Jump to content
nevets23

Control4 Intercom Anywhere App

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, nevets23 said:

 


Thanks! What I am really interested in though is how it works when someone pushes the DS2 doorbell, and you’re not in the intercom app on your phone. In other words, how does it notify you there is a call from the DS2? With Bria, as long as the app is running, I believe it just gives you a quick push notification, which in my experience isn’t good enough or noticeable enough to be able to answer quickly. I’m guessing that is the case here as well. I’m also guessing you have to have the intercom app always open/running?

Ideally, I would like to see a call from the DS2, ring to your iphone the way facetime does, regardless of whether you have the intercom app open in the background or are actually in the app. In other words, it would work like receiving any other video/phone call on your phone....any insight into the way this will work would be much appreciated.

Thanks for sharing!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

this. exactly this. most mature apps that use some type of calling feature have integrated with CallKit on iOS. i can't say i have much faith in c4 that they will have proper CallKit integration so that we can get native call notifications globally, but hey, it would be a very nice feature. I'm hoping with the "half year beta cycle" that they have baked this in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When using the 2N Mobile app, the phone rings like any other phone... Scratch that! The phone rings and it shows you a video preview.

I don't know how the Control4 Mobile app will work, but I'm sure it'll ring the phone like a regular call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oh, and to add on here, Doorbird doesn't do this either, so C4 really has a chance to step out on top of the market with their app

Conpletely agree. I have seen very very few apps integrate CallKit....didn’t even realize there was an api for it....for that reason alone c4 really has no excuse not to integrate this into the intercom app.

From my viewpoint, I think this app would be a huge failure if it doesn’t have CallKit, because it essentially render the intercom app pointless for many situations. By the time you open up the app from a push notification, the person may already assume no one is home and leave, or the “ring” may timeout/end.....not to mention there is the issue of even noticing the push notification in real time to even attempt to open the intercom app.

This video highlights my point:



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When using the 2N Mobile app, the phone rings like any other phone... Scratch that! The phone rings and it shows you a video preview.
I don't know how the Control4 Mobile app will works, but it'll ring the phone like a regular call.

Ok, so it sounds like the 2n version has callkit. Hopefully c4 is modeling the intercom app after the 2n version then...at least with respect to that part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nevets23 said:


Ok, so it sounds like the 2n version has callkit. Hopefully c4 is modeling the intercom app after the 2n version then...at least with respect to that part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

we can hope... but i won't hold my breath. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we can hope... but i won't hold my breath. 

Well given the 80 year beta, they have time to incorporate it, if it isn’t incorporated already....if they don’t do it, it will be a huge embarrassment failure. I’m going to stay positive, and believe it will be incorporated.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well given the 80 year beta, they have time to incorporate it, if it isn’t incorporated already....if they don’t do it, it will be a huge embarrassment failure. I’m going to stay positive, and believe it will be incorporated.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So something that was never stated to be incorporated and may not is a huge failure? Wow. I guess all companies fail often in your eyes

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So something that was never stated to be incorporated and may not is a huge failure? Wow. I guess all companies fail often in your eyes

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


As someone who runs large public platform-as-a-Service software/product development operations —— the answer is yes. If what you come to market with doesn’t distinguish you or is even behind what everyone else is doing, then your product is a failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

same as @jragan, yes. it took c4 an inordinate amount of time to adjust their iOS app for the iphone X screen bounds, which in the end all they did was simply expand the canvas for their app, and didnt take advantage of it in any other way. 

integrating callkit is simple, so yes, it will be a disappointment despite them not explicitly calling it out as a feature in their press release. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also, to lay out where i come from here, i am someone who works for one of the major tech companies that runs rolling alphas, betas, and RCs that are rolled out week over week. the fact that c4 has a half-year dev cycle for this is somewhat laughable, but can be _somewhat_ (but not entirely) explained by their need to make it work in all sorts of cases, hardware, projects, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So something that was never stated to be incorporated and may not is a huge failure? Wow. I guess all companies fail often in your eyes

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


I call it how I see it. Doesn’t mean that C4 doesn’t do anything right, but the feature we’re talking about is some obscure feature, or even ground breaking. We’re simply talking about taking advantage of an api and the best features available. If they can’t do that, then something is seriously wrong.

We have all have a vested interest in C4 succeeding, but it doesn’t mean that I am going to applaud them for pooping the bed if they do it...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you just must think that most products are huge embarrassing failures then.  The fact that ring doesn't integrate with control4 - they both have API's - huge embarrassing failure for Ring.  I mean I just think that huge embarrassing failure is a little extreme of a comment.

