To address your question Danny - I had suggested a quick fix in the following para
Couldnât agree more, jimtng.
Am surprised by comments that we donât care about adoption rates and performance vis-a vis competition - for this is what will determine the survival of the platform and fulfilment of the OH Foundationâs stated goals. Wouldnât this even be an obligation for fiduciaries?
I think electricians and installers of lighting fixtures need to be comfortable recommending Openhab as a brand agnostic platform. Same for home automation installers who would then be contracted to install OH or whatever alternative. It is free after all so surely this is attractive - so what is holding people back - and why are so many apparently considering the (free) competing product?
Irrespective of the upfront challenges of installation (which a home automation provider can handle easily), day-to-day use has to be hassle free otherwise installers will get complaints and wont want to bother. It is a feedback loop - canât expect recommendations on installation if it is easy for a non-tech-savvy user to break it (i.e. get to a screen which is confusing to them).
If we think we have that âsmooth user experienceâ covered, have the management team considered education sessions for home automation installers? What about more youtube videos showcasing the smooth user experience on the app - followed by a step by step installtion guide. (The ones available now are very out of date). Part of the challenge is the hurdle of installing on the Rpi⊠Some hobbyists will enjoy the installation process, yet people who just want their lights to go on/off at a certain time probably wonât. Sell pre-installed RPi? Offer remote installation service for a fee? No harm in the Foundation charging for this service.
This approach will not encourage broad adoption. After setup, it just needs to work (and it mostly does extremely well - a credit to the team - except for the parts of the app which I highlighted).
To encourage broad adoption, we need to make exactly this kind of assumption and develop the product accordingly.
I donât think openhab can âeverâ reach this level. To be on this level, it would have to be almost completely idiot proof. Even Home Assistant isnât on this level. This would be the likes of Google Nest or Amazon Echo Show type of stuff. Even then, thatâs already âtoo fancyâ for most people. But that probably depends on which generation (gen Z, etc) weâre talking about.
A more relevant use case that could apply to the current openhab users/developers would be to use openhab at technology-averse parentsâ or grandparentsâ house, or for those who operate airbnb⊠but perhaps for those, the mantra would be âthe simpler the betterâ, meaning no automation, plain old dumb hardware switches and dumb lights.
openhab is more for âhobbyistsâ and geeks.

IMO, openHAB is lagging behind HA in UI âwowâ factor (or at least in how easy it is to create them) and in integrations, and perhaps a bit in ease of use.
Iâll only caution that HA to OH is not really an apples to apples comparison. They are a commercial entity with paid developers. OH is 100% volunteer. In that regard they actually can have a roadmap and priorities and such because they can force development in certain directions. They didnât need a volunteer for everything.

Wouldnât this even be an obligation for fiduciaries?
The openHAB Foundation is a specific type of charity incorporated in Germany. The way it is established they are legally forbidden in participating in active development of the openHAB product. They can only do communication and similar type activities.

and why are so many apparently considering the (free) competing product?
HA is not free. Or more accurately itâs free up to a point. For example if you want remote access you have to pay a monthly subscription fee. Thatâs how they can afford paid developers.

we think we have that âsmooth user experienceâ covered, have the management team considered education sessions for home automation installers?
that is something the foundation can pay for I think, but to when and where? OH is used world wide. Does it make sense to have a single session in Germany? Is that a good return on investment? Iâm not saying one way or the other but it is a question that needs to be answered.

What about more youtube videos showcasing the smooth user experience on the app - followed by a step by step installtion guide
As with everything in OH, volunteers are all thatâs really needed. Docs, articles (in case you missed it our own @florian-h05 got an article about OH published in Linux Magazine), videos, tutorials, etc are all volunteer driven.

Sell pre-installed RPi?
Selling something like this is also something the foundation is legally forbidden to do.

Offer remote installation service for a fee?
I donât think anything is stopping someone from volunteering to do this or even making a business or of doing something like this. But again, Iâm not sure this is something the foundation would be allowed to do.

