It was fun while it lasted!

Organisation Misc
53

Frankly I don’t understand your approach. If you were just looking to “understand” OH and if it could be something for you, you wouldn’t have needed to install anything and could have just read the docs and forum.
But now that you decided to install it instead, there’s a number of choices you have to take such as hardware and Java.
I feel that none of the annoyances of selecting proper HW and Java download are fair to be attributed to openHAB - it’s just the way of the world that there’s many potential servers and Java providers, each to bring their pros and cons and to enforce their own licensing model.
I admit this can be annoying for people who just want something to work out of the box but it is boon and bane since on the other hand it allows for a large hardware and user base.
You could have chosen the openHABian-on-Pi image approach if you were out for the ‘simple box’ approach.

I also think that your comparison to Firefox falls short. Firefox is nowhere near OH in terms of complexity. Unfortunately this leads to sometimes ‘abstract’ parts of the basic docs since they are supposed to be correct for all use cases. Yes things are physical things most of the time, but there’s also virtual things e.g. when you ‘remote control’ some other HA system that in term controls the physical devices.
I can’t really comment on the docs, maybe someone else like @Confectrician can. I admit the learning curve is a bit steep but then again I feel it’s better to explain the hard part right in the beginning rather than to let people dig further in with a lack of or wrong understanding. And yes, every user who wants to get the full benefits needs to understand the concepts some day.
Maybe it’s also a wording thing, most docs contributors are not native English speakers. But you and every other user are invited to help enhance this. Correct them yourself (there’s a link at the bottom of each page) or just open a thread on the forum if you need clarification. And Marcel is right.

2 Likes
54

Many people (including myself), read a manual to decide if they want to buy / install something.

With openhab there is a demo site shows the product, so that part is already covered (Probably could be mentioned in the install file)

yet that is not enough to decide if a product like openhab would work for me.
I need to understand some basics on how to get stuff installed.

That is why many products these days have a quick install card inside the box.

I think what @gnuarm is looking for here, is the quick install guide, to figure out what he needs to do to understand if he can even understand how to get started.

y

55

To be clear, I started by trying to read the docs. That was a couple of months ago and I described what I ran into. I only considered installing the software when Markus suggested I read the Tutorial where the first step is installing the software. Did you not actually read my post???

I would love to help with documentation. But I think this is a project that is ok with complexity and it would be a massive uphill battle to find ways to mitigate exposing the complexity to the user.

I can’t discuss the issues you raise with Java being inevitable because I don’t know anything about why it is used here. But surely Java is not an inherent part of a user experience. You mention people just wanting something to work “out of the box”. What is this stuff for if not for people to use??? Even suggesting that I could use the openHABian-on-Pi approach ignores the issue that I still know nothing about OpenHAB.

When you claim Firefox is nowhere near as complex as OpenHAB I think you are confusing complexity with operation. I am pretty sure Firefox is much more complex than OpenHAB will ever be and I suspect you actually understand this. The difference is Firefox hides its complexity and makes the software easy to use… relatively that is. lol I still have to do Google searches from time to time to make something work correctly.

BTW, not sure what you mean about Marcel being right. He didn’t make a statement, he “wondered” about a supposition. So what would he be right about?

I offered my point of view and Markus made a suggestion and asked my opinion. If my opinion is not welcome that’s fine, I won’t bother giving it anymore. Just let me know which. I return here from time to time to see if I can do a better job of understanding what OpenHAB is and how it works.

56

From another user who didn’t know anything about openHAB before I started using it: I found the best way to get your head around it is “learning by doing”. Install it and try it out! That’s btw a general advice for just about everything computer-related.

But then again, if you don’t even know what java is (and - more importantly - don’t have an interest in finding out) then perhaps you should go with a commercial system like Hue or SmartThings…

4 Likes
57

I would like to join some previous speakers here.

The Openhab community is a great thing. I have rarely received a better “help desk”, even with purchased products. You always get help 24/365 and completely free!

If you decide to use Openhab, you should be aware that it is open source software (not commercial!). However, without a minimum of technical understanding, it would be better to use another system, e.g. a commercial product like Magenta Smarthome. Or better, the desired product should be installed by a professional.

Also the documentation is much better than it is proclaimed here by some people. Mostly I found what I was looking for. Also proper searching must be learned!

