Securifi Community Forum
Securifi Products => Almond+ => Topic started by: compulov on November 26, 2014, 09:40:43 am
-
It's my understanding that when you use the app to toggle a ZWAVE switch (or do any action, for that matter), that is always relayed through the Securifi cloud servers. When I'm at home, I'm usually on the same Wifi network as my Almond+, so I was wondering if the app could be designed to not rely on the cloud server at all and talk directly to the Almond+ itself. I've just found it somewhat annoying to have the cloud as a point of failure preventing me from turning on a lamp in the same room I'm standing.
-
Not at the moment no, but it's something we're aware of that there are requests for, but it would require some major work on our side, so don't expect it any time soon. Sorry about the cloud being glitchy though, it's not how it should be.
-
2nd.
Make the 'local' apps on tablets etc go through the almond+, and have it queue up changes to the cloud, and once the cloud responds remove them from the waiting list. Only off-site ios/android app devices should have to go through the cloud. If my internet goes down (oh, never, with comcast, sigh) I want to be able to control my devices...
-
+1 what mr23 said.
-
+1 from me too.
-
I truly do hope requirements for basic in home operation will not require cloud access. I just ordered my Almond+ and have just about every home automation software/hardware in a closet somewhere. Revolv has been by go to option for the last 18 months but I've recently been extremely disappointed by the direction they went as a business and feel they left their entire early adopter customer base completely high and dry with a very expensive paper weight. So I was leery to drop another couple hundred bucks on a product that "required" cloud access for day to day functionality.
-
Can you not use the browser app on your phone/tablet, which connects directly to the Almond+? I've done it and it works fine.
-
The android app, at present, goes through the cloud.
-
You could make a web clip to your router page on your phone and control it through there.
Unfortunately, that was not the functionality that I wanted, but maybe it will work for you. I am not a fan of the cloud at all between it being a failure point and the security issues with having one.
Between this issue and the issue that there is still no automation, I'm sad to say I went ahead and ordered a Vera. With Christmas and all the lights, the automation part is a big help. I'm going to keep the Almond+ for the router functions. I do believe in securifi, but the delays are taking too long. Vera also supports a lot more zwave devices already since they've been around for so long.
-
The android app, at present, goes through the cloud.
That's not what I said. I said access the local Almond+ browser UI (using a web browser on your phone) to control/view your devices, nothing to do with the Android app.
-
Sorry about that. Missed the browser piece of that.
-
Guys, I realize it's frustrating but you have to think of it from a practical, network based angle. For the app to work when you are not at home, it has to send through the cloud. For the app to send locally instead of through the cloud, it has to know when to do this. It can't just send locally whenever it's on wifi. It has to know it's on the wifi network that the almond+ you want to send a signal to is also on. That's not easy. It has to have some way of identifying the almond+, securely and definitively so as to prevent any dangerous security holes. Then it would have to identify that it's on the same network as that almond+, also securely and definitely and also for those same reasons. And, this process would have to happen in full every time you connected to a wifi network. It would also have to check to make sure the almond+ was still connected to the same network every time you issued a command. Every. Single. Time.
I realize for many, the almond+ is their wifi router and therefore if their phone is on that wifi, it is also networked with their almond+. But that isn't the case for everybody and even when it is, there still has to be verification to prevent spoofing attacks. It's a large undertaking with massive potential for bug generation at a time when the team is still implementing core functionality.
-
The fact that they are busy is a reason for this to not necessarily arrive in the next release... but it does not stop this from being a valid request. If Securifi will never add this capability, or put development resources to it, they could say so. Flat out, that answer would upset some sure, but it would also be clear. Would I get rid of my Almond+? No. But I definitely would be interested in having the ability not to go through the Cloud. What are my own reasons?
1) Why send the data over the cloud when I am home? I DO NOT have cell service at home. As posts in another thread mentioned, I rely on a pico cell. So either way my cellphone is connecting through the network to get to a cloud site, to get back to itself.
2) The cloud connection has failed multiple times. I do not know of one time that it was Securifi's fault. A couple times it has been the cloud servers (I think they use Amazon). At least once has been my home internet connection.
3) "Simplicity". My phone and many other options I have are set up to keep things internal when at home. Not that I am worried about cloud activity (I have things that send out specifically) but I like the option.
4) Not a concern for me now... but who knows in the future... Bandwidth. With so many ISPs looking at implementing data usage caps (my own, Time Warner, tried before) I think it is only a matter of time until they start trying again. Any way to minimize it, if I desire, would be a plus. Why go off the network if it does not need to?
