Comfort Home Automation/ Security System Forums Home
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register

Home Automation Market
 Moderated by: admin Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2   
 New Topic   Reply   Printer Friendly 
 Rating:  Rating
AuthorPost
 Posted: Monday Nov 21st, 2016 09:05 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
21st Post
slychiu
Administrator


Joined: Saturday Apr 29th, 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 4028
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

yes the ETH04 will plug into the base UCM, but it will cost a bit more.. but it will be worth the cost



 Posted: Sunday Feb 19th, 2017 01:52 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
22nd Post
idheath
Member
 

Joined: Saturday Aug 11th, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 82
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

MQTT integration would be good since it works nice with OpenHAB.

I've got an OpenHAB set up at home which is excellent (and not vendor specific).

Also I intend to make use of the excellent work cab123 has done on this.



 Posted: Tuesday Nov 7th, 2017 04:39 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
23rd Post
Majik
Member
 

Joined: Saturday Aug 26th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 23
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

I general, I think support of some sort of advanced network API is far more important than a built-in web Interface.

My personal preference would be JSON+REST, and I would see the ultimate aim to be able to move to the point where all control and even programming could be done via this sort of interface.

The big advantage of REST is, assuming the API is sensibly defined, this makes it possible (and relatively easy) to build client-side control web-apps entirely in html/javascript.

In other words, you wouldn't necessarily need to embed a web-interface into the ETH04 at all; it could be a separate app that people could host on a local server/Raspberry Pi.

Of course, including it on the ETH04 makes it a nice, out-of-the-box package.

The other option is, of course, IoT style automation with cloud-based control.

Cloud-based is really required to support Alexa, Google Home, and IFTTT. The most straightforward approach would be for Cytech to build a cloud-based service that customers can optionally connect their systems to. This can then be used for external control across the Internet without messing around with firewalls and port forwarding.

In this scenario, the ETH04 would register with the Cloud app and then communicate with it via an encrypted data "bridge". This is typically HTTP or MQTT based. Then, typically, all user control goes via the Cloud application, although it is also possible to provide local control.

Amongst others, Google (https://cloud.google.com/solutions/iot/ )and Amazon (https://aws.amazon.com/iot-platform/ ) provide frameworks to make it easier to develop and host cloud based IoT solutions. Note that both Google and AWS support a variety of protocol bridges including MQTT.

The big issues are all around privacy and security. This includes security of protocol, security of cloud service, and questions like "What happens if the Internet service goes down?".

Personally, I would like to see both local control and programming via a network API which can be kept within the local network, and the option for some Cloud based services that can work with Alexa/Home/IFTTT, etc. but which would be more limited in scope (without, for instance, the ability to reprogram the system).

Cheers,

Keith

Last edited on Tuesday Nov 7th, 2017 04:43 pm by Majik



 Posted: Thursday Nov 9th, 2017 12:28 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
24th Post
wexfordman
Member
 

Joined: Monday Jan 1st, 2007
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 484
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

slychiu wrote: Thank you all for your comments again
We are in fact looking at options for ETH03; MQTT, REST, Openhab, but there seems to be new things coming out so often that we want to see which is practical and supported
We have also been working on the webserver in ETH03 - the user interface is more the challenge rather than the functionality
As a taste of what is going to be available, we plan to have a "UCM" which is also a controller. Imagine Comfort without the inputs, outputs, telephone recording which looks like a UCM which can plug in the ETH, USB interface for comunication. This can be used as a low cost logic controller where you can connect KNX, Cbus, IRIO and other modules.

Hi Slychiu,
One of the things I think at this point is critical, is integration into smart speakers such as google home and amazone alexa, and it would need to be done in a manner that is user friendly.
If you think about it currently, one of the great things about comfort, is its ability to interface to so many different standards and protocols, eib, cbus, velbus etc, and there are very few systems which allow you to do that. Whats missing is the ability to integate these into goolge home type devices.
As far as I know, there is no simple way to integrate and connect velbus, or cbus etc to google h ome devices, but if comfort was integrated to google home, then problem solved, you immediately provide people witih the ability to interface all these standards directly to google home.
I have recently got some hue lights, and a nest, and while all of my lights are controlled by comfort velbus, I now rarely use the comfort app for home control. The hue lights (and they are only two lamps at this point), are so easy to control, you just speak and it happens, it makes the app seem very cumbersome, its almost a legacy now (although that is stretching it, its important and needed, but not required as often).
Apps are no longer the easiest way to control your home, its voice now.



 Posted: Thursday Nov 9th, 2017 01:58 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
25th Post
Majik
Member
 

Joined: Saturday Aug 26th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 23
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

wexfordman wrote I have recently got some hue lights, and a nest, and while all of my lights are controlled by comfort velbus, I now rarely use the comfort app for home control. The hue lights (and they are only two lamps at this point), are so easy to control, you just speak and it happens, it makes the app seem very cumbersome, its almost a legacy now (although that is stretching it, its important and needed, but not required as often).
Apps are no longer the easiest way to control your home, its voice now.

I think it's very personal.
My experience is I dislike speaking as a way of control, except where my hands are busy:in the kitchen or in my car when driving.
However, the requirements for integrating with Alexa and Google Home actually enable not just the speech interface, but the ability to have the "use anywhere" app-based control without messing around with firewalls and having to deal with dynamic IP addressing issues, and integration with other external services such as IFTTT.
Cheers,
Keith

Last edited on Thursday Nov 9th, 2017 03:48 pm by Majik



 Posted: Saturday Nov 11th, 2017 06:02 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
26th Post
slychiu
Administrator


Joined: Saturday Apr 29th, 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 4028
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

I believe the alphawerks IoT module that we are developing with them should handle Google home and similar integrations

see http://www.comfortforums.com/forum136/

Last edited on Saturday Nov 11th, 2017 06:02 am by slychiu



 Posted: Saturday Nov 11th, 2017 08:52 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
27th Post
Majik
Member
 

Joined: Saturday Aug 26th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 23
Status: 
Offline

  back to top

From what I see that is an integration with Smart Things which may, indirectly, provide integration with Home, Alexa, and others.
That's good, I guess, but IMO it's fairly messy, requiring additional third-party systems to make it work. I guess using Samsung's cloud services removes the need to build your own.
Cheers,
Keith



 Current time is 09:03 pmPage:  First Page Previous Page  1  2   
Top




UltraBB 1.172 Copyright © 2007-2014 Data 1 Systems