• WalterBright an hour ago

    Looks like I was ahead of the curve. When building my house, I looked at all the smarthome stuff, and eventually decide "nope". It's all conventional wiring. Consider that the dimmer switches, over time, all failed, some I had to replace multiple times. I finally gave up and replaced them with simple on/off switches.

    What I did do, which paid off handsomely, is run RG6 coax and Cat5 cables everywhere in a star configuration. I did all the work myself to make sure it was done right. Haven't had any trouble at all with it, despite lots of upgrading of the electronics.

    BTW, another thing I did, which isn't exactly home automation. I bought a $10 microwave from the thrift store, and put it in the bathroom. I don't have to run the faucet anymore waiting for hot water for a wash cloth. Just wet the washcloth and throw it in the microwave. Aaaahhh, the luxury of hot washcloth on my face! If I was designing a house these days, I'd build in a special spot for the microwave in the bathroom.

    • WalterBright an hour ago

      P.S. the high end coax and ethernet cable costs very little money. What costs is the electrician, who charges (long ago) $50 just to attach the wires coming out of the wall to the socket.

      Me, I watched the electrician at work, and the cable guy working at my previous house. I noted the tools they used, and bought them. A Milwaukee right angle drill puts the holes in the studs. I bought the Telewire Supply coax strippers and crimpers, and the ethernet socket tools. With that, you can do a pro job which will last and costs very little.

      I learned back in college that using professional electrical/electronic tools, like a soldering iron, makes a huge difference.

      • ensignavenger an hour ago

        What do you use the cat5 cables for? You mention it is all "dumb" (edit, actually the word used was 'conventional') but you also mention electronics, so it must not be that dumb?

        As for the bathroom, another option would be a small on demand water heater under the bathroom sink.

        • ensignavenger an hour ago

          What do you use the cat5 cables for? You mention it is all "dumb" but you also mention electronics, so it must not be that dumb?

          As for the bathroom, another option would be a small on demand water heater under the bathroom sink.

          • WalterBright an hour ago

            I use the cat5 to distribute ethernet throughout. This was before wifi was any good, and I still use the cat5 all day every day. Gigabit is not supposed to work with cat5, but it does just fine.

            I hadn't thought of the on demand heater. But it's hard to beat a $10 microwave that just plugs in.

            Try it some time. You'll never go back to cold washcloths!

            • ensignavenger an hour ago

              I'm a big fan of cat(whatever number they are on now...) and PoE for low power devices. I wish more devices supported it.

        • cmiller1 an hour ago

          A long time ago when I envisioned a "smart home of the future" I imagined using lots of sensors to control vents, windows, blinds, and HVAC to more efficiently heat and cool the house and optimize comfort in it while using less energy. I still would like something like that but instead we got dishwashers you can turn on with your phone...

          • hedora 32 minutes ago

            Yeah. I want a weather station, automated blinds and automated window openers. (We have European style 2 way tilt windows. They can tilt open a bit and still be secure against burglars).

            The weather station would be for solar load, outdoor temperature, precipitation and (most importantly) wind.

            They’d all be coordinated with a local docker container or something like that.

            Anyway, if this existed when we built the house, I’d have paid at least $30K for the system, installed and configured. I doubt I’m the only one. It’d be nice if it could control the furnace / ac too.

            Edit: also, skylight openers, which are surprisingly inexpensive, except the software integration sounded like a nightmare.

            • cassianoleal 16 minutes ago

              What is missing with current offerings? Between Matter and Zigbee devices, having Home Assistant as broker and coordinator, all of that is feasible today with nothing calling home if you're willing to put in some work.

            • xg15 an hour ago

              That would require smart home widget actually working together and to be designed with a common design in mind, and not just every widget phoning home to its vendor cloud...

              • unsnap_biceps an hour ago

                Support Matter over Thread and we can get there. It's still a little rocky but man, it's so much better than wifi devices all calling home to wherever.

                • cassianoleal 17 minutes ago

                  There's no need for Thread. Matter over WiFi does the same job.

              • rcarmo an hour ago

                Environment and lighting are the only smart things I have, and the last few additions were ZigBee wall switches-but everything needs to have a manual alternative, of course.

                Nothing else is really needed, IMHO.

                • rs186 an hour ago
                  • jackyinger 36 minutes ago

                    Yeah, I’ve fantasized about the same thing with windows, blinds, and hvac. It would be so nice.

