I don't trust advertising companies with more intimate data about things inside my home. A phone and computers is bad enough. Fortunately there's a good solution for me (today) and for everyone (hopefully soon).
Home Assistant [1] has been a Github-topping repo for a while. You've seen it here on HN several times [2]. It's a Python 3 open-source home automation platform that runs on a Raspberry Pi or other home server. Local data, local control. It's been being bootstrapped by tinkerers who can handle YAML config files for a while but is getting much fancier these days.
When Google shut down Revolv hubs in 2016, they posted rationale about why your hub should be open and local [3]. This kind of move further justifies the argument.
As big companies clamor over access to your home, let's take a stand by demanding open standards, local data options, and local control.
100%. I’ve also been using HA for a while now and have been very impressed. Tons of integrations including a number of z-wave and WiFi thermostats — so you don’t have to bother with this Nest / Google nonsense if you don’t want to.
As HA approaches version 1.0, I hope more people will jump onboard.
One of the tough things about open source software and especially HomeAssistant (long time user here!) is that HomeAssistant connects to many services, a lot of which use some sort of oAuth protocol, which in turn requires a client key/client secret, which can't be embedded in the software. For Nest, it requires every installation/user to create a new key/application with Nest/Google, for what in many ways is the same software. There must be a better way - in the end all that's being given back is a client key which is used in the actual authentication.
Another way of looking at it is that the problem is better attributed to OAuth / centralized web services. Nest/Google is responsible for making you go through that developer rigmarole to simply use your device. Next time, choose hardware with a better user experience!
Both perspectives have their validity of course. Your description is more applicable to someone interested in moving to Home Assistant after already having bought a bunch of proprietary devices. These network effects are exactly why it's so damn important that open protocols and projects are adopted and become standard, rather than these dead end "service" worlds of Google et al.
> We’ll stop accepting new WWN connections on August 31, 2019.
> One of the most popular WWN features is to automatically trigger routines based on Home/Away status. Later this year, we'll bring that same functionality to the Google Assistant and provide more device options for you to choose from.
I'm sorry, but... What?
You're sorry that you've caught developers and users by surprise, but the main functionality that they want won't appear until some unknown time in the future? And they should just trust you that this will actually happen after you yanked the carpet out from under them once already?
This coming from the company that removed the YouTube subscription collections feature promising they’d replace it with something better 4+ years ago.[1] Of course I’m still waiting on that promise to be fulfilled.
Google has become a big horrible disaster. I'm extremely disappointed in what is going on these days.
I am a heavy user of Nest (7 cameras, other accessories). I've fully bought into the ecosystem. I literally have no idea what's going on. It sounds to me who is only casually paying attention that they're killing off Nest and the Nest brand. Whether that may or may not be true, they need to understand the perception of their actions to their users. Do they really expect most people to say "Okay, I need to spend 10 minutes and read through exactly what this all means."
Now I'm left with the dreaded feeling that my Dropcams and Nestcams will no longer work in the near future.
Google has really damaged their brand because I no longer consider them reliable. If I buy a brand that is associated with Google, I expect that it will get changed in the next year or so into something that I can't comprehend or don't want, and it makes me want to search for alternatives.
I don't want to "merge" my accouns with Google Home. I want to keep my single account on Nest like I have for many years now, and I just want alerts and to be able to see my cameras. All this other nonsense that they're trying to pull me into is not what I want as a consumer, and it upsets me that Google is becoming this kind of company.
They are in many ways worse than Microsoft was at their worst. Before Microsoft used to be a monopoly on the desktop, but Google is now turning into a monopoly in my entire life.
Meanwhile, Nest has been dormant for most of its existence, releasing only a few features. But in terms of cameras it's the most reliable which is why I stick with it. But there are so many opportunities for them to improve this service and it feels abandoned. Instead of adding features, like animal detection or car detection, they are worried about how I log in or who my account is? That's just stupid.
I refuse to buy google hardware after the horrible mess they made with their tablets, My first Gen Nexus 7 died due to hardware failure and they refused to admit or fix it, then I bought a second gen and the last firmware update bricked it. Such Garbage
It's not just the first gen. My second gen nexus 7 bricked. And my 2 Nexus 5X died from fatal bootloops. And there are screen issues with Pixel, Pixel 2, and Pixel 3 (and slowdowns/lagging/battery issues from recent firmware with all three)...
