Hi Folks

[rlkoshak (Rich Koshak)]

@paulcam

I don’t need any of that. The comment about Z-Wave being a complex mesh network that works with hundreds of different devices is an example. I don’t want nor need a mesh network. I don’t need nor want to work with hundreds of different devices. Why would I need a protocol that can work with a WhizzyDuffer2.0 when I don’t have, nor will ever have a WhizzyDuffer2.0? Why would I want to burden my system protocols with the intricacies and complexities of controlling a WhizzyDuffer2.0 when I don’t need to?

Because your time has value. Do you want to self code each and every thing custom? Do you want to build up each and every circuit from the ground up? If so then, yes, openHAB is not for you. Nor is pretty much all of the typical home automation protocols, technologies, and capabilities.

And you will forever be severely limited in what you can accomplish because you will never be able to dedicate the millions of man hours that have gone into projects like this.

But here’s the thing. Yes, the Zwave protocol is complex. But from the user’s perspective I tap a button on my computer, press a button on the device and boom, it’s now part of openHAB. From the user’s perspective it’s super easy.

My time has value. I want to spend my time building my home automation. I don’t want to spend my time writing each and every line of code that runs on all of my ESP8266s, building UIs suitable for my family to use, sitting at my desk for hours with a soldering iron building custom hardware, etc. Because I’m able and willing to build upon the work of others I will always be in a position to accomplish more than you ever will be because I can leverage thousands of man hours of other people’s work.

@paulcam

When you remove all these superfluous requirements you would be absolutely amazed at how simple these things actually become.

Depends on your perspective. For me, nothing is as simple as adding a new Zwave device to my home automation. Literally every other technology I’ve dealt with is much more complicated for me to include and use in my home automation. If I had to code it myself, then yes, it would be far more complex. But I don’t.

And on this same line, if you remove all those “superflous” requirements, you pretty much exclude anyone one else from being able to accomplish anything with home automation at all unless they are professional or semiprofessional coders with experience in electronics. I’m sorry, I’m not willing to cut off so many users from this hobby in the name of “simplicity.”

@paulcam

They are typically be-all-to-all systems, jack of all trades, master of none, which is understandable though infuriating.

I think you may have a fundamental misunderstanding about what a platform like openHAB is. Your digression about your day job is kind of an apple to oranges comparison. Why? Because the developers of openHAB, or really any similar platform isn’t a software program. It’s a software development platform/environment. It has more in common with Java EE than it does with Firefox. It does nothing on it’s own. What it does is provide an environment in which a user can build their own bespoke home automation system. And each and every user has their own requirements for that system. A platform like openHAB is an enabler.

@paulcam

I realise there are developer APIs for those big three and that would open up the eco-system of either accessing those devices via Google/Amazon offering or making my devices support their protocols, but Google/Amazon come with the privacy policy issues. I use facebook, I use GMail, I use Amazon prime, but I am not oblivious to what I am providing them with and it’s risks to my privacy. Using Alexa or home assistant however is one step too close into my home life and many bits of data about me too far for me to have these in my home. That could change in the future, but for now, it’s a no. I urge the users of said devices to read the small print and really think about the data they provide, not just in how it is used today and by whom, but how that data could be used by someone you DONT want to have that data and for what? We already have the police, local councils, employers, insurance companies all demanding access to peoples Facebook and Amazon Alexa and Google devices and not just current access, but historical access. Something you did or said in your own home 2 years ago could come back to bite you later because “Google Knows”.

Honestly, none of this is relevant to openHAB. Don’t want to use Alexa or Google Assistant? Don’t use it. openHAB can work with these but openHAB doesn’t work with anything by default. You have to make a positive decision to install and configure an add-on to enable that.

@Bruce_Osborne

In fact there is a nonprofit foundation that owns the product specifically to avoid that.

Not quite correct. There is a non-profit that owns the trademark on openHAB. The product is open source and not owned by anyone, at least not in the typical sense.

@chris

You should focus on the requirements you want in the SYSTEM and ignore the IMPLEMENTATION.

Some days I try to say something with a thousand words and someone says the same thing in 15 words. This this this!

@paulcam

I’d be more inclined to just add support for devices as I need them.

This doesn’t take into account the cost of your time. Like I said above, to include and start using a new Zwave device takes me literally no more than 10 minutes. It would take me hours over a few days to build a custom device that does the same thing. I’d rather spend my time on the automation of my home and less time on the little stuff that someone else can and has done and did it as good or better than I could.

And also like I said, this DIY approach excludes a huge number, perhaps the majority, of people who might want to create home automation and have the same concerns about privacy and cloud services that you do.

I am not and never will try to convince you that openHAB is something that you should use. I’m certain you will find it too complex and bulky. But it feels like you are telling us that we are doing home automation wrong. I strenuously reject that. openHAB provides a platform that enables non-developers and even some non-technical folks who are willing to learn the ability to build home automation systems that rival anything that commercial outfits can offer.

@paulcam

So OpenHAB as an integration layer for me, is an option.

Honestly, that’s all openHAB really is. It’s an integration layer that provides some abstractions (Things and Items) and “modules” that hang off of that layer to provide capability. These include bindings (interfaces with technologies and APIs), Persistence (saving data to databases), Rules (where the automation occurs), and UIs (administration and presenting an interface for the users of your home).

@paulcam

this is exactly what I mean by “Burden of complexity”.

Based on your description, I would call this “rigidity in approach.” openHAB’s approach is no more complex than the approach you described. But it is different. And it would indeed be a burden to try to force your approach onto openHAB’s approach. Again, I’m firmly of the opinion that openHAB is not for you. But I’m also firmly going to defend that openHAB’s approach is legitimate. It’s only complex in this case because you want it to work the way you want it to and you are not actually assessing it in the way it was designed to work.

@paulcam

Pining the phone… nope. The phone doesn’t respond when sleeping.
ARPinging the phone… nope… same thing.

This is solved. The Network Binding has a way to use arping to make it work or you can look at iPhone Presence Detection with hping3 and ARP - #28 by rtvb which has a script I’ve been using for years and it works great with iPhones and Android phones. I’ve never had it not report a phone as present when it is in fact present and asleep.

@paulcam

On a long shot I SNMP Walked the TP-Link router and found the connected devices OID table and experimenting found that my phones MAC and IP appeared within 10 seconds of my phone Wifi coming on and disappeared within 10 seconds of it disconnecting.

SNMP is another way. Some users run scripts on their routers (DD-WRT usually) and in Europe there is a FritxBox that has bindings for support in OH.

@paulcam

I’m sure this could be wrapped in a binding and would be of use to people with TP-Link routers or possibly other routers if they provide this OID table and the configuration is updated with the correct OID.

There is already an SNMP binding and some users do in fact use this for phone presence detection.

@paulcam

For later fun I still have to try ESP32 bluetooth radars for individual room presence detection. I do not expect that will be easy.

If you move to RPi 0Ws it’s a solved problem with reelyActive.

@paulcam

So if, for example, a demand is raised that ultimately turns the heating on but something else just turned it off 20 seconds ago, the heating switch will reject that with a 400 Bad Request. With an event based system that’s more or less the end of the road, the event performed the action and it failed. But with a polled interval demand based system the demand will be reactioned and the controller will detect the heating is still OFF and send the ON command.

Not necessarily. You can absolutely code this sort of behavior in Rules.

If the device is using MQTT, sending a retained message is all that’s needed really.