                  • avidiax an hour ago

                    I feel there is some baby being thrown out with the bathwater here, but I'd blame the automation companies that are pushing complexity as a means to vendor lock-in. The Crestrons and Phillips Hues and Samsung SmartThings of the world refuse to make an app-free cloud-free commodity smart home system.

                    Matter is unfortunately not that vision. It is still locking you into a cloud-based system, but you can take your devices to a system of your choice.

                    The system just needs to be simple. You should be able to buy a smart switch from any company. It should power and dim attached dumb and smart bulbs the old fashioned way. Pairing directly connected bulbs should just be turning the switch on and off 5 times quickly. Wireless pairing shouldn't require an app or attestation or other cloud stuff, just sharing a secret one time in-band on some standard protocol over 802.15.4. If you want to have a wireless switch clone a wired one, turn them on and off together 5 times. If you want an all-on, all-off wireless switch, turn all your lights on, and flip the master breaker 5 times along with your new switch. If you want something complicated, get an 802.15.4 bridge/controller. If you want to control with an app, let the bridge controller be accessible via a TailScale-like tunneling VPN or the local WiFi, still no cloud.

                    This could all be simple and interoperable, but that won't let any company tell their shareholders that their cloud-based smarthome base is growing X% YoY or that their gross margin on smart bulbs is 80%.

                    • cassianoleal 25 minutes ago

                      > Matter is unfortunately not that vision. It is still locking you into a cloud-based system, but you can take your devices to a system of your choice.

                      I'm not sure what that means. I have quite a few Matter devices. None of them use cloud services. They exist but they're not required in any way.

                    • WalterBright an hour ago

                      People have been saying that for 30 years now.

                      • eternityforest 35 minutes ago

                        We actually had this kind of thing 30 years ago or so with X10 and the like.

                        I always hear it was crappy and unreliable and insecure, but it seems like it's pretty much the kind of experience people want.

                    • xg15 an hour ago

                      Interesting that most of the issues seem to be UI problems - or rather, the idea that we don't need physical switches anymore because the phone is just the universal remote for everything reveals itself as incredibly stupid.

                      If we're already struggling with phone addiction and an out-of-control attention economy, probably the last thing you'd want is to constantly be forced back to your phone if you just want to do basic household things.

                      Also, I don't understand how anyone could think that random passcodes in the place of what used to be a button would be good UX.

                      • WalterBright an hour ago

                        > the idea that we don't need physical switches

                        Even when the power goes out for 2 weeks, I still reflexively hit the wall switch every time entering a room.

                        Home automation only makes sense for people with very limited mobility.

                      • WalterBright an hour ago

                        I use "The Clapper" to turn lights on and off :-)

                        • robotnikman an hour ago

                          I'm reminded of the Mr Robot episode where they hacked into the Lawyers home and messed with all the smart appliances.

                          • username135 28 minutes ago

                            i take the battlestar galactica approach. has been working exceptionally well.

                            • mystraline an hour ago

                              I prefer simple tech. It can still be automated, and 'smart', but using HomeAssistant, its smart for ME.

                              No passwords, no stupid. Doesn't even need internet, just the local network.

                              I can even share access creds to pur garage doors remotely.

                              Again, I focus on simple and effective 'smart', not throwing enshittifying internet garbage everywhere.

                              • XorNot an hour ago

                                Yeah but that is smart tech, it's just not what people experience as the consumer branding of it.

                              • mohi-kalantari an hour ago

                                Tech-free homes are the new rich people flex? Crazy that in 2025, the super wealthy are spending millions on houses with no smart gadgets or Wi-Fi, like they’re living in the old days. It’s not just about hating tech maybe more about buying privacy. No Alexa listening, no data tracking. Is this just for billionaires, or are we all tired of being online all the time?

                                • RetroTechie 28 minutes ago

                                  "It’s not just about hating tech maybe more about buying privacy."

                                  For the ultra-rich, probably this.

                                  Personally, I don't mind 'smart' tech. But only if used wisely, making life more comfortable, saving energy, etc.

                                  I do mind the 'let random 3rd parties spy on your everyday life' part. 'Smart' could be just "automatic" and/or LAN only. Connected but not to anywhere outside the house.

                                  Also I dislike making things more complicated than necessary. Light on/off? Physical switch does the job. Ok, add TV-style remote if you want. But doesn't need phone app/WAN networking or software updates.

                                • barbazoo an hour ago

                                  “Why the people that can afford smart homes are unplugging from smart homes”