Now I understand it is tough. Validation of the network connection would prove difficult but the device is already validated for the network. You could even set it up to only allow certain MAC addresses to use the app locally (I would LOVE that because I could let my wife's phone control switches without using my account). Does this make people unhappy that have a more complicated setup? Sure. But there has to be some limitations. Securifi cannot do everything for everyone, be everything. If they come out with a limited thing and say "look, we did it, but there are some caveats you need to be aware of and you can only use it by doing it THIS way..." then I think that is good enough in my book especially to start with.
So far my experience with my Almond+ and Securifi has been positive. I believe they have a good product available. The software needs work but I assumed I was getting into that. I am the type of person that does not mind dealing with betas and bugs (heck, I used to be on and run a software QA team). Is it for everyone in this state? No way. Would I recommend it for friends or family. Not yet. If they come through? It looks promising and I am willing to work with it and them. Things work with the forums and my dealings with Securifi personnel have been good. If they come back and say "nope"... Fine. That is their choice and direction as a company. Like I said before, I am OK any which way. I think they do need to come up with a little better communication to satisfy some of the people that have been making requests, at least showing what some of their priorities are, but I am not that person. The surprise keeps me checking the forums and being active.
Probably too long of a response... and too rambling. Sorry Cuthain... split my head early and I guess it shows... but I hope my overall opinion came across.
-
For the app to work when you are not at home, it has to send through the cloud.
No. No, it doesn't. There's no reason why a http interface could not be hosted on the Almond + and made available over the internet (with the proper security in place to prevent random internet-tough-guys from blinking your lights on and off). It would just mean entering your Home IP address (or your DNS name if you set up that service) into the app settings to make that work.
If a full up webpage was generated, then you only need to navigate to your home IP address, login, and mess with your home automation stuff to your hearts content from anywhere on the internet. No app needed.
In my opinion cloud hosting is where products like 'Wink' have gone wrong. It's another point of failure, of unknown state to the end-user, that they have no control or capability to fix. It adds lag to any sent command and can go offline at any moment, screwing up timed events. I have a Wink and I hate it for these reasons. Please Almond + team, don't put all your eggs into the 'cloud' basket. The 'cloud' doesn't make much sense for this application. There's no reason to route every command through the remote cloud server and back out to the home user when he's on the same network as the almond + 90% of the time he's trying to issue commands. Also, do you really want to be continuously upgrading your severs as the customer base grows, constantly requiring more bandwidth to keep everyone happy, for no recurring revenue return? How are you going to plug that to management? If you can't defend it to management, then the cloud service it doomed to atrophy until it's as unusable as the Wink.
On the other hand, someone who's got it right is Honeywell and their Vista Automation Controller. I recently picked one up for interfacing with my existing home security system. It provides z-wave home automation, controlled from a locally hosted webpage, and sends security email notifications via STMP. No cloud servers needed (but you can buy Honeywell's cloud monitoring service if you really want). Perfectly independent. Fast response time to commands sent via the web interface. I can access the my home website from any where on the net. No app needed. This is the way I want Almond + to go.
-
Well, we're not going to say that we'll never do it, but it's not going to happen any time soon. We're still aware that people would like this feature, but it'd require a lot of work on our side.
What's easy to forget is that we'd need a local server running on the Almond+ that would have to sync with the cloud, say for example if you're at work and your wife is at home, you'd both have to be able to see if the other person is making any changes.
You can already set up an account for her though, simply follow these instructions - http://wiki.securifi.com/index.php?title=Almond_Cloud_-_Invite_More
She'd have full access though, as we've yet to implement any user restrictions.
Your points are valid, but this would take a good few months at least for us to implement and it's something we have discussed, but due to the complexity of it, it's not something we're going to start poking around with for now. If it was easy, we'd be doing it sooner, but it's not. We're also aware of the concern a lot of you are having based on what happened to Revolv, as their product will end up being pretty useless by the time they turn off their servers. We do still have the local web UI, but I also understand for many, this is simply not good enough. Just to be clear, this is where the automation will take place initially, although the plan is to add it to the mobile apps in the future as well, but I don't have any kind of ETA for that.
We, well, at least I, do read 90% of everything posted in the forums. I admittedly miss things, but this isn't my full-time job. That said, I think our product will live or die depending on us listening to our customers. We can of course not do everything that everyone wants, we simply don't have the manpower to do that, BUT we are paying attention and we do discuss a lot of the things being brought up here.
The fact that they are busy is a reason for this to not necessarily arrive in the next release... but it does not stop this from being a valid request. If Securifi will never add this capability, or put development resources to it, they could say so. Flat out, that answer would upset some sure, but it would also be clear. Would I get rid of my Almond+? No. But I definitely would be interested in having the ability not to go through the Cloud. What are my own reasons?
