Life dependent on automation everywhere, yet not in the home?

I am building a home (on the side, as it has taken years now, but is getting very cclose to call the shots on the ‘wiring’), wondered and pondered about installing light switches, and concluded rather not to, but the “one manual light per room” idea keeps getting in an out of my mind… together with all the diverse and by itself valid arguments made.

The posts above are not about ‘having a go’ at the authors… it is about the statements I find bewildering, considering we have auto-everything these days; such as freezers, cars, lots of production machinery; office buildings (HVAC and lighting, security); you can’t shop/pay if the Internet goes down. And for the ‘power outage’ folk, no power no action in the house anyway.

So why the adversity towards an OH-controlled home?

While I get the ‘build escalators’, I cannot consolidate the thought that I put in ‘legacy’ technology, to then augment it with automation. It is certainly not a ‘first principles’ approach… :slight_smile:

Open for discussion…

you build a 3 story house and install a elevator because it is “modern” and do not put in the staircase because it is legacy after all who wants to walk upstairs when you have an elevator.
What do you do when the elevator breaks, or the power goes out and you are on the 3rd floor?
What if it takes 3 days for parts to come in for that elevator or the power to be restored?
But if you installed both an elevator and an escalator then you could walk down the broken or non-functional escalator and go on with life.
You install nothing but automated lights and smart outlets and a fully integrated HVAC system that can is only be controlled by an automation program? Program crashes or hardware fails a week to get new hardware or reload program then what?
sit in the dark in the heat or cold or you just go to a hotel?
But staying with the adding of an elevator and an escalator is the most sound rationale.
Now if you have the opportunity to build the house from scratch heck yea add the good stuff extra cat 6 cables and additional control wiring anywhere you might think you want something extra add in deeper 1 gang and maybe 2 gang junction boxes where lights and outlets are going. Add that switched circuit to the light and also add that non switched power and land that neutral wire in the switch boxes instead of it just being in the ceiling box.
Add that cat 6 cable next to the toilet because maybe you just may want one of those automated toilets that self clean at some point and turn on night lights why not you have a chance now to add it do it.

Add the extra over sized A/C panel and add the wiring for the solar panel then add the wiring for the electric vehicle even if they are not in your near future plans so that it is modern and future it all as part of the rough in now.
think about it in all aspects as you plan sure automate but never opt out of having a failback solution.
same with plumbing approach maybe you do not plan on putting a Bodea in but much easier to rough plumb now then tear up floors later. or a ice maker for the fridge in the garage or even the gas piping for the stove even if you plan to use electric never lock yourself into just one way of doing things is always how I approach automation or any project planning.
The entire idea of smart home conversion versus smart home built by design are 2 completely different mindsets and discussions. But both have at least one thing in common.
Leave a contingency way out just in case.


This is probably it!
I am talking about a new build.

I do not buy the backup plans; while I get the elevator, usually staircases are a code requirement.

For example: I have 16 LED lights on a 22 meter (72 ft) long verandah. Four rooms border on it. Do I really install four light switches, to switch Zigbee bulbs, which should be ON to act as coordinators?
I saw a 3x3 light switch with one automation panel running Main UI on it. Id’ prefer the panel any day.

The kitchen will have kick board lights, under uppers lighting, ceiling lighting, spot lighting, island lighting. Light switches for all of those?

Living/dining has 20 light fixtures (on two mains cables); am I expected to put a light switch for each? Or if groups, which LED to which group, to which switch? A cable to a central location for each? 20 meters (65 ft) by 20 lights = 400 m (1,300 ft) of cable?

When employing modern lighting, it becomes insane quickly from a control perspective. To this day I have been unable to consolidate the legacy approach and automation. It’s a double up, and more costly than automation in the first place.

All my lights are ambient, CT and presence controlled. Try to mimic this in legacy wiring.

Why is the desire for a fallback so strong?

Yet, there is no fall back for a fridge, hotplates or the pluming system. E.g. the pump goes = all out. No lights, use candles?!
Are we buying a second car in case the first one breaks down?

Yes, I will have a HVR system. If anything in it goes kaput there is no fall-back. automated or not. Yes, I have windows I can open, but I need these for natural light not venting (as it is a passive house).

Yes, there will be lots of physical wiring, CAT6, window door sensors, etc.
I have (commercial) facial recognition for building access, and have key, as the door was delivered with one. :slight_smile: Would I have a key on me? No. It is hidden just in case.

