Will Z-wave Survive?

Introduction

I recently got an email from a friend asking for my thoughts:

Do you think zwave will die with the onslaught of wifi?
http://uncrate.com/stuff/wemo-light-switch/

The short answer is eventually, yes.  The long answer is below.

Features

The link above links to the Belkin page with more information about the WeMo Light Switch.  It looks like a pretty standard switch with a decorator style.  It promised to make your life easier by being able to:

• Turn on/off your lights via app
• Turn on/off your lights via a schedule (fixed times or sunrise/sunset)
• Doesn't lose the schedule during power outages
• Has no batteries to wear out (not sure how this works with the last one - a super capacitor?)
• No minimum power levels to allow it to work with all lighting (and ceiling fans)

It looks like an interesting device that could make people's lives easier.  As long as they are handy enough to replace a light switch.  I'm not sure that we are quite to onslaught for wifi-based home automation tools, but we are probably not that far off.  An interesting question to ponder and develop a framework around more generally.

Limitations

From the Belkin web site:

Please note that the WeMo Light Switch is not compatible with lights controlled by more than one switch or with metal face plates. Metal face plates interfere with Wi-Fi® signals and will not allow this product to work correctly in your home.

I think the first part is important, the second part most people can live with.  However, let's say this a different way:

• Neutral Wire Required
• Single pole (Not compatible with 3-way (multi-location control) switches)

Both are meaningful and more limitations of the product and not the technology.  I won't pursue these in my comparison below, because I think that both are easily overcome.

Specifics of Z-wave vs. Wifi

Z-wave has been around for some time, but is still a technology of which most people are not aware.  From what I can tell from the childishly designed Z-wave website, Z-wave has been around for about a decade.  It is described as:

... a next-generation wireless ecosystem that lets all your home electronics talk to each other, and to you, via remote control. It uses simple, reliable, low-power radio waves that easily travel through walls, floors and cabinets. Z-Wave control can be added to almost any electronic device in your house, even devices that you wouldn't ordinarily think of as "intelligent," such as appliances, window shades, thermostats and home lighting.

Generally speaking, Z-wave works with a master controller that sends commands to the devices over (a mesh-network of) radio waves.  The controller can have a good or bad interface for controlling the device.  My experience has been with the MiCasa Verde Vera (I have an older version than the 3), which has some frustrating limitations but is otherwise reasonably reliable and a well-thought out product.  My use has primarily focused on lighting control, for which I have about 12 different switches connected to it.  Most of them are on a dusk-to-dawn schedule for security purposes.  I also have a DIY garage door opener / sensor set up.  My pool controller (an Intermatic PE953) is theoretically connected to my Z-wave network, but won't respond to signals in its current location (the mesh is failing me!)

So what are the differences?

Characteristic	Z-wave	Wifi
Antenna/Controller Cost	Low	Relatively low and declining, given the wide-scale adoption and many embedded wifi applications
Bandwidth	Low	High (with growing potential)
Current Adoption	Limited to home automation applications (very low)	Widespread - most houses have wifi available
Reliability	High, low data rate and mesh networking approach should result in robust network.  However, depends on controller functioning.	High in places with network coverage (though many houses do not necessarily have complete coverage)
Control	Central - requires a dedicated server or box to run the system	Disbursed.  Each piece of equipment has to have the intelligence to control itself.
Available control items	Generally wide: - Switch controllers (2, 3, 4 and no neutral available widely today) - Plug-in modules - Thermostat control - Door locks - Sensors - Pool controller - Security (cams, etc.) not available given high bandwidth requirements	Wide in some categories: - Nest (and others) for HVAC - WeMo for lighting (limited to 2-way with neutral for now) - Others for plug-in modules - Door locks (small companies) - Security-based webcams (common) - Electricity usage monitoring (think TED) - Many new, remotely electronic items are coming with some form of networking built in.
Integration	Modest to high	Low - each system stands on its own
Ease of use	Modest	High for the limited single application uses

When I first started looking at this, my initial impression was that $50 was way too much for an individual light switch (the Belkin WeMo has an MSRP of $49).  Then I searched for the z-wave switches that I've used in my house (GE-branded Jasco switches) and saw that they are $42.50 each on Amazon.  Not terribly different.  I remember having bought most of mine on a good sale at SmartHome, but they were in the mid-$30s.  Of the two switches, my guess is that the wifi one has the greatest potential to get much cheaper than the Z-wave switch due to economies of scale.

Other Technologies

Zigbee is out there, but is stupidly non-standard (i.e., high integration costs).  This will be in single niche products or will serve as just the last 15 feet of control (think Philips Hue) and wifi will be useful for controlling before there.

