5 points

Matter sucks ass

permalink
report
reply
1 point

Matter has been pretty good to me lately. Had to solve an Apple Home Hub issue, but it’s pretty rock solid now. My only complaint is switches could have less latency (I want near instant), but at least they are working consistently. I’m using Matter over Thread, not Matter over WiFi.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

The problem with matter is that EVERY update to a device must be certified and that costs money.

So brands are sticking with the proprietary hub model so they can iterate faster

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Also you need to pay (18k/year iirc) in addition to that as well. Next to the fact that matter itself is quite convoluted from an implementation standpoint.

It’s really not made with things like startups or niche products in mind. It’s really a standard by and for the big companies

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
permalink
report
reply
30 points

Still on zwave which works great. Don’t see the point of this standard which runs over an inferior type of networking and is brought to us by the companies that created the interoperability problem in the first place.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

Don’t see the point of this standard which runs over an inferior type of networking

Inferior how? Matter is not comparable to Z-Wave. Z-Wave is a mesh network, Matter is just a standard which would allow Alexa, Siri, Google, etc. to control the same devices. To allow Z-Wave like functionality, Matter is able to work on top of Thread, which is in fact superior to Z-Wave.

is brought to us by the companies that created the interoperability problem in the first place

Of course. You don’t want to be the company known for refusing to participate in an open standard, even if you secretly don’t want it to succeed. Anyways, there’s no reason for companies to not want an open standard for controlling smart devices, since it literally helps everyone support more devices for basically no effort once you add support for Matter.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

Inferior range, potential for interference, power consumption, meshing, and security. Name one area where it’s better.

And I still expect one or more of these companies to break the standard to create their own walled garden.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Matter over Thread is similar to Z-Wave at the user level and supports a lot more device types. The below is from Silicon Labs

• Application layer: Matter is an IP-based application layer protocol that can uses lower layers from other technologies such as Wi-Fi, Ethernet, or Thread. Z-Wave is complete protocol covering physical layer to application layer Its a non-IP MESH protocol that uses sub-GHz ISM bands.

• Device types: Matter supports a broader range of device types than Z-Wave, including cameras, speakers, TVs, and more. Z-Wave focuses on low bandwidth devices that require low power and reliable communication, such as security systems, sensors, switches, and locks.

• Security: Matter provides end-to-end encryption, device certification, and cloud integration, which can enhance the security and privacy of smart home devices. Z-Wave also offers encryption and device authentication, but it does not have a built-in cloud service.

• Compatibility: Matter is compatible with popular voice assistants and other IP-based devices, which can make it easier to integrate with existing smart home ecosystems. Z-Wave requires a Z-Wave specific gateway or hub, but has a large number of compatible devices that work together.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Zwave stuff are way overpriced, even comparing to the wifi or zigbee quivalent.

As an examble I get good quality (aka not an unknown chineese brand) Zigbee smart object for 2 to 5 times lower price than what a Zwave equivalent.
Same goes for wifi one, which are roughly the same price as the Zigbee stuff.

The only good aspect of Zwave was the security protocol that was more robust than the Zigbee equivalent (albeit Zigbee 3.0 closed the gap) and more standardized endpoints. Matter objective is to get those two to surpass their ZWave equivalent.

Unfortunately my gateway (which is compatible with both Zigbee 3.0 and ZWave btw) is still waiting for its Matter/Thread upgrade, so I can’t try it yet, but compairing my Zwave objects with my Zigbee ones, I see no point of buying the former over the later.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I once owned a bunch of WiFi connected devices. One day I inspected my router logs and found out that they were all making calls to a bunch of services that weren’t the vendor - things like Google, and Facebook.

WiFi connected devices require connecting to a router; in most homes, this is going to be one that’s also connected to the internet - most people aren’t going to buy a second router just for their smart home, or set up a disconnected second LAN on their one router. And nearly all of these devices come with an app, which talks to the device through an external service (I’m looking at you, Honeywell, and you, Rainbird). This is a privacy shit-show. WiFi is a terrible option for smart home devices.

ZigBee, well, I haven’t had any luck with it - pairing problems which are certainly just a learning curve in my part and not an issue with the protocol. I chose ZWave myself because I read about the size and range limitations of ZigBee technology, versus ZWave, but honestly I could have gone either way. Back then, there was no appreciable price difference in devices. Most hubs support both, though, and I can’t see why I wouldn’t mix them (other than I need to figure out how to get ZigBee to work).

In any case, low-power BT, ZigBee, or Zwave are all options, whereas I will not allow more WiFi smart devices in my house. I’m stuck with Honeywell and Rainbird, for… reasons… but that’s it. I don’t need to be poking more holes in my LAN security.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I feel your point regarding the WiFi devices and that they shouldn’t be recommended to casual users. But if you just set up an isolated VLAN with its own SSID and use e.g. homeassistant running locally to orchestrate them, then what’s the harm? If your goal is privacy, you need some kind of local “hub” anyway, and to me it makes way more sense to be able to place that machine anywhere, regardless of e.g. bluetooth reception to your smart home devices (since that is taken care of via the additional SSID on your WAPs).

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I had some difficulties too with Zigbee pairing, that’s one of the shortcomings that Matter fixes with their QR Code pairing. On my case it was just about understanding that you have to put both the device and the coordinator in pairing mode for the “interview” to happen. And that is has to be close to any device of the target network that isn’t battery powered (they can do the interview on the coordinator behalf).

I stopped using WiFi devices for the same reason, but found out about Tasmota, an open-source firmware for ESP devices. It requires a local coordinator, but never send anything to Google and the likes. It can be hard to flash, but some vendor, like Nous, offers pre-flashed devices. Some of them are also Matter compatible (if it has recent hardware as old ESP device has too little rom to handle the Matter code).

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I would argue you get what you pay for in terms of interoperability and reliability, but I can imagine people willing to trade some of that for a lower price.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Interoperability comes from standardization, which Zigbee sorely lacked. But actors like Tuya or Leroy Merlin built their own standard over Zigbee, which means anything that has “works with Tuya” will work with any Tuya coordinator of any brand (same for Leroy Merlin ecosystem). And even those who don’t usually mostly works.

With that you’d get ZWave reliability, most, if not all, of its security features, with Zigbee lower price. And they still works great with third party coordinator.

But it is true that Z-Wave uses lower frequency than Zigbee (868MHz vs 2.3GHz). It means lower frequency interferences, and better reliability over high distances.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Another issue is that zwave isn’t available in all countries (or it is but uses incompatible frequencies) so it’s less useful outside the big markets.

permalink
report
parent
reply
85 points

I just want to buy home automation gadgets that don’t need a bloody cloud account to work.

permalink
report
reply
18 points

Zwave and zigbee have never needed a cloud.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

They might be older tech, but they’re pretty rock solid.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

That’s the point of this standard, at least in theory. Same with the older but still common ZigBee standard.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.1K

    Posts

  • 130K

    Comments