I am quite content with the idea that if some automation breaks, to wait until it has been fixed.

I find a lot of opinion, but see a lack of logical reasoning. Maybe I am just a stubborn old man?! :slight_smile:

Logically if you properly add 3 way and 4 way lighting circuits you do not need to have multiple light switch circuits. as for all the things you mention as something you would not want to have some switches for manual fall back tell me this when they break you still have to turn the power off somehow to repair or replace the controls so why would you not want to have a way to use the lighting with a manual effort if the automation control fails?
If a fridge breaks yea you are without but do you just say oh well and let all the food spoil?
No, you either invite folks over and have a huge cook out or you go get ice coolers and lots of bags of ice every day till it is fixed to keep the food from spoiling.
It is not about opinions for me at least it is about not wanting to be inconvenienced ever. I do not want to have to work for my automation I want it to work for me and make things easier or more convenient not be hugely inconvenienced because it did not work and now I have to stop what I wanted to do and go fix my automation Heck I been fixing junk since I was 10 years old because we did not have the money to buy new so we fixed it instead.
I am an old man also and told quite often I am stubborn as well. I was around long before this thing called the internet was even born. I fixed TV’s when they used vacuum valves. So, yea I get it. Perhaps it is the military in me from my days in the Air Force or even goes back farther than that to when I was a boy scout and always wanted to be prepared. But the one thing I have always done is embrace the technology and use it to make my world better. Technolgy is an employee to me not my employer.
So, will I spend a couple extra bucks to add in a manual switch to turn the lights on and off if the automation breaks? If just so I do not have to stop watching the football game and go fix a failed automation controller to stop my better half from complaining about having to pee in the dark. Heck yea I’ll spend that money on some redundancy!
I also live in an area where natural disasters occur dang near yearly (hurricanes seem to visit us in Florida a lot :laughing:) and they say we are the lightning capitol of the world at least the country I believe so depending on technology is always a big gamble here. I like to be able to have options and that may be an opinion but for me at least it is a daily reality that technology fails. Here In Florida, we have an old saying if you don’t like the weather right now wait 15 minutes and it will change and most times it is a big old thunderstorm as your change.

I think you’re taking Rich’s quote too literally.

It’s up to you how much contingency you want to have in your home. In my opinion, some folks worry too much about their automation being offline, while others are overconfident that everything will always work as expected. Reality usually falls somewhere in between these two extremes.

The usual advice is, at it’s simplest, to make sure your home can still function at an acceptable minimum level if the automation isn’t working. In many cases, this is less about the person who maintains the automation, and more about the other occupants of the house.

If there’s a power outage, are the other occupants content to wait for everything to come back online before they can turn on any lights? If so, then you don’t need to worry about fallback, because it’s unnecessary for your scenario.

You’ll have to have some physical light switches, of course, due to that whole building-code thing.

No, because the logical fallback for “my car broke down” is not “have another car that I never use”. Popular backup plans include “take the bus”, “call a friend”, “ride a bike”, “call a taxi/Uber”, and “walk”.

I assume this means that you won’t worry about having backups of your OH server (since hardware never fails), or a UPS for your server (since the electricity will never fail). It would all just be a waste of time and money.

Honestly, yes. You’re being stubborn. Not because you’re sticking to your opinion, which is perfectly valid, but because you’re claiming that everyone else is demonstrating “a lack of logical reasoning”. That’s pretty much what stubborn people do (young or old): claim they’re the only ones making any sense. If you can’t see the world from someone else’s perspective, you’re never going to think anything they do is logical or sensible.

Your opinion is quite logical for someone who is opposed to redundancy and the costs associated with it. The advice given by by Rich, Justan, me, and many others is logical for someone who prefers redundancy and is okay with the associated costs. Both of these things can be true.

Here’s a third truth: for someone who’s struggling just to pay their rent and put food on the table, none of this makes any sense. It understandably does not fit within their worldview.

Again, if you review the many opinions you’ve claimed are illogical, you’ll find that the people are often more concerned about what happens when they aren’t around to fix the automation.

A realtor would recommend to you that you still put in all of those extra light switches, so that someone buying your house in the future won’t potentially be put off by relying on a homebrewed automation server that they can’t comprehend. But hey, your house, your money, your rules. That’s all that really matters.