Hardware is hard, I get it. But just the handling of the Nexus 5X was inexcusably bad--to ship firmware that crippled the entire deployed fleet, and then shrug. Shame on me for buying more of their hardware.
My Nexus 6P ia still sitting here with a bootloop. Apparently you could get compensated if you're in the US so I'm out of luck.
And the compensation didn't happen until a lawsuit.
At best, I'd consider Google hardware to be disposable. That's how I treat my Chromecast devices that I still use. I'm not buying anything new from them if it costs more than making them disposable.
Like a car company with a 7 year warranty, with a guarantee of support for parts for the life of the house.
Google have a responsibility to their customers. In this case, the customers are the people that actually buy the hardware. It's not "Temperature As A Service".
FWIW, Philips just did something even worse with their Hue system, essentially forcing "legacy" (v1) Hue customers to spend $50 to buy a v2 Bridge if they wanted the system to keep working as usual.
I haven't used a v2 bridge, but v1 bridge I have is horribly slow and underpowered.
I'm more annoyed by the API changes they've made over time that broke my integration with the bridge. At least there is a local LAN integration option though, and you aren't forced to integrate with a remote service that might be shut down unexpectedly.
I think Google just realized the path they were taking was too short. They underestimated the nest contingent which is funny considering how much data they collect.
It seems like product management and engineering wanted to do it quickly and didn't do enough customer homework.
Then they had to backtrack, still sounding like douches because of their "if we change our minds we will keep you informed" tidbit.
I'm genuinely curious about their Alexa support through the transition. Seems they are willing to give away customers who want nest and nothing else.
> For these custom integrations, partners will undergo security audits and we’ll control what data is shared and how it can be used.
It sounds like they're going to keep a tight control of their relationship with Amazon on this one - I imagine the negotiations are going to be extremely tedious.
> In HN's thoughts, how should Google have approached this?
Google/Nest created an API for developers to use with an associated slogan to for marketing if end-user devices which people buy with a 10+ year plan of ownership because it’s built into their bloody homes.
That obligates Google to keep this stuff working for 10+ years, as is, no weasel words. No exceptions. Anything else is a scam.
Edit: looking at Google’s history they clearly don’t have the intention nor ability to do this. Im not buying anything Nest/Google Assistant ever. I’m not interested in time-bombed devices.
I'm surprised anyone still runs their business on a Google dependency. I was trying to use Google maps for Android ca. 2012 - they acknowledged the bugs I filed a few months ago. If a Google product is a dependency of your business, you must get ready for a potential change or switch out said dependency. E.g. Crashlytics for a more recent example.
This is very true. Google is not a reliable partner.
Update: consumers realized this years ago. This is why Google has to announce messaging apps two at a time and cancel them next year. This is why Microsoft products are so extremely popular on Android.
It's funny, Microsoft used to have a reputation for announcing things but never building them (vaporware) to delay people's purchases of competing products. Google takes it one step further by actually releasing a product, getting everybody on it, then killing it.
That can be a burden in itself though. The size of the OS and even the processors we use can't be shrunk down because of all of that backwards compatibility. It's some what if an anchor / technical debt in itself.
> The size of the OS and even the processors we use can't be shrunk down because of all of that backwards compatibility
On the other side of the fence Apple breaks compatibility all the time (see OpenGL vs Metal 2). Yet you can run Windows 10 on comparatively lower specced hardware while still being able to run apps developed for Windows XP.
I guess you missed the WWDC 2017 and WWDC 2018 sessions describing how all Core.... stacks have been migrated to Metal with OpenGL backend left as compatibility purposes only.
I wonder if the courts will agree this applies to content that web servers transmit to google’s crawler. If so, can I add such an agreement to my homepage, and claim it applies to all the http requests I initiate?:
> When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to our Services.
HTTP has a builtin mechanism for this; you can send 200 OK if you want copyright law to control the use of your content, or 403 Forbidden if you want more restrictions. Google, of course, does not super care about your extra conditions, so the 403 route probably isn't going to get you much.
Doing infosec, I see examples and guides for people using Gsuite in a corporate environment. That’s their best supported product and I can’t believe people go for it.
Edit: disagreement apparently but I’ve never seen a serious company that wasn’t in danger or recovering from a breech using it. Maybe it’s just coincidence.
