If you build for 40 years, stop thinking like a young programmer jumping on the new trend, you need to go with robust solutions even if they cost 10% more. If you build a house, you can even wire it in a way to later add the smart features just where you effectively need them.
You can almost hear the salesman saying "you'll save money on the electrican with this $200 light switch!"
Nothing wrong with "smart" lighting systems (Lutron). These lighting systems are essential for large homes. Just need to be installed properly.
For example he describes how adding a generator made influenced the lighting. That didn't sounded like a wireless problem, but a problem with either the relays or mosfets/igbts that were used for switching or dimming, or the power circuitry that made the chips reset in those units.
There are also wired systems that use the existing wires for example. It's just apples and oranges and I don't think wireless vs wired is the issue at hand here.
You answered your own question:
> For example he describes how adding a generator made influenced the lighting. That didn't sounded like a wireless problem, but a problem with either the relays or mosfets/igbts that were used for switching or dimming, or the power circuitry that made the chips reset in those units.
The long, long list of subtle things that can go wrong with wireless is the problem. Reassigning blame to the Wan Hung Lo SMPS barfing RF all over the place doesn't solve anything unless the person in question has the expertise, tools, and patience to track down and address the interference at the source. Putting in wires that easily reject such interference, OTOH, solves the problem nicely.
Your statement that it must be interference is unfounded.
It's an unfair statement trying to tie reliability to one aspect of the system. It's like a doctor who never prescribes oral medicines because the stomach is such a hellish place.
Wireless might not be the weakest link you think it is. In the end wireless is just EM waves, it is just physics. There is no way it violates the laws of physics.
each of these corrupt packets has potential of causing lasting strange behavior. especially if we're talking about a closed source system from a niche vendor.
a more fitting metaphor would be a doctor that blames the patients lung cancer on his smoking habit. while there might've been another reason for the affliction, that possibility is low.
The problem of closed source and niche vendors is also a different one.
I feel sorry for people that get advice from the current home automation dealers. What seems to be important to them is to make a lot of money. One of the ways to guarantee that is by forcing customers to wire their homes completely and require them to contact them for any change imaginable. This is how KNX is sold in Europe. Subsequently they create a very crappy KNX wireless protocol almost as a marketing trick.
With DALI for lighting its the same. Moreover, when those lobbying groups come up with a DC standard, even the voltage level is not standardized.
There are also plenty of wireless systems that aren't attacked for being "wireless". People know that if "3G" or "4G" "doesn't work" it is a matter of devices and coverage. If it is GPS they know it's getting a signal from satellites. Light is wireless as well, so with infrared they often know it's changing the battery in the remote or pointing more accurately to the receiver.
You will probably see the same behavior with wireless charging. A few people will swear by a cable. However, the majority of people will be happy to get rid of them. Yes, first the distance might not be large enough and a few protocols have to be standardized, but there is no reason that it can't be done reliably.
And about corruption of packets. We already know how to handle stochastic processes since UDP. Besides that, human communication is inherently fuzzy and lossy. That's not a reason to despise it. Collaborative filtering methods that now form e.g. the blockchain backbone come also from fields such as wireless (sensor) networks to give one example of how people make reliable systems out of noisy ones.
The faulty packets are mostly dropped in the application layer on fully fleshed out systems, but this is exactly why the niche vendors with their closed source controllers are so error prone in that regard. And i'm merely pointing out the to me most obvious problem. There are way more edge cases around.
"The next day the REV was installed. It fixed the TV, the Touch Screen AND all the flickering, humming lights. Control 4 reported the REV “to fix some known bugs”. Hmmmm…."
If the system is wired, chances are only central hubs/displays need to be changed. With a wireless system then ALL the switches and sockets will have to be changed.
That seems contradictory.
Even with the switching, if Lutron goes out of style, atleast all of the switch-legs are run to a central location. The entire system could be replaced (and the devices). It would not be cheap, but at least it's possible. Replacing devices in the wall isn't the worst thing in the world.