I think disappointing is more appropriate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you just must think that most products are huge embarrassing failures then.  The fact that ring doesn't integrate with control4 - they both have API's - huge embarrassing failure for Ring.  I mean I just think that huge embarrassing failure is a little extreme of a comment.
I think disappointing is more appropriate. 

It’s not Ring’s job to integrate with others. It is, however, Control4’s job to integrate with others. Ring exists in a DIY market where first and foremost the core functionality must work well - that’s the door station being used as a door station. As long as that works well, 99% of their user base is happy. Control4 bringing a door station to market has not only the core door station functionality to get right but also the integration functionality (with Control4) to get right as well. As the door station is OEM’d by another vendor who already apparently has all the core functionality of a door station in place, this should have been an easy win for Control4 to only have to focus on the integration side. If there is truly that much work for Control4 to do to make basic door station functionality work then clearly OEMing was not the right direction and C4 should have either fully acquired a product line they could control, or they should have created their own from the ground up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jragan said:

not Ring’s job to integrate with others

wow, ok, didn't know that.  Thank you for telling me.  I guess I should tell Josh the CTO of Ring that Ring+ should stop existing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wow, ok, didn't know that.  Thank you for telling me.  I guess I should tell Josh the CTO of Ring that Ring+ should stop existing.

What? Does it behoove them to have an API so others can integrate with Ring - yes. Is it Ring’s job to seek out every potential product that might integrate with them and force that integration to happen - no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you missed the point of my post. Let me try to clarify.

1) I FULLY AGREE that this is a critical and important app for control4 

2) I am not saying the app shouldn't exist

3) I am not defending the beta cycle

What I am trying to say that **if** the app doesn't integrate one API from iOS that doesn't make it complete failure in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you missed the point of my post. Let me try to clarify.
1) I FULLY AGREE that this is a critical and important app for control4 
2) I am not saying the app shouldn't exist
3) I am not defending the beta cycle
What I am trying to say that **if** the app doesn't integrate one API from iOS that doesn't make it complete failure in my mind.

Definitely on the same page there. And I agree with #4 to a point - I think Control4 needs to be better than MeToo to remain relevant. But even MeToo (as long as it’s rock solid) is still a win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still no word...? C4's silence on pretty much everything really makes me question this company's trajectory. I love my C4 system, however, Apple and some others are definitely starting to catch up. I see new, very solidly built and reliable, devices released all the time that integrate with HomeKit, and in some cases, do things that C4 can't even do (e.g. reliable geo-location based tracking/automation). Obviously, as many have pointed out, Apple is a huge company with deep pockets and significant amounts of money in R&D in comparison to C4, but it doesn't change the fact that Apple Homekit is gaining traction as a much cheaper alternative to C4 with many comparable features (including the ability to integrate everything into one app). One of the main differences currently is that Homekit doesn't have the ability to do much, if anything, with respect to control of av products, like C4 does. As of right now, that is a big difference and can justify the exclusiveness and premium that C4 offers. With that being said, however, I believe it's only a matter of time before Apple starts exploring down the AV route for Homekit, which would cause major issues for C4. It's not something that will happen overnight, but I won't be surprised if/when it happens.

In my mind, C4 has one of two options in order to continue to set themselves apart from Apple Homekit and product manufacturers that offer products which integrate with it: (1) start throwing tons of money at R&D (or acquiring cutting edge companies) and continually and frequentlycome out with new cutting edge, innovative and truly useful software and hardware that keep it far ahead of AND distinct from other home automation platforms that just plain work seamlessly; or (2) completely change its business model in a manner that makes it more affordable/accessible and more direct to consumers/end users. I would love for nothing more than to see option 1 be the route C4 goes, but honestly I don't have much faith in them at this point. The c4 intercom app is a prime example of the reason I have very little faith and why I think others are getting frustrated as well. They announce a product (which many indirect competitors have had for a while), say its in beta at the time of announcement, and then almost 6 months go by without a peep. I've never seen a beta last this long, especially without any updates. Meanwhile, the company that makes the product (the door station) for C4 has had intercom app out for a while, so clearly it's not some obscure new innovative technology. It's extremely disappointing and, in my mind either indicates a lack of the proper resources (i.e. skilled coders, technicians, money, etc.), leadership from executives, or all of the above. Regardless of the reason, the rate of innovation, updates, and new product releases does not bode well for the future of this company.

I really hope something changes and soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...