Everything I did not find in the documentation was mostly answered by the community or I found it there!

The rest was learning by doing! And reading a lot.

I find it totally unfair when Openhab is blamed for someones own carelessness.
There is a new release? Yeah, just update it!
No backup? Did not read any releases notes? Did not read instructions?
Blame yourself!

Even if you had done everything mentioned, errors can still occur. We all make mistakes.

6 Likes
58

openHAB also suffers from trying to be backwards compatible.

There are multiple ways of doing something:

  • Textual vs web-rest-interface [PaperUI])
  • Some bindings (legacy ones) are directly acting on Items, some (OH2-bindings) do a Thing/Channel/Item architecture
  • We have Sitemaps (OH1) vs habPanel.
  • “New actions” architecture vs “old actions” architecture.
  • DSL rules vs scripts.

The community and developers should decide on one single way and improve that to a state, that a second way would not be required. Less confusion for users and less code to be maintained.

1 Like
59

The part about installing Java threw me to when I first gave openHAB a try. Followed the links and had no idea what I was supposed to download or install. Finally just gave up and installed openHAB. Guess what, it ran. It was a Windows 8.1 and had Java installed. Maybe a script or install routine that checks if you already have Java

60

To pacive

Amen! I know how to program in several languages. I know a bit about Java. But no, I have zero interest in programming in Java to use a wifi connected switch. I have one that came with software (although only on the phone) and another similar. One app is pretty good and the other is crap. But at least I can use them.

Everyone is free to do things as they wish. But it just seems so overkill to ask a user to do programming to use an open source project. I guess that is just me. Enjoy

61

What programming is required to run an OH installation? Aside from installing the prerequisites (on pretty much any OS of your choice), the only thing really required to be done outside of the GUI is a custom sitemap…and I think even that can be done through an automated script now.

To insinuate that OH requires “programming” knowledge to run an installation of it, in my opinion, is a slight on all these developers who have put these tools at our fingertips in about as understandable a way as I can possibly comprehend.

I missed out on a lot of the OH1 days, but if you think OH2 requires “programming”, then you would have REALLY had a difficult time in the OH1 version. It has come a really long way in a short amount of time. Paper UI is HUGE for this software. It’s not perfect, but I have done everything in the GUI aside from a sitemap and some automation rules (which also are now possible to implement from Paper UI).

If you don’t read the docs, I can understand how it can be considered complex. And even after reading the docs, it’s not a walk in the park, but home automation is a complex subject.

This community is incredibly helpful and I won’t even attempt to list all those that have just helped ME directly. This forum may not be a help desk but it is an excellent knowledge base. Searching Google for my question with “openHAB” attached to it yields a previous question (which has already been solved) 90% of the time. The other 10%, I typically piece together multiple posts or try and solve on my own.

But I don’t think any of that sounds unreasonable.

3 Likes
62

I wouldn’t know. I was following the directions for the tutorial and responding to those who feel knowing how to program in Java to use this app is reasonable.

Are you saying Java is not needed? Maybe you should share that with the other posters?

Have you viewed the tutorial? Why is Java installed if it is not needed?

Paper UI??? Not sure what that is.

Did you read my posts? I gave specific details of what I found difficult about reading the docs.

I think this is a perfect example of why this project is the way it is. If you don’t think there is a problem, I guess no effort will be put into solving it.

I’m not trying to say OpenHAB is of no value. The only thing I’ve ever said is that it appears far too complex for me to make an investment in to control a few devices. I don’t know what OpenHAB has to offer much less what it has to offer that is better than other solutions. I likely never will because it isn’t presented in a way that provides that information. More importantly it requires serious effort to begin considering to use it. Not only was it hard to learn what is is about, it seems there is no reasonable way to find out what devices are supported. I even found an effort to create and maintain a spread sheet of that info and many discouraged the effort because it wouldn’t be perfect!

63

Umm…I think you are misunderstanding…you don’t program in Java. Paper UI is the point and click GUI which performs all the under the hood operations that interact with the rest API (and I’m sure I’m selling that short). No offense, but if you don’t know what Paper UI is, then you haven’t interacted with the software enough to have an educated opinion on this matter.