Isn't there a bit of selection bias if you work in infosec and all the companies you see are either in danger or recovering from a breach?
In the all examples you mention, was it specifically Gsuite that was breached? I've always belived Gmail had fantastic security, so I'd be very interested to learn more about any breaches in their core gmail/gsuite offerings.
If you look at product changes per user-minute rather than just the percentage of products cancelled, Google APIs are probably more stable than those of any other company.
this is a bad metric, since a million user using the service for all of 1 minute at the same time is not the same as 1 user using it for a million minutes. As a business, i would rather the latter.
Yes, two victims of the WinDev vs DevTools internal wars pushed by Synfosky, with such a result that he ended up resigning.
UWP was the fix to WinRT and UAP changes introduced by Sinosfky's team.
Again, UWP is not only for Windows Phone, all Windows 10 new APIs are UWP based, there isn't any Win32 version of them.
People are able to keep using their legacy skills to write new apps, because Microsoft seldom plays an Apple move, killing any possibility to keep using legacy stacks on modern OSes.
If you miss XNA you can go use MonoGame, which Microsoft even advises on MSDN nowadays.
Do you realize what you just shrugged of more or less killed Windows phone???
When WP needed 3rd party games to have a chance in the consumer market Microsoft killed their fully functioning and very popular xna platform without explanation. For a while there was no replacement and the standard response from Microsoft was silence.
Later Microsoft pointed to mono as a replacement. At that time, mono was slow, buggy and incomplete. In fact, for a long time mono was missing the asset pipeline tools. According to their official tutorials you had to dig up an old copy of xna and use their asset tools.
And the number of companies who care about any of those platforms are vanishingly small.
How many companies that still care about the desktop at all are going to invest resources in Windows only frameworks and not something like Electron? How many of those that are writing native Windows apps are going to use UWP instead of Win32?
Plenty of them across Europe to keep me and other devs busy until retirement.
macOS is largely insignificant in many countries over here outside iOS shops, GNU/Linux hardly matters for consumers, the Web still fails short of many native scenarios and mobile devices are mainly for consumption.
I agree that native Mac software is insignificant, desktop software is insignificant to most consumers period. Except for apps made by Microsoft,Adobe, and who else besides game makers are making software for PCs?
I’m nowhere near Silicon Valley, but I can say that hardly any money is going into desktop software development. Companies are following Microsoft’s lead. Even c# shops are strategizing how to get rid of their Windows dependencies by going to .Net Core.
Plenty of factory automation, medical research device companies, control panels for car monitoring devices, ticket selling machines, and lots of IoT devices deployed with Windows only UIs, some of them now migrating from Windows Embedded into IoT Core variants.
People certainly did use it and are now suffering the consequences. The admin GUI for one popular CRM system is written in Silverlight – a natural choice since the rest of the system uses Win32, COM, .NET and pretty much every Microsoft technology you can think of from the past 25 years.
Their new from-scratch rewrite is based on Python and web standards.
To be honest, I find it depressing that people needed to protest and complain en masse just to get permission to continue using devices they already own.
Can someone explain for those of us unfamiliar with the many Google products and services: do they "hear" us in the sense that they will allow users to run their own servers for these IoT things, or will they keep users locked in, and will merely support some platform for a little longer?
I think definitely not #1 (make open) and almost certainly #2 (keep alive for now). This is a direct response to the entire Nest integration ecosystem going "what?!" after basically being told they were getting shut off.
"Works with Nest" is getting extended to the end of August, and Google might help some people move over to the Google Assistant powered platform that will replace it.
Just a slightly more reasonable timeline for switchover, but still Assistant-based.
Unbelievable public-relations megacorporation bullshit full of clichés and topical weasel words. Really google, if this is you hearing people, I prefer talking to the European Parliament.
Offtopic, but...is it just me or is there a bug on the 'hide related artices' button? Pressing space while focused on it triggers the action twice. So it just opens/closes.
“Moving forward, we’ll deliver a single consumer and developer experience through the Google Assistant.”
...until 18 months from now when the Android team has more political sway and we announce “Android Home”, a new unified home automation platform to bring all your devices together in one easy to use system, which will allow you to turn your lights off by simply blinking into one of the many Google cameras mounted in your home.