General Considerations for Adoption of New Technology

• Cost: Cheaper is good.  The potential to become crazy cheaper is even better.  Should be considered on a total system basis.
• Current Embedded Base of Related Products: Tends to reinforce the cost point.  But also should incorporate what people know about the technology and how to implement it (both the user and the designer).
• Complexity: Highly complex (to the user) solutions generally fail.
• Reliability: In the real (not virtual) world, users do not accept high rates of failure.  (I'm not sure how high, high is in this case.  Is a failure rate of 1% of commands to devices too high?)
• Product Features: Ensure that the product solves the real problem that the user has, not the problem that the technology is capable of solving.

What is Currently Missing In Home Automation?

[DRAFT section]
Home Entertainment
HVAC/Hot Water
Lighting/Shades
Physical Access Control
Spa/Pool Equipment Control
- Chemicals not there
Energy Usage Monitoring

Conclusions / Forecasts

I guess its a bit of a cop out to suggest that its still anybody's game out there right now.  Belkin is a big name and has a fair amount of brand power behind it, they could (potentially alone) shift the playing field.  Overall, though I don't think Belkin will be a dominant player here.  My guess is the following:

• Wifi wins:  Wifi will eventually come to dominate the controlled/connected home; wifi networking is ubiquitous and the hardware has gotten very inexpensive.  That said, I think that some support for z-wave will exist for a very long time.
• One at a time: Most homeowners will take a very piecemeal approach to home automation.  A few light switches here or there.  Simple schedules will dominate.  The next five years will be mostly DIY, making even three-way switch replacement a bit tough.
• Physical/Virtual Interface Design:  Apps will be useful for setup, but people like to be able to turn on and off a light without having to pull out their iPhone.  Expect to see relatively small number of "central load control" systems.  We will still have light switches in our rooms.
• Integration will matter: That said, how people interact with the disparate systems will become a bigger and bigger issue as they add more smart items to that home.
• There will be the parallel growth of a home controller that can bridge wifi, z-wave, x10 and all other previous technologies.  Think something like the MiCasa Verde.  
• For these boxes to work, they will have to plug into IFTTT, which I think has the potential for changing how users interact with their digital and real worlds.
• High End will Still Exist: Proprietary systems will continue to reign on the high-end (Control4, Creston, AMX) where systems implementation are a high portion of the system cost.
• These should die out or just serve a smaller and smaller niche as improvements elsewhere in the ecosystem are made.
• Security Matters, Eventually: Maybe after some noteworthy hacking event, security will become a big deal for home automation.
• Where the Control Sits:  There will be some diversity in where the control exists.  Should it exist in the switch or in the device (i.e., lightbulb)?  Obviously as it gets cheaper, the end device gets more and more achievable and in the end, mostly more flexible.  Mostly, because you will note that no matter what control signals are sent to my Hue lightbulbs, they won't turn on if the switch is in the off mode.

End Note: Anybody have a really good WYSIWYG HTML editor for the Mac that handles tables as well as Word?  Blogger has nothing.  Tried SeaMonkey and the results are above - which I'm not terribly happy with.  I've been using Confluence at work a lot and find it to be very fit for its purpose - especially for tables.

Outdoor WiFi

I took the plunge recently in installing an outdoor wifi repeater at my house.  I have a Pioneer VSX-1122 receiver that can do AirPlay hooked up to our outdoor speaker system.  That was great but if you can't get a wifi signal while you are at the pool, it limits the usefulness of the system.  My wife's primary usage of the system was expected to be with her phone, while sitting out at the pool.

I chose to install an Amped Wireless SR10000 along with their outdoor antenna kit.  I finally got around to installing it a couple of weeks ago and it worked out perfectly: what I intended to do actually worked.  Here's how it went.

I have a set of outdoor flood lights (note the Feit LED bulbs) on the back corner of my house, right near the pool, like so:

Normally, this wouldn't necessarily be too helpful.  In this case, there were two reasons why it was:

1. The light box had screw plugs that would leg me attach a standard PVC conduit to it.
2. I knew that there was a hot wire in the box.  I knew this because I was going to install a z-wave switch on the box, but couldn't due to the fact that there was not power at the box.  If power wasn't at the switch, it had to be at the box.

My plan was this:

1. Use an old extension cord from my garage door automation project.  The cord had the female end intact, but the male end was cut off.  Perfect.
2. Buy a plastic outdoor (cable) box and put the SR10000 in it.  I forget where I found this online.
3. Use PVC conduit to connect the cable box and the electrical box.
4. Hang the antenna to the side of the roof.