In fact, it’s described in the docs.
https://www.openhab.org/docs/configuration/paperui.html

In my earlier post I wasn’t trying to insinuate that you hadn’t read anything. Just saying how overwhelming the software would seem to someone who didn’t. I apologize for that confusion. Anyway, user programming in Java is not required to run an installation of OH. The application USES Java. That’s why it’s required to be installed.

64

You need to install the Java runtime I order to run OpenHAB on your computer, just like any other application written in Java. That doesn’t mean you have to do any of the programming.

1 Like
65

Then why are people saying I should expect to do programming if I want to use OpenHAB???

66

The programming is just like in any other HA-system: “If this happens then do this”. There is no system that just automatically knows what you want it to do when, for example, it senses that you’re home because your phone connected to your WiFi. You need to tell the system that.

This can be done in different ways, either by writing textual rules, or by just point and click through paperui.

1 Like
67

Hmmm… I guess I really should just give up. The topic of conversation is needing to program in JAVA. Does anyone read further back than just the last post???

68

The last post seems to have been replied to the wrong post. It was supposed to be in reply to pacive

69

I’m not sure I understand…you quoted the OP and not once does it state that you must program in Java to use OH.

Why you are incessantly arguing with users of said software (when you are not a user of this software yourself) is mind boggling.

To use openHAB you DO NOT need to program anything in Java. In fact, your entire argument has been a detracrment from the initial post, which I disagree with fundamentally anyway.

Your continued replies are starting to scream of trolling rather than constructive criticism of the software since you continue to willfully disregard users of this software telling you otherwise and continue your diatribe of misunderstanding the documentation.

5 Likes
70

This can be done in different ways, either by writing textual rules, or by just point and click through paperui.

And what @gnuarm did not understand, is that some people call this programming (others don’t)

For most of the rules we don’t need really muhc java skills, yet for some more complex rules, it’s handy to have even more then basis understanding of java programming (I’m thinking of the lambda’s)
Yet these things are not needed when starting out.

The fact that when a new user gets a lot of info on java and not paperui, gives it a very complex idea.
It should mention you need java. so new user can figure out why it’s not launching. yet all the info to install java, is not needed when just reading to understand.

Which shows the duality how user manuals are used.

Both for understanding the basics and for debugging the installation.

1 Like
71

Trying to resolve the Java confusion a little bit. I was also confused in the beginning and most of this confusion was caused by mixing the different meanings of the term “Java”.

I think it is important to understand the difference between

To use openHAB you …

… don’t have to do Java programming

  • openHAB is written in Java programming language, but unless you want to become a developer there is no Java programming needed to use openHAB
  • when talking about “programming” to use openHAB this comes from the “old” openHAB 1.x days (and many users including myself do it this way until today) where automation rules (do x if y happens but just in the case of z …) had to be written in *.rules files. To write this rules a DSL (domain specific language) is used. This DSL is not Java programming language but has a syntax that is similar to it.
  • If starting from scratch with openHAB 2.x there are different possibilities available to set up these automation rules. One of them is the so called NGRE (Next Generation Rule Engine) where no programming at all is needed and the rules can be clicked together via PaperUI. Unfortunately this NGRE is still in experimental state and lacking some documentation but the community is heavily working in this.

… have to install the Java software platform to run openHAB

  • openHAB as any other software written in Java programming language needs the Java software platform to run
  • so you have to know how to install this “platform”, basically this is installing a piece of software like you do with any other software you want to use.
  • The Java software platform is available from different “vendors” (that’s what listed in this table in the docs). If you don’t have any special requirements or issues just go with the Zulu platform.

Greetings
Sebastian

4 Likes
72

I don’t think that is the case. This is a project that understands that bridging the gaps between 360+ walled gardens is going to be complex. The only way to be successful at eliminating the complexity is to eliminate the options. This is why commercial offerings, which are much simpler compared to OH, only support half a dozen technologies and standards.

You can’t have it both ways. OH has chosen to support more technologies even if that does cost more complexity rather than limit the end user’s options. If that trade is not a good one for you then a commercial offering is going to be a better choice.

One thing that a lot of users new to home automation do not realize is that building a smart home (or whatever you want to call it) is development effort. You the user are and will be responsible for coding the behaviors of your home automation. You the user are and will be responsible for configuring the system to inter-operate with what ever technologies your bespoke home automation system uses. You the user are and will be responsible for constructing and creating the end user interfaces and experience.