Two sides of the coin: If for some reason or another the persons living in my home can’t (or won’t) use the smart only home, I’m losing value.
first off:

  1. If I would sell my house, the new owner probably never even comes close to knowing openHAB
  2. If for some reason openHAB closes its doors, I’ll have to move ALL the homes’ things to a new smarthome platform
  3. If some of the tech I use is EOL and “cloud-only”, I’m losing a lot of money and I had to renovate the whole home
  4. insert some other reasons here

the other side:

  1. you’re comparing apples and pears. Smartphones, Smart Cars, Smart whatever have a life span of 5 to 10 years max. You won’t get any updates (features AND(!) security) for a device older than 2 years sometimes, there’s no support whatsoever for smart devices older than 10 years.
  2. you’re living in a smart home for more than a decade (even if you’re not a German living in bricks! :wink: ), thus you’ll never have the guarantee, that some device or software will be supported in 2040, heck even in 2030.
  3. there’s loads of examples of hardware, which was abandoned by companies, just have a look of Alphabet’s/google’s hard- and software which is not accessible anymore. happens everyday, that some kind of hardware is EOL, the cloud-reliance is taken off the internet or there’s no more fixes for it.

that being said, you could argue, with “local API”-only devices you could at least be somewhat “safe” - and you’re probably right. As long as the hardware doesn’t break down (no replacement) or you are willing to learn all there’s to know about that API to be able to change or add something in the future.

so in my opinion, a smart home is only here “to press buttons” for me, which i could otherwise do myself, if I would not be that lazy. Meaning:

  • it will turn on lights for me (easy)
  • it will regulate my heating control in accordance to my presence (but the heating control stays active nonetheless)
  • it will anticipate my day and turn on coffee makers, shut down/drive up my blinds, pre-heats the whirlpool/sauna, …

all that little things I would do manually on the devices itself.

So, that’s why I decided to built KNX-controlled home actuators (lights, blinds, floor heating valves, …) to be sure to have a wide range of both devices and manufacturers, which mitigates the risk of failing devices or not understandable electric wiring. Around that KNX-ecosystem I built some other stuff like weather sensors, wallboxes, whirlpool, … Which I carefully picked, to have a local, open API and - if possible - have known “stable” vendors, to be sure to have yearlong support for that. Most of the devices are like “dumb”, the API perhaps consists only of a “on/off”-switch of some kind, some (e.g. my wallbox) have like a 200page API manual…

my understanding is to have a “down to earth” home, which could be accessed by lets say my grandmother, but is enhanced with smart logic on top of that, which “presses the buttons” for me. So I protect my investment in my house and mitigate the risks of losing features, if the devices/technology/clouds go EOL. (and be sure to have security-updates)


Thank you for your reply. I am not going to respond in detail, but will say this:

  1. the assumption of not caring for backups and redundancy - incorrect. E.g. I am running a whole of property (now 40kWh) battery; have backups of each physical component of the automation system (controllers, bulbs, SBC, swtich, etc.)

  2. I should have used ‘not much’ instead of ‘lack’…

  3. I am not even thinking I am the only one who makes sense, or my thinking would. It is the selective approach to what needs redundancy, based on personal preference or need. E.g., for me it’s this, for the other it’s that…

  4. Redundancy again; it is based on preference, not logic, which would be generic.

  5. I will leave this property in a coffin, hence, do not care about resale.

  6. While it may be my house my rules, it is not my approach otherwise I would not have started this post). I am looking for a reasonable way forward, and question why a legacy approach when automation is mature enough to replace it.

  7. The dilemma is indeed the notion of ‘home-brew automation’; were I differ in saying that my controllers are based on open hardware, well documented, with instructions on how to replace any component of it. Hence, it beats most ‘commercial’ solution’, which often are not up to the standard one can expect from a commercial product. (You mentioned in another post if it goes up in flames you certainly won’t consider it; I agree.)

  8. I don’t think taking Rich’s quote too literal; it is a good approach. Build something that functions w/o automation is essentially what it means.

  9. I worked in various office buildings that had no light switches; all automated, and worked great. Why is it seemingly not acceptable in a domestic setting? (is what puzzles me, or rather the resistance towards it.)

Thank you for your detailed reply.

The idea is running OH on a isolated system (no Internet to surprise with auto-updates). All parts have replacements, all is documented; all tools are in place to put firmware on a new controller with how-to instructions, so that an IT support person can ‘service’ the system, like a car that goes in a workshop for repair (which has documentation, part and tools to carry out repairs).

