

[wappinghigh]

The consumer based hubs already exist. They just need to be integrated into C4 in as far as they aren't yet.

Again, WHY would C4 create all these things, reinvent what's already out there (and take all the risks for a much smaller market) - when it is far more sensible to take all these things and make them work with/under control4.

That would require drivers. 

Yes. Extremely good point.

 

But the integration (from the C4 "enthusiast's" homeowner perspective anyway): simply comes across as being a little to slow all the time.... 

[msgreenf]

The angst comes down to the "people don't buy platforms" vs "people buy and or get pushed an entire (C4) platform" does it not?

The big Q is has Control4 come to terms with the fact that yes... People don't buy entire HA platforms... ?

Sure they put them in (like I am doing for the second time now....LOL..call me crazy I guess...) as a backbone.. but *every* HA product in the entire chain as C4??

No company in their right mind would expect to have a handle on *every* product in the entire field of HA..

.. ie be able to be up to speed and produce the latest "state of art" TS, doorstation, lighting solution, TStat... etc etc all in house (or even rebadged) entirely themselves...

Surely not??

People do buy platforms. That is why we all have control4. Because it's a platform. No one says that you have to use all c4 gear. Idk where that is a misconception. But thst also doesn't mean that control4 or developers are going to wrote integration with everything and anything. It takes time and money neither of which are free.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wappinghigh]

^ Nah forget it. It aint worth it. Note to self: be happy with C4 as the backbone. It's great at that. Just leave C4 do the grunt work and forget the sparkle:  Life's good. I'm at peace with it all right now. Show me some real problems

[RyanE]

I think this is a valuable thread, and agree that Control4 still needs to work on 'IOT-type' things.

 

I disagree with those in this thread who say that Control4 is not partner-centric, and doesn't open itself up enough to partners / partnerships.

 

Control4 has *never* (intentionally) limited or crippled it's ability to interface with 3rd party products, and if someone sells a solution that does X better than Control4 does X, there's usually pretty quickly a driver to allow Control4 to control the 3rd-party solution for X.

 

That's always been *baked in* with Control4, especially since we developed DriverWorks.

 

Selling a Control4-only solution has not made sense since day 1, and IMHO, would never make sense.

 

RyanE

 

P.S.  Good stuff, and a Happy New Year!

[digitaltrader]

Unfortunately Control4 Corporate is not proactive about making drivers anymore.  Now that EV has been swallowed by C4 I hope that changes, but the constant change of 3rd party driver resellers all requiring a 3rd party server for verification is really risky for the end user when they go belly up.

[Cyknight]

..at which point those drivers are likely to be opened up in short enough order. Bruno will see to that

[wappinghigh]

^ yes. lol. "Opened up" indeed. Carnivale style?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyanE]

Bruno 'opening up' any drivers in the new .c4z format's new encryption is highly unlikely.

 

2.6 and up, unfortunately.

 

RyanE