Hacker News Reader

Comment by jmuguy | Hacker News Reader

Sounds like my experience with Nest last summer. Got the thermostat, can't get it connected to my wireless. Support basically tells me to get bent until I go into full IT guy mode and prove its an issue with the unit. Replacement unit comes, doesn't work at all (first one was at least a nice looking thermostat with no connected features). Third unit comes and it's been fine ever since.

For some reason I thought it would be a good idea to get their smoke detector. One day it randomly detects smoke and will not shut the hell up about it even after resetting, replacing batteries, etc. Nest offered to replace it - I just put my old "dumb" detector back up.

I will say it's pretty damn embarrassing to buy this stuff and have it fail so spectacularly, at least my roommate wasn't here to see me seriously losing my mind trying to shut up the Protect.

View on HN

Perhaps as a PSA, I wanted to point out that there are two types of smoke detector technologies: ionization and photoelectric. Ionization detectors are more sensitive to flaming fires. Photoelectric are more sensitive to smoldering fires. As my friend whose house had an in-wall smoldering fire for four hours before the ionization alarms went off now knows, it's important to have both types of smoke detectors throughout your house.

The Nest appears to only be a photoelectric smoke detector based on a quick googling right now.

In my house, I have 5 photoelectric alarms that are hooked up to my central alarm system that is centrally monitored. I also have 4 ionization alarms that are hard wired together such that if one goes off they all go off. The ionization are not hooked up to the central alarm system because they have a reputation of having more false alarms. I have never experienced a false alarm in 5 years, but that is their reputation so many experts recommend not making them hooked up to a system that alerts a central monitoring service.

More Info: http://www.nfpa.org/safety-information/for-consumers/fire-an...

> many experts recommend not making them hooked up to a system that alerts a central monitoring service.

As a guy who regularly rides a big red truck to people's houses after their cooking pan gets a little too hot and smokey... thank you.

Knowing that pretty much all software is buggy and Nest and Wink are pretty new to market, do you want to depend on them with your life?

In the northeast US this weekend we will be having a high temperature of zero degrees Fahrenheit in some areas. I don't want to rely on a flaky device determining if the heat should be on. What happens if the temp drops really low, like with a power failure? Did they test that?

Same can be said for smoke detectors. A lot of new construction houses have all the smoke detectors wired by electricity with 9v battery backup. One goes off, they all go off. Sure there can be device failures, but you're talking about something that has been around for a long time with a proven track record.

If anything, maybe keep the old tech devices running and use the new tech along side it to see how it works.

As a counter-anecdote, I have been very grateful for my Nest during these especially cold days. It takes the weather outside into account, and does a much better job keeping my house in a comfortable temperature range.

Outdoor temperature reset has been a feature on furnace controllers for a long time (also called modulating aquastat).

(so there is a sense in which it isn't necessarily a smart home type of feature, it doesn't need a great deal of integration or whatever, and will work with any dumb thermostat)

Yeah, to be fair, my Nest replaced a dial thermostat with a mercury switch on a bimetal coil...

If the power is off, no thermostat will be able to start your furnace.

What's scarier is the thermostat going down at inopportune times. Last January Nest pushed a firmware update that bricked some units...right during the coldest night of the year for us. My early adopter neighbor was up at 2am rewiring his old Honeywell dial to keep his family warm.

That smoke detector story makes me think it could even be dangerous, no?. Could opposite happen and the device fail to detect smoke?

Maybe I'm becoming more of a luddite or cranky old-man, approaching my mid-30's, but I don't see any benefit at all to using the Nest smoke alarm. I'm replacing tried and true, simple, technologies, with a new device that seems way more complicated than it needs to be.

No, there really isn't a reason to use it. It looks pretty, and I have to admit that's basically why I bought it in the first place.

I like the theory of it integrating with the thermostat's auto away feature, so it can detect you even if you're not in the same room as the tstat for a while. It needs to be connected to mains for it to work in real time though, so that combined with all of the problems it has working as a smoke detector convinced me to not get one.

It's easier to turn off in a false alarm. It can warn you ahead of time when the batteries are getting low. It can alert you over the internet if your house is maybe on fire. Not sure if that's worth the price premium, but there are some benefits.

There's a difference between "there's no benefit at all" and "the benefits don't outweigh the downsides." There are many benefits of the Nest smoke detector. Easier to test. Easier to silence a false alarm. Less likely to wake you up in the middle of the night with a battery warning. Built-in night light. Integration with the thermostat home/away features. Notifications of an alarm when you're not home. Easy identification of which room the alarm is from when you have multiple interconnected alarms. Etc., etc., etc. Now, are those benefits enough to justify the cost and to outweigh the problems? I dunno. Do you care about those benefits? It's up to you. But there are clearly benefits.

You're completely right. My original comment wasn't really fair to the Nest alarm device. It clearly does have it's benefits, but not enough for me to overcome the potential issues with the device. I don't think the cost is that terrible, but I don't entirely trust its reliability and durability. A $100 smoke detector is fine if I don't have to worry about buying another smoke detector for a long time, but I don't trust the Nest to provide that longevity.

The difference between real & perceived value is only a price tag away. Be wary when seemingly trivial choices with potentially fatal consequences are made based upon marketing trends and convenience. Perhaps these systems will mature & increase their reliability, but remember that 'latest, greatest' gadget is still just a useful toy...and revenue/data stream for the supplier.

*I work with commercial building automation controls, it's pretty useful tech, but nothing I would ever risk my welfare on.

> Easy identification of which room the alarm is from when you have multiple interconnected alarms.

Now, this is just fantastic. It's what basically every movie portrays when they want to show a security station, but it is almost unheard of.

Why yes, yes it could. ;)

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26879987

Dumb detectors can have the same problems. I'm not sure if they get contaminated or suffer some kind of other breakdown, but I had to switch out two smoke detectors in recent time due to their propensity for going off on a whim. Of course, normal smoke detectors don't come with the Nest's hefty price tag...

Where were your faulty detectors? My ex-girlfriend's dad used to do testing for a smoke alarm company a while ago. I learned an interesting thing from that. You know what they use to simulate smoke when they test smoke detectors? Hair spray. The fine mist is actually pretty good at tricking the sensor into thinking there are smoke particulates in the air. This also leads to an interesting failure scenario for many home smoke alarms: those close to bathrooms or in women's bedrooms tend to get gunked up with hairspray.

Hairspray is a bad idea IMO. It will leave residue behind. There are cans of fake smoke you can get at the hardware store. I worked on ships and tested smoke alarms that way.

There are different detectors for different applications. Usually the issue with false alarms is the wrong alarm + poor placement.

Ionization smoke detectors have a high false-positive rate in areas like kitchens where you have a lot of particulate matter. Use a photoelectric there.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/co-and-smoke-alarms/buyin...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com