OH is a platform whose goal is to make this easier. But it can only go so far. You WILL have to deal with the complexities of development.

OH 2 has and continues address these complexities in many ways (automatic discovery and creation of Things for instance) and it is by no means done addressing ways to make it simpler. But OH is NEVER going to provide the end user a Firefox like end user experience. It can’t, because OH isn’t the end product. The bespoke home automation system YOU build is the end product. And I can say with authority, almost all of our end user experiences DO approach something like the Firefox experience. But we, as our individual system builders had to put in the work to make it so. OH can and does help (I can’t imagine trying to build a system like I have without some sort of HUB) but it can’t do it all.

I cannot stress how important this will be in anyone’s use of any free and open source home automation hub.

My understanding this is the goal. It is taking an extended amount of time to get there though. And do not underestimate the fury of the old timers if you take away a feature like being able to define Things in a .things file.

But I believe we will get to a point where there will be one official recommended way to doing things. Though support for some of the old ways will persist. I don’t think we will be able to drop them until a 3.0 release where we can say 1.x bindings are no longer supported (for example).

There is a Chocolatey package for installing OH which I believe will also install Java if it isn’t installed already.

See my comments above. Home Automation IS a development effort. You can’t get away from that. Even working with the commercial options requires a bit of programming (more at the Scratch level perhaps). What is Home Automation but defining behaviors of your devices under certain circumstances? And what is defining behaviors but another way to say programming them?

Comments like this, IMHO, show a lack of understanding of the Home Automation problem space and OH’s role in address parts of that problem space,

A home automation system that doesn’t let you define your own behaviors is no home automation system at all. At best it’s home remote control.

Quite a lot actually, but OH does a decent and always getting better job of hiding that fact from you. Much of what you are doing when you create Items and link Items to Channels and create Groups and most especially create Rules are all exercises in programming, whether you realize it or not. The fact that you missed it points to how successful the OH developers have been so far in reducing that complexity.

Possible but I wouldn’t recommend them yet. They are still experimental.

There is no requirement to program in Java to run OH. The only requirement is to install Java as a prerequisite as OH runs on the Java Runtime Environment.

Just like installing Python is a requirement to running Home Assistant.

Java is needed. Programming in Java is not.

There IS programming required to develop automation Rules but those are written in other languages. The default is to use the Rules DSL which is a simplified programming environment a little friendlier to users of OH who are not already programmers. Those who are already programmers are usually happier with one of the other options like JSR223 scripting or using an external rules engine like NodeRed.

An administration UI for OH. See

Perhaps this is unreasonable on our part, but I do know that when I personally send someone to “read the Beginner’s Tutorial” I expect them to read through the tutorial, not try to perform all the steps (the first time) and then stop when they run into trouble, especially when your main goal is to figure out whether or not OH is something you want to pursue.

Building docs is hard. Building beginner level docs is REALLY hard for experienced users and developers to write because it has been far too long since we’ve been beginners. So we are stuck in a catch-22. Beginners are usually unwilling to contribute and experienced users are no longer qualified to write them.

I don’t think most of us think there is no problem. But is there a problem here we can actually solve? Maybe. Do we actually have any concrete solutions or recommendations of solutions to solve the problem? No, we do not.

You are most certainly right. It isn’t intended to control a few devices. It is intended to mix and match the behaviors of dozens+ devices from any number of different walled gardens of technologies and services in a unified way.

If you want a virtual remote with buttons to control a few lights, OH is way overkill for you. If you want the lights to just know when to turn on based on external stimuli from sensors from three or four different technologies which don’t normally work together then OH is a good place to start.

And now you know why there is no list of devices. OH literally supports tens of thousands of different devices and the number grows every day. The amount of effort required to build let alone maintain such a database is not feasible.

Instead, what one can and should do to determine if a device is compatible is determine what technology/API it uses (Zwave, TP-Link, Xiaomi, etc) and look for whether there is a binding for that technology. If there is only limited support for that technology the read me for that technology will list that. For example, there are only a few Zigbee coordinator chipsets the Zigbee binding will work with. They are listed in the binding readme which you can find under the Add-Ons link at the top of this page.

At the end of this long thread, I think that indeed, OH may not be the right system for you. Your problem may be smaller than OH was built to solve and so the complexity is really beyond what is worth it for you.

4 Likes