No harm in the Foundation charging for this service.
Itâs forbidden and would cause the foundation to lose itâs charity status.
OH is not and as far as can tell will never be a commercial. This comes with advantages and disadvantages. One average is anything is possible if someone volunteers to do it. But thereâs no real central control or direction. A roadmap is kind of pointless if you canât force developers to work on specific things.
In that regard they actually can have a roadmap and priorities and such because they can force development in certain directions.
Unfortunately they are a competitor, no matter whether it is fair or not - OH needs to consider how to handle proactively
The way it is established they are legally forbidden in participating in active development of the openHAB product.
Has the Foundation taken proper advice on this? I fully appreciate that the Foundation cannot make PROFITS which are distributed to members - for this would be contrary to what a charity is generally supposed to do - however I was not aware that an âeingetragener Vereinâ cannot make REVENUE - the cashflows from which are retained in the organization for the advancement of its goals. I looked at a couple of other e.Vs in Germany⊠one of them even has a shopâŠ! I am not lawyer but may be worth asking someone who is - and specifically - how do the other eVs manage to charge for products they sell ??.
Does it make sense to have a single session in Germany?
Surely online⊠available for replay?

that is something the foundation can pay for I think, but to when and where?
I am afraid not, this is not inline with the constitution. But anyway, last year we tried to give trainings for openBAB in cooperation with the Linux Hotel in Gernany. Two courses had been schudeled, both canceled due to lack of interest.

day-to-day use has to be hassle free otherwise installers will get complaints and wont want to bother
From my experience with the german market, installers are mostly propose and use commercial systems like KNX or Bosch or Gira. Why, because they sometimes get benefits from vendors and their technical support.

technical support
Probably #1 reason for anything commercial
As well as they donât know better ⊠many electricians have installed Jung or Gira (those two German companies basically rule the market, at least in my impression) switches and outlets since âeverâ and if they do KNX installations they also do it with Jung and Gira because they already have connections with their distributors etc.
Just to mention, there are competitors in the KNX space with better products (quality and functionality) for less money (e.g. MDT from Germany as well, can really recommend them), but I guess the âaverageâ electrician doesnât know enough about the competition and often even lacks the expertise to install KNX properly, or wants (way) too much money.

I donât think anything is stopping someone from volunteering to do this or even making a business or of doing something like this.
Checking the openHAB foundation website (Organization Members | openHAB Foundation), there are some companies installing openHAB, I also had contact with a French company installing openHAB for which I fixed a few things for a bounty.
Whatâs important though is that you donât sell openHAB as your product, you are only allowed to sell the hardware you run it and installation and configuration as a service.

Docs, articles (in case you missed it our own @florian-h05 got an article about OH published in Linux Magazine)
This article is mentioned in the openHAB blog (openHAB @ Linux Magazine | openHAB), the article itself has been published in the German Linux magazine (without paywall) as well as in Golem (German, paywall) and the American Linux magazine (paywall).
Interesting discussion, my 2 cents is that what one considers as âvisually attractingâ is as subjective as âeasy making or beginnerâ. Nevertheless, I feel that using the grid layout in Main UI in combination with widgets is not that difficult and visually quite appealing. So I think close to the wish this subject started with. About the menu button, maybe hiding it with CSS is the easiest solution. So the gap is not that big, maybe if we publish our âsimpleâ widgets (assuming switches and music control are the main interest) and make a small tutorial we come a long wayâŠ

Has the Foundation taken proper advice on this?
The members of the board have been fully informed about the legalities and what they can and cannot do.

Whatâs important though is that you donât sell openHAB as your product
Indeed, this is a key point. The OH trademarks are registered and owned by Kai or the foundation, I forget which. Permission must be given to use it.

Has the Foundation taken proper advice on this?
The foundations constitution defines a clear purpose, which limits what money can be spend for. The purpose is defined as user information and security ( Verbraucherinformation und Verbraucherschutz) This does not include any development activitiesâŠ

The OH trademarks are registered and owned by Kai or the foundation, I forget which
Actually, the name is registered to Kai snd the logo to the foundation. The foundation has written permission to use the name.