Why is this not sufficient and acceptable… and as far as the car goes, I am not having a backup or horse and cart in case the car doesn’t work.

While the car is not your example, I still find it valid in principle. Replace ‘it’ with any other system people utilise.
BTW: my Tesla had so many updates I lost count :slight_smile:

Nicely summarised… and exactly what I question and seek to understand.
why is this reasoning so important for light switches and not for anything else (as in any other technology)?

Ross’ argument of catching the bus, call a friend, etc. is not applicable to me living in the sticks. :slight_smile:

What I can say in summary… and I thank all respondents — if the light switches are the only thing of concern (it always comes back to those, even with my wife), then I install one light per room that is switched with a toggle, which can also be automated; the Germans know this as “Treppenhausebeleuchtung”, where a momentary switch on each floor triggers the light. This requires a latching relay for each circuit.

just examples, because lights is that, what everybody has.
My family of four is quite fond of “Alexa, turn on light/coffemaker/…”, but they also are able to reach for the buttons.
To be clear, my openHAB has control over:

KNX buttons/actuators, which are present in each room

  • all lights (around 40ish): on/off, dim
  • all HVAC settings (in all 8 rooms): set temp, away, … like you would on the controls in each room
  • all blinds (in 4 rooms): up/down, percentage
  • all KNX scenes (17 presently), which coordinate settings in single rooms, but also whole house
  • Video Doorbell: open relay, some displays


  • Doorbird: my local accessible Video Doorbell: images, bell rules, video on displays
    ** can be also used via Doorbird App in parallel
  • Air Quality: alarms, displays on bad quality
    ** openHAB is the only consumer of this information
  • amazonEcho: use as audio sink for audio feedback on states/rule output/…
    ** can also be consumed in my amazon App, but I’m the only one, family uses the echos in every room
  • PV converter: information on states, commands to override automatic
    ** openHAB is one of many consumers for information => in rules
    ** openHAB is the only one overriding settings (forces battery-charging/discharging, …)
  • Tibber: dynamic energy prices are used in rules
    ** openHAB uses this information in combination with Tibber to command high energy devices (EV-wallbox, dishwasher, washer, whirlpool, …)
    ** Can also be consumed in my Tibber App
  • many more, you’ll get the picture…

In every single case I can do it manually:

  1. use the HVAC buttons in each room
  2. tell my Wallbox to load my EV
  3. start heating up the whirlpool, start the dish washer, …
  4. look at the pricing curve in Tibber and then start my consumers manually
  5. or even decide to use any other App/Cloud-Service/…

ad 5.
For exampe, my wallbox is listed with Tibber, there’s a “binding” (called powerup) in the Tibber-App. So I could use the Tibber Cloud-Service to tell my wallbox, if there’s a cheap hour to charge my EV. But that’s nothing I’d like to have, because I like to use only local APIs. So I use openHAB as a (temporary?) tool for having my logic there, which I would normally do manually.

But - and that’s aimed at your “reasoning”-question:
If I take away openHAB today, everyone in the house would be perfectly capable living in it.
yes, it would be more cumbersome, yes, it would require loads of manual steps and button pressing… but: it’s possible. every. single. usecase.

Take away Internet-connection on your “Tesla”-example: You should be able to use the car without, but you can’t use the App to start it, you have to resort to the key. (or keycard? I don’t own a Tesla, because of QElon, but that’s another story). Perhaps you can’t use the AutoPilot, because this feature depends on a live check on your subscription… you can’t use live traffic in your navigation. you can’t see, if there’s free stalls on the next supercharger station, …

Point being: if you are completely dependent on technology (intranet or internet/cloud), you will at some point find yourself at a dead end. Question is: do you mitigate that in some form or way? or do you “live with it”.
The majority here does not live with it, but uses some kind of mitigation. That’s not to say your way is “the wrong way”, far from it. But even in Star Trek, there’s buttons on the bridge of the Enterprise (in all variations, even the newest ones! :wink: )


Because we’re talking about mission critical components under any conditions including potentially life-threatening emergencies.

It’s about having stairs to get out of a burning building.
It’s about how the emergency doctor can open your hyper-safe electronic door when you cannot.
It’s about having a lit room when he’s in to reanimate you lying on the floor.

It is not about mimicking the full range of features such as dynamic color lighting, fallback is about being able to light a room independent of any automation components that may fail at any time.