1) Why send the data over the cloud when I am home? I DO NOT have cell service at home. As posts in another thread mentioned, I rely on a pico cell. So either way my cellphone is connecting through the network to get to a cloud site, to get back to itself.
2) The cloud connection has failed multiple times. I do not know of one time that it was Securifi's fault. A couple times it has been the cloud servers (I think they use Amazon). At least once has been my home internet connection.
3) "Simplicity". My phone and many other options I have are set up to keep things internal when at home. Not that I am worried about cloud activity (I have things that send out specifically) but I like the option.
4) Not a concern for me now... but who knows in the future... Bandwidth. With so many ISPs looking at implementing data usage caps (my own, Time Warner, tried before) I think it is only a matter of time until they start trying again. Any way to minimize it, if I desire, would be a plus. Why go off the network if it does not need to?
Now I understand it is tough. Validation of the network connection would prove difficult but the device is already validated for the network. You could even set it up to only allow certain MAC addresses to use the app locally (I would LOVE that because I could let my wife's phone control switches without using my account). Does this make people unhappy that have a more complicated setup? Sure. But there has to be some limitations. Securifi cannot do everything for everyone, be everything. If they come out with a limited thing and say "look, we did it, but there are some caveats you need to be aware of and you can only use it by doing it THIS way..." then I think that is good enough in my book especially to start with.
So far my experience with my Almond+ and Securifi has been positive. I believe they have a good product available. The software needs work but I assumed I was getting into that. I am the type of person that does not mind dealing with betas and bugs (heck, I used to be on and run a software QA team). Is it for everyone in this state? No way. Would I recommend it for friends or family. Not yet. If they come through? It looks promising and I am willing to work with it and them. Things work with the forums and my dealings with Securifi personnel have been good. If they come back and say "nope"... Fine. That is their choice and direction as a company. Like I said before, I am OK any which way. I think they do need to come up with a little better communication to satisfy some of the people that have been making requests, at least showing what some of their priorities are, but I am not that person. The surprise keeps me checking the forums and being active.
Probably too long of a response... and too rambling. Sorry Cuthain... split my head early and I guess it shows... but I hope my overall opinion came across.
-
No. No, it doesn't. There's no reason why a http interface could not be hosted on the Almond + and made available over the internet (with the proper security in place to prevent random internet-tough-guys from blinking your lights on and off). It would just mean entering your Home IP address (or your DNS name if you set up that service) into the app settings to make that work.
If a full up webpage was generated, then you only need to navigate to your home IP address, login, and mess with your home automation stuff to your hearts content from anywhere on the internet. No app needed.
Well, have you tried the local web UI? It actually looks ok on most mobile devices, although it's not perfect, but it does exactly what you're asking for.
In my opinion cloud hosting is where products like 'Wink' have gone wrong. It's another point of failure, of unknown state to the end-user, that they have no control or capability to fix. It adds lag to any sent command and can go offline at any moment, screwing up timed events. I have a Wink and I hate it for these reasons. Please Almond + team, don't put all your eggs into the 'cloud' basket. The 'cloud' doesn't make much sense for this application. There's no reason to route every command through the remote cloud server and back out to the home user when he's on the same network as the almond + 90% of the time he's trying to issue commands. Also, do you really want to be continuously upgrading your severs as the customer base grows, constantly requiring more bandwidth to keep everyone happy, for no recurring revenue return? How are you going to plug that to management? If you can't defend it to management, then the cloud service it doomed to atrophy until it's as unusable as the Wink.
Have you had an issues with lag on the app side on the Almond+? Having played with the Wink hub, our app is 5x faster in terms of response time and I have never seen the issue I've seen on the Wink hub where you switch something and it doesn't change state. We've had some issues where you get a message that the sensor didn't respond, but that's a different matter.
The cloud makes a lot of sense for this application, see me reply above. Then again, as pointed out, we still have a local web UI that doesn't require any kind of cloud connection and this is also where the automation will be located initially, so it'll work even if your internet connection is down, unlike most home automation solutions in the market today.
We don't have to plug anything to management, as management is involved in the daily operation of the company, please remember that we're a smaller company and we also have very flat company structure, so if I want to talk to management (which I guess I'm part of), I'd go to the back of the office where our CEO is sitting...
On the other hand, someone who's got it right is Honeywell and their Vista Automation Controller. I recently picked one up for interfacing with my existing home security system. It provides z-wave home automation, controlled from a locally hosted webpage, and sends security email notifications via STMP. No cloud servers needed (but you can buy Honeywell's cloud monitoring service if you really want). Perfectly independent. Fast response time to commands sent via the web interface. I can access the my home website from any where on the net. No app needed. This is the way I want Almond + to go.