Am surprised by comments that we donât care about adoption rates and performance vis-a vis competition - for this is what will determine the survival of the platform and fulfilment of the OH Foundationâs stated goals.
The issue at hand is that the economic forces implied as soon as you use the term âcompetitionâ really donât apply the same way in the open source software space. By your argument, the nano text editor should have been eradicated by Word or Google Docs decades ago. Last I checked it was going strong.
Open source software can face existential threats, to be sure. Historically speaking, however, âcompetitionâ from more commercial offerings in the same space isnât the most pressing of those threats. To continue the example from above, the Atom editor has essentially died in the last few years, but not due to being ârun out of businessâ by Word or Google docs.
I think our perspectives on why people use openHAB are very different.
From what Iâve read in this community over the past six years, the reason that many users find openHAB is that ânothing works togetherâ (followed closely by âI want local control without a cloudâ). This means that the biggest threat to openHAB isnât competition from other vendorsâitâs the Matter standard.
If we reach a point where the majority of consumer-focused devices work with Matter, average consumers wonât need to look any further. And as a home-automation enthusiast, thatâs exactly what I want. To put it in terms of adoption, Iâm more interested in vendors adopting Matter so that average users wonât need to adopt openHAB at all.
Our benefit will continue to be for advanced users who want to do things like writing complex rules and creating custom UIs that go beyond what Alexa/Google/Homekit offer. But these advanced users are a minority, because most people arenât interestedâespecially if they donât have much technical expertise. Itâs the difference between a laptopâs built-in keyboard and a USB gaming keyboard with LEDs, programmable macro keys, and a choice of linear/tactile/clicky switches. You can type on both of them, but one is going to require a lot more time and energy to figure out.
Thatâs why I donât think openHABâs focus should ever be on user adoption, or even on the needs of average consumers. Itâs a specialized, open-source project for people who want more from their home automation and are willing to put in the effort.
Our benefit will continue to be for advanced users who want to do things like writing complex rules and creating custom UIs that go beyond what Alexa/Google/Homekit offer. But these advanced users are a minority, because most people arenât interestedâespecially if they donât have much technical expertise.
I think we are mostly in agreement.
However one apparent difference is the perspective that users of this product just want to use it for themselves alone. On the contrary, I (and perhaps others too) want to use it not only for myself but also for other people - to interact with OH on networks which I set up (yet which others use). Why canât family & guests benefit from the tailoring which OH offers if I am willing to set it up for them? They could if the app were foolproofâŠ
I donât think openHABâs focus should ever be on user adoption
I have a slightly different view - scale must surely matter in terms of survival and fulfillment of the Foundationâs stated goals - user base is important since it has a correlation to availability of future contributors.
Thank for you for engaging in this conversation. The team has built a great product. Happy New Year !
P.S. pls can someone make the suggested changes to the android app?

However one apparent difference is the perspective that users of this product just want to use it for themselves alone. On the contrary, I (and perhaps others too) want to use it not only for myself but also for other people - to interact with OH on networks which I set up (yet which others use). Why canât family & guests benefit from the tailoring which OH offers if I am willing to set it up for them? They could if the app were foolproofâŠ
Thereâs an important distinction here.
In your own home, your family and guests should be able to benefit from your work on OH. No one has ever intended to say otherwise. Thatâs why my original post suggested that youâre overthinking the need for a completely foolproof UI, because youâre available to provide technical support for openHAB (as should be the case). In this regard, nothing youâre asking for is unreasonable, but you might be a minority in wanting it to be a high priority.
The muddiness came in when you wrote:

To achieve this, we need to increase the number of folks who would be comfortable recommending OH to a less-tech-savvy friend or client - assuming install and setup were done for them upfront.
What Iâm disagreeing with is the idea that you or a contractor would install openHAB in someone elseâs home and then walk away from it, never to be bothered again. openHAB is a server, not an app. Someone needs to be the administrator of the system, so that they can fix it when it breaks, deploy updates, and add new features/equipment. Someone has to know what Main UI is and how to use it.
Your previous comments did not give the impression that you intended to be that administrator for your family and friends, but that you think openHAB needs to be self-sustaining after you get it working the first time (so that we can increase adoption). Amazon, Google, IKEA, Samsung, TP-Link, and others agree with you: thatâs why they put everything in the cloud, where they can maintain the servers on behalf of their users.
Thereâs nothing wrong with this (Iâm not anti-cloud), but itâs not the openHAB model.
Iâve made it pretty clear that I donât care about user adoption, but I do care about you and the people in your home (as fellow openHAB users). Thatâs why I suggested focusing on your needs, and not openHABâs survival.

P.S. pls can someone make the suggested changes to the android app?
Iâd usually suggest posting a feature request in GitHub. However, the main Android devs (that I know of) already chimed in earlier, so Iâll defer to their preferences.
If you want a solution now, you can also try using FullyKioskBrowser, but Iâm not sure if it will let you block what you need to block. If you have an old iPad handy, the iOS kiosk mode will let you make sections of the screen non-tappable.
Happy new year!