No but we prepare for a car outage and have a fallback option ready, e.g. to use public transport.
It’s the same ‘degraded’ mode of operation you will have with a broken or powerless escalator:
you can still use the stairs. You still get to where you want. Less convenient but it does the job, for as long as it takes to get the primary setup fixed. Which can be minutes or months.

You have not been hit by an outage of mission critical components such as heating or lighting.

Be assured that if you had been there, your opinion on this would have turned by 180°.

Just change the 3rd character of the thread title to ‘f’.


I am not arguing about code requirements.

How does this work with a normal door that requires a key to enter? (without breaking it)

Neither heating nor lighting is mission critical (for me).
Maybe this is one reason why I am puzzled about the requirement to be manual.

We have balmy temperatures all year round, except in winter where nights can get close to zero, but day time has high twenties.
As for lights, we have windows, and when it is dark we could use candles or flash lights.
The above are power-related issues.

OH related issues have been mitigated (as outlined previously, and) by adding a UPS to the rPi, should the main UPS ever fail gain, which happens a couple of weeks ago for 2 seconds (a first in ten years since the system exists).

Maybe I describe it differently: why has nobody a backup for a light switch or any other ‘service’, yet when it is automated they need a fallback. This is what I do not get. And if a backup is needed, why is it only needed when automated, and not under normal conditions?

I understand your point. Still it seems a bit “extreme”, even for digital natives.

I do have “backup” for the colported lights and heating.
Electricity in my house is distributed between all three phases and every room has a different phase than the one next to it. And the hallways also are on a different phase. I don’t know for sure, but I think thats kinda building code here in Germany
If all three phases are cut (power outage), I do have a (manual) cutover to my home battery, which then runs my house on emergency mode. I could also use my EV for an even more emergency mode, because it provides at least power for one phase in emergency mode - or simply a 230V cable from the garage to the house, so at least heating and fridges can be run, if need be (never had power outage here - only for announced service windows).
But I did have scenarios, where there’s a short circuit in one device on phase 1 and therefore the main circuit breaker for that phase went down, so I could use lights of the other phases.

and for heating: I do have three energy sources: solar thermal power, gas heater and wood stove, which all three heat up my layer storage, which in turn heats house and warmwater. and I do have a spare heating controller lying around, because I got it very cheap and the model is kinda akward to find.

Yes, but… my point is, if said device fails, there is no backup.
Yet, in case it is automated, a backup requirement is put on the table.
This is what I struggle with.

Let’s say the coffee machine is by default automated to make coffee every day at 0700.
There wouldn’t be a manual coffee machine as backup?

I am not trying to be difficult. I simply do not get it… and if there was one thing in my life that has puzzled me for years, it is this topic.

As for your previous post: I do understand the desire or need for redundancy for various systems. Looking at three phases, I get all this, the interesting difference in Australia is, (on a side note) that on three phases the phase-specific circuit breaker are linked and trip together; lose one phase = lose all three. :slight_smile:

you’re mixing two things.

  1. there’s usability without a smart home
  2. there’s having replacements handy for broken stuff

the first is that one, we’re talking about here I think, the last one is redundancy. or simply put in IT-speak: MTBF and MTBR.

Mean Time Between Failures: If IT-systems break down, you can’t do anything with it → how to cope with that (e.g. having a “manual override” like I explained)
Mean Time Between Replacement: if anything (IT-system, coffee maker, …) breaks down → how long do I live without it, or do I have a replacement handy in 5mins.

two completely different things.

…and I do have a spare coffee maker, true: it’s no portafilter, but my camping coffee maker :wink:

1 Like

… understood, and the two things have been thrown together over the course of the posts / conversation (and are arguably intertwined when reading the arguments.

Assume I have #2 covered, why is there a need for a backup when when the home is automated, yet nobody cries foul if something in the non-automated home can no longer be operated (which is point #2 again).

As for “having a party” when the fridge/freezer dies, I consider this as my most valuable service; hence, while I can’t operate it manually, I have (besides the property UPS) a generator to run these if need be; but, this has nothing to do with a SmartHome (as it is #2 again).

My SmartHome works, I do not need usability without it. If it breaks, it will be fixed, like a HAVAc or any other ‘system’.