We're looking at adding an SMTP option for email notifications, but it won't happen until next year. Apart from that, I think we're heading in that direction already, but with a free cloud service for those that wants to use it.
-
Thanks for the response Lars. No matter what, you folks keep working at it all and I think it will work out. At least I hope Securifi keeps going because so far, so good.
-
I hope it'll get a lot better soon ;)
-
+1 for me too! I'd like to use the app so I don't have to log-in every time but the A+ web UI would work in the meantime! I'll give it a try ...
my two design cents, if it helps.
- Have us set the home network. If set then once on that network it talks to A+ directly and if not set always thru the cloud. This will allow us to talk to A+ thru the cloud always or directly at our option
- Outside the Home network force the cloud to update status when we access/re-invoke the app and we have a home network set
from what I've seen the app must refresh anyway, at least I'm forced to ... e.g. if a lamp (GE Link bulb) is powered off (power source turned off) it continues to show the unit as ON, so maybe we need a third state to display disconnected state. I guess at this point A+ is unaware that the lamp is powered off.
Side Note: Is there a likelihood of a Windows app in the future (We also have windows phones/tabs in our homes)? If not at least providing the API at some point would allow us to build one for ourselves!
-
Uhm, how is the Almond+ supposed to know that you turned off your ZigBee bulb at the mains switch? That's impossible. The only thing we could report is that the device is offline in a case like this and even that isn't so easy.
Any sensor that has its power source disconnected stops reporting, that's just how it is.
If what you wanted us to do was easy, wouldn't 1. think we'd done it and 2. why aren't everyone else doing it?
Again, I'm not saying this will never be done, but if you read some of the previous replies I've given in this thread, you'd know some of the reasons as to why it hasn't been done and why it'll take a lot of time.
As for a Windows app, yes, it's possible in the future, but so far it's only a small minority of customers/backers asking for this, so it's not a priority.
-
My 2cents on this whole "without the cloud" topic: yes, please!
Now, the biggest issue I see is the protocol problem -- I'm sure the way the A+ and the cloud talk is not the same as the way the cloud and the app talk, so you couldn't directly hook up the app to the A+ without some (likely significant) changes. I don't expect anything soon, but I hope they get around to it eventually. Then when away from home, the app could STILL talk directly to the A+ via VPN. I use this approach now with the web UI -- works the same when at home or away. I've never used the app at all. The only real problem I have with the web UI is that it is clunky on a phone, and the need to log in to the A+ each time I want to use it. If there was a slick mobile interface and a way to use certificates to bypass the login, I'd be perfectly OK with it.
Now, for the simple home user, setting up the VPN and turning it on on their phone might be more than they want to do -- I have no problem with Securifi offering the cloud service, in fact I think it makes sense for them. I'll just not use it.
So my suggestions for the app include:
- ability to input the IP address of my A+ and connect directly (bypassing the cloud) (I'd put in 10.10.10.254 which works when at home or away via VPN)
- certificates or public/private keys for authentication (so no login required), or something like whatever they do with the app now.
- probably a "local/cloud" switch option would be required for users that don't want to set up the VPN. Most users would set it to 'cloud' and forget it. Some users would switch it whenever they need access away from home. I'd leave it on "local" and use the VPN.
I'm really looking forward to the next few updates, hoping the automation starts to be useful -- keep up the good work!
-
absolutely agree in fact I said as much :-[
I guess at this point A+ is unaware that the lamp is powered off.
I guess I should re-phrase ... is it possible to display a disconnected state up on a refresh or if a connection attempt fails? As displaying an ON or OFF state is misleading ...
Uhm, how is the Almond+ supposed to know that you turned off your ZigBee bulb at the mains switch? That's impossible. The only thing we could report is that the device is offline in a case like this and even that isn't so easy.
Any sensor that has its power source disconnected stops reporting, that's just how it is.
-
I just wanted to add that one of the best implementation of what is being asked is done by guys at Radio Thermostat. The thermostat can be managed through cloud access when away which ha a delay as cloud server only pings thermostat at set interval but when I'm on same wifi network, it shows communicating directly with thermostat and changes are instant. The app works same on ios and android. Just a suggestion to reach out to them as they have it working well and it would definitely be a great improvement to Almond+ app.
-
For some devices, maybe, like bulbs, as they're mains powered so they can be "pinged". For battery powered devices it's not as easy, as you don't generally "ping" them to preserve battery life, but we're trying to figure out a way of doing this, as it should technically be possible, it's just not that clear how it's done.
absolutely agree in fact I said as much :-[ I guess I should re-phrase ... is it possible to display a disconnected state up on a refresh or if a connection attempt fails? As displaying an ON or OFF state is misleading ...