It turned out well and our new backyard network is up and running and at a good strength.  Here are some more pictures:

Here's a view of how everything will fit into the box when its all set up.  I did have to drill a hole in the bottom of the box to get the antenna wire out.  Some putty is due to seal that up.

This is a view of the box attached to the underside of the overhang of my roof.

The same electrical box, this time with a PVC conduit coming out the back side.

Some perspective of the box's orientation to the floodlights.  The antenna is hanging freely; it is my intention to nail or staple that down at some point.

A view from a little farther away, showing the antenna.

And even farther away, showing the mounting to the roof.  Its not terribly long, but it works well!

Waiting for Technology [Draft]

I had a grand vision about eight months ago of setting up my home entertainment system to be controlled exclusively by my iPad that is sitting next to the couch.  I have a relatively recent Pioneer receiver (a VSX-1022) for which they have thoughtfully created an iPhone app.  However, it is less obvious how I would control my Roku, my Blu-Ray player or my Fios cable box.  Ideally, it'd all be integrated, too.

I looked around and found some options and ultimately think that I'll need some hardware to pull this off (likely a GlobalCache IP2IR box), but then some good software.  I concluded after poking around for several months that there were no solutions that I found reasonably easy and cost efficient.  I will wait for something better to come along.

That got me thinking about how frequently it is the right answer to wait.  Particularly, when you are looking at an environment where multiple devices need to work together (a system).  To not enter into the market because something will come out in the not too distant future that will better server your needs.  If you are going to wait, I guess you probably have to believe all or most of the following:

1. There are people & companies working on the problem you are looking to solve
2. The solutions will likely be better.
3. Its more of an integration issue than the development of any particular technology.

Private Bike Sharing

[I know that this isn't so much a technology or gadget idea than it is a discussion of a business model, but it's my blog!]

So much has been written and done with respect to public bike share programs.  They serve an important need and I think that generally speaking, they are a wonderful idea.  Not a huge fan that the government is subsidizing them in some cases (but better for it to be something like the Citi Bike system in NYC), but no matter, they are a great idea.  I had the most fun visiting DC during the Cherry Blossom festival when I rode my bike over from Virginia and rode all around the National Mall on a bike.  Running and biking are great ways to see a city.

All of that said, I couldn't help but thinking today that if I was visiting a city and really wanted to get a ride in, I wouldn't want to be on one of those clunky bikes.  Today, I was riding down the C&O Canal trail that connects to the Capital Crescent trail.  When I got closer to the core of the city, there were a number of people on bike share bikes.  They were noticeably clunkier than any other bike on the trail.  That got me thinking . . .

. . . There are a number of services out there that are designed to increase productivity out of both capital and labor.  Think Uber, Airbnb, taskrabbit, renttherunway.  Some even set you up to be able to rent people's bikes.  That said, you are dealing with potentially flakey people in unknown neighborhoods when you are in a new city, but sites like GetAble even focus on things like bikes, but as far as I can tell, it appears to mostly be a front for local bike shops trying to rent their bikes.

Similar to house sharing services, why not set up a service to share your bike when you are not in town and then as a virtue of doing so, you get to use a (nice) bike in the city you're traveling in?  Simple idea, and I know that cars are not houses, but maybe something like this could work.  Presumably the bike shop would have to do some tuning/checking that the bike was in good enough shape to rent.

If this works, then whenever you go to a new city and want to ride (a good bike), all you need to do is bring your shoes, pedals and helmet and you are good to go.

Why It Fails

I think that in the end, the benefits for the rental shops have to outweigh the costs.  Here are the costs:

• There are a fair number of coordination costs
• Storage costs of the bikes available for rent
• Maintenance costs of the incoming bikes (and risk that somebody renting lies about the state of bike maintenance)
• Potential (real or perceived) costs related to foregone revenue opportunity for renting bikes (even if that isn't their main line of business)

That said, I think most of the above, except for the last one can be be solved by technology and community feedback and rating systems like ebay and Amazon.

Why It Could Succeed

Local bike (especially rental) shops are up against a variety of pressures:

• National chains (i.e., Performance)
• Bike sharing programs eliminating or severely reducing income and foot-traffic

This could be a meaningful push-back against those pressures (though it really can't stop Performance from doing something themselves).  It really should help strengthen the connection that the local bike shops have with their local customers.  Those customers have to drop off their bike for renting while they are out of town.  That clearly provides the shop opportunities to sell them other goods or services.