Nest Acquires Home Automation Hub Revolv, but Will Stop Selling It | Hacker News Reader

Nest Acquires Home Automation Hub Revolv, but Will Stop Selling It

recode.net

33 pointsDuhck17 comments

I really like Nest's products. They also own DropCam which makes good if a little overpriced IP cams.

One big disappointment was that when Nest purchased DropCam they shelved Dropcam's then up-coming "Tabs" which were security sensors which communicated to a DropCam and you could receive alerts via their hub[0].

Honestly in the rush to home automation it really feels like security has been ignored. Traditional security companies charge too much and their products are antiquated ($30/month subscriptions anyone?).

A lot of people aren't comfortable with IP cams in their home for obvious reasons. They would be more comfortable with motion sensors which connect into a hub and allow you to receive push notifications when they're triggered on a schedule.

I know for an elderly relative I wanted that exact setup. She was uncomfortable with an IP camera in her home (which is reasonable) so I was looking for a single motion sensor which would send me alerts so the same thing could be accomplished without invading privacy.

Home security is ripe for disruption.

[0] http://blog.dropcam.com/look-whats-next/

I looked into this, and ended up signing up for ADT.

As a software engineer, residential security systems bug the hell out of me. Almost all of them are susceptible to someone coming up to your house and snipping the phone and network cables before entering. That's right, these systems do nothing if the connection is cut. There is no keep-alive. Apparently, phone lines disconnect so much that if the security company called the police every time it happened, there would be a lot more false positives than actual emergencies. ADT does have a product that helps with this: they use wired phone lines as well as cellular lines for communication. This setup is harder to disrupt.

Moreover, almost all security systems are susceptible to a very simple attack: run into the house and find the wiring panel. Then smash it. There, now no call will be made to the monitoring station. Most "new" internet connected panels suffer from this because they integrate the key pad and the central unit into one easily smashable device that is typically installed right by the entrance.

Also, I actually get a discount on my homeowner's insurance by having burglary and fire protection installed. If I do this myself, no matter how clever, the insurance company won't see it as a real system.

Realistically, if someone wants to get into your house, and grab something or hurt you, they will. No security system you can afford will prevent that. What you really want is a big fat ADT (or whatever) sign in your front yard, so that the lowest level burglars simply move on. Fire protection is a whole other game and at least to me is very important: I want to protect my possessions, but even more importantly my pets.

I think nowadays it makes a lot more sense to use a pure cellular connection. When I had my system installed, I initially got a phone line installed just for it, but then the monitoring company pointed out that the monthly cost of my POTS line was more than the monthly cost of the data-only GSM connection. I'm not particularly worried about macgyver burglars snipping my alarm wires, but now in order to disrupt it, they'd either have to jam the GSM signal or locate the controller box (which is locked up) and rip the antenna off.

Re: your comment about your insurance company not recognizing a homebrew security system, all I've got to say about that is that I don't care how good a coder you are, being the sole QA person for your house's security system is probably a pretty miserable experience. :)

Two things:

- There are use cases for "smart" motion sensors which aren't security (did you see my elderly relative example?).

- Most common criminals won't cut the wires into your home. They're looking for an easy score unless you are a common target of professional criminals I wouldn't worry about it.

- There are degrees of security systems. A simple smart system definitely won't be in the upper echelons of what is available, but that's fine, there is market enough below that.

- Cannot argue with an insurance discount, good point.

Surprised you went with ADT. http://thesweethome.com/reviews/best-home-security-system/

I looked at it, and FrontPoint would have cost me more up front and been $2-3 more per month. Yes, they have a better system, but as long as the smoke detectors are monitored, I am happy. Having said that, no reason not to go with someone better. I just happened to already have parts of the system in the house I had moved into.

well they still did not manage to create a Dropcam outdoor version, although the market must be exponentially larger

A number of Revolv's electrical engineers were not part of the acquisition, and didn't receive job offers to migrate with the team Google/Nest. (I assumed because Google planned on shutting down the project and most of their production is done in Asia)

However if anyone is interesting in hiring a wicked-smart (former) Revolv electrical engineer/hardware engineer who also has software engineer experience, let me know. They will be relocating to Bay Area anyway - my email is in the last line of my profile.

It's an acqui-hire; they want to build the most talented team so that they can develop the best smart-home devices. They're going head-to-head against Apple, but with a very different strategy. Apple is trying to build the best mobile devices and the best SDK to create a huge market and a great dev environment for developers to build devices for HomeKit. Google's strategy seems to be to build their own great smart home devices.

It's interesting to see Google preserve the Nest name for these business dealings. Tells me they're very aware of the potential concern consumers are likely to have inviting omniscience into their homes.

As I understand it, it isn't just the branding. Nest is still operating as an independent entity that happens to be wholly owned by Google, not as a division within Google's management structure.

That's a viable reason. But I think they're mainly doing that because Tony Fadell is in charge of Google's whole smart home operation, so Nest has to remain the overarching brand.

In a recent interview at Stanford, Matt Rogers (co-founder of Nest) explains the Google/Nest relationship. Basically, they needed a bunch of $$$$ to get to the next level and they wanted Google to buy them and fund it rather than raise a huge round.

Nest? you mean Google?

Google yes, but Nest is the acquirer technically. Same with the Dropcam acquisition

As a revolv owner, I was really pleased with the app, the hardware, and the functionality. This actually makes me a bit sad as 3 of the 7 or so radios in the Revolv hub weren't enabled, but were promise to be enabled later down the road with a software update.

This basically means I might as well go back to my ISY-99i Pro with a bunch of python glue code. sigh

soooo, nest still wants the thermostat itself to be the hub. a power constrained, proprietary hub with wifi and thread (when it is actually released). Rather bizarre in my mind.

There seems to be a hub phobia. I'm not saying it makes tons of sense to have multiple little servers for every device but I look at things like my kitchen and wonder, which heating hub I would choose. my microwave, oven, toaster, etc.

If there is going to be some kind of singular hub (which would be great) it needs to run apps and have expansion capabilities for the radios. A nest will not cut it. Also, without nest having thread enabled, the only way for things to talk is over wifi (nest <-> api.nest.com) and http. not bad for consistency but it sure would be nice to have all of the communication stay in the local network.

On another note, my San Fran apartment doesn't have a thermostat....

Reply on news.ycombinator.com