Another example I can think of, I have a tank, a valve and a pump. These are at three locations spread over 10,000 m2. the filling of the tank is automated. As in, the tank publishes its demand, the valve listens to it, and tells the pump to start, after which it opens to direct the flow. There is no way to make this manual, unless a whole bunch of manual valves, T-pieces and general plumbing is installed, plus some extra wiring. This was the start of my automation journey, because my wife was tired of doing this manually, by opening the valve, at the same time switching the power for the pump, then start an egg timer with 45 minutes, which at times she did not hear, and the tank overflowed.
Why would I want a manual fall-back for this? :slight_smile:

I admit one draw-back of the current solution, if you want to switch it off w/o automation, the power on all three ‘devices’ need to be disconnected. But, there is no need for it, is there?

This is my main concern too.

So do you imagine that the house will need a total rewiring then, in order to revert it back to a “normal” house?

Btw I’m on the Gold coast, Qld.

I’m not sure I understand your idea yet. Are you thinking of not having traditional light switches (that can control the lights even when openhab is down) at all?

What do you envision should be done to operate things if openhab is down?

It’s always a trade-off. I don’t want to steer my heating manually either: meaning I don’t want to open/close valves, tell the gas-heater to burn and whatever. That’s why there’s heating controllers, which run on a reliable hardware.

The point:
even if my openHAB installation runs for nearly 10years now on Raspberry Pis with SD cards and did not fail me big time, I don’t want to hand my live over to a 30bucks hardware, which I regularly update with rules and new things, items, … thus potentially breaking software.
And I do think with using smarthome-capabilities in parallel to existing “traditional” devices reaches exactly my goal: to relieve me from tedious tasks and use smart rules.

or put it that way: I don’t envision smarthome software as a “whole-in-one”-solution, but as a sophisticated enhancement of reliable hardware. I don’t like the idea to centralize devices in openHAB, but to use different devices, systems, logics in openHAB. Thus mitigating the “single point of failure” in openHAB and distributing it to all the devices, which in turn can run without openHAB and without problems.


Not really… I simply envisage OH to be similar to say a KNX or Clipsal system. These two systems, for example, require specialist knowledge and tools, so does OH.
Of course this can be argued… but I see the difference as much as your computer works differently to mine, can you fix mine, can I fix yours?

In other words, my assumption, proven over almost ten years, or as long as OH exist, has been proven to be reliable. The incident two weeks ago had nothing to do with automation in general or OH specifically.

I have a local IT guy who uses OH and Linux and can attend to the system; I am sure there are others too.

As for the light switches, I have conceded to having them installed!

For bigger areas, or multiple lights, they will be broadly grouped and assigned to a light switch (with will be a momentary switch triggering a relay, the automation system can also control (but works without the latter).

Why should the rPI – used in industrial control system, not be good enough for my domestic environment?

Well, updating things to fail, where is the test system, before deployment, or roll-back capability?

Much to the dismay of my wife, I basically open any device and check it out. What I see at times is shocking, and no better than my ATMEL-based micro-controllers. :slight_smile:

A valid point… I see the opposite, it can be. Why not?

Like may innovations or new way of doing things, people take time to adopt.

We used to have land lines; now have ‘wireless’. This is a technology change. so is automation.

In summary, I get some of the arguments; I will install light switches, but am not sure about switches for the blinds. The more legacy stuff I add, the more cost I add for no perceived benefit.

I am already at a point where I run sophisticated commercial systems (imported from Germany), which most Aussie trades will not understand or be able to fix. I already put my plumber to the test, who never installed a floor heating (let alone balanced one), and can not commission the multi-input hot water storage tank and controls.
Even these controller will be replaced by the industry in years to come (no different to SmartHome components.)

On a side note: can also make hot water from solar, combustion heater and electric. :slight_smile:

Rasberry Pis are not certified hardware for industrial purposes. They’re historically educational boards. If you use them in ICS, you’re outside of any spec.

I think I made my point quite clear. openHAB to me is merely an orchestrator of a bazillion of individually working devices, nothing more.
Or to put it in IT-terms: I don’t use openHAB as a monolithic application server, but more like a way to handle microservices. All Microservices can run on their own in a way. Perhaps limited and they need manual commands, but they run, even if the monolith is down, there’s not internet connection or another microservice is broken. Better explained? :wink:

1 Like

Lots of gear runs on rPi… which became apparent during the pandemic. display, DIN rail, heaps…

I get your explanation :slight_smile:

To all:
I do appreciate all the contributions, and am grateful for the engaged discussion.