This will be followed in 2022 with the new “Chrome@Home” platform, which will revolutionize home automation by letting you send and receive Morse code messagess with your neighbors via innovative light-turning-off-and-on technology.
Finally, in 2025 we will announce the revolutionary “GoogleOne” home automation system which will allow you to set minimum reading-light thresholds for your teenage children who insist on reading in too-dark rooms simply by yelling “how can you even read in this room?? You’ll go blind if you don’t turn on a light!!” while standing in the appropriate room of your home.
I've seen this same satire about Google multiple times on HN, and have made the same point before myself; I'm curious how many Google employees understand why more and more people are seeing Google's product lines as a joke in that sense. Google makes working software and devices, but does anyone feel like they can count on Google for anything? It seems like few do at this point, and it's mystifying that the higher ups at Google don't seem interested in addressing that perception unless enough people complain, despite the dissatisfaction being totally predictable.
I really wonder whether, if someone with any clout at Google read your comment, they would get the joke or not understand.
My assumption has always been that the Google employees that read HN understand and even agree with this sentiment, but do not have the (political) power to actually influence this process.
I’ve understood this to be a pretty fundamental cultural thing with Google, where people are more likely to get promoted for shipping something new (rather than improving something that already exists). If this is indeed the case, it’s likely not something that a few employees reading HN can solve, but rather needs a big shift in process from the very top of the organization.
I am in contact with several googlers, and I’ve asked if they were aware of google’s reputation, and if it had impacted them directly. All said that they knew people perceived google as shutting down products often, but their own projects had never been shut down. They also said that google upper management was aware of it, and “was doing something about it”.
Ironically this agrees pretty well with what your parent comment said:
> the Google employees that read HN understand and even agree with this sentiment ... people are more likely to get promoted for shipping something new (rather than improving something that already exists)
If the Google elite like your product, it gets integrated into everything and you get promoted. You probably stay at Google long term. If your products are the ones that get cut, are you likely to be a long term Googler? Google is an exercise in selection bias for a group of people who don't understand supporting a product long-term.
I understand both supporting a product long-term and selection bias. I also intend to be a long-term Googler, despite having been struck twice by leadership deciding my team no longer fits their picture, no matter the technical merit.
Also: you can get promoted for a cancelled project, unless you're at the level where keeping the VP from cancelling it is within your duties.
Management has been "doing something about it" for almost ten years, and that "something" is "nothing" because they're utterly dysfunctional on almost every level, outside of pure technical skill in the few areas they lead. It's a depressing demoralizing disaster of a company to be inside, and they show no actual signs of changing course.
While the fundamental cultural thing you describe rings true, it applies at a level way too low to make this kind of decisions. Which, I presume, would also be the level of Googlers likely to frequent HN, like yours truly. Big product decisions are the scope of execs, who are governed by a completely separate set of rules.
> mystifying that the higher ups at Google don't seem interested in addressing that perception unless enough people complain, despite the dissatisfaction being totally predictable.
In which some of the commentators seem to be arguing that openly expressing your opinion on Google's product strategy is treason, or at the very least above your pay grade.
I gave up on native Android, because every year the best practices get rebooted, they don't give a dam about future Java compatibility (Java 8+) and after 10 years, NDK is still WIP.
One example, the whole story with fragments, then now that they finally have a good story with constraint layout, after three years in the making, they are introducing a Kotlin based DSL.
At least the Chrome team gets a solid story with their PWAs, also supported by other vendors.
First they screw Sun and then don't bother to buy Sun's assets when given the opportunity.
Lots of third party JVM vendors are able to deliver improvements into the Java world, while staying in peace with Sun, now Oracle. Google being the exception.
Can you imagine being in a bidding war with Larry Ellison? Talk about a lose/lose...
Either he outbids you and then had the legal right to fuck with you for decades
Or he bids you up to some ungodly number, and you have to live with the fact that Larry Ellison forced you to burn billions of dollars for his personal gratification.
They're a multi billion dollar international conglomerate not a 10 person startup. Their primary business model involves tracking everything you do and everywhere you go. They're already dirty as shit.
Yes, of course we can count on Google to deliver good keyword search results based on specific quer... okay, semantically based search results that interpret what I'm actually looking fo... what the hell is AMP and where are my search resu... What is this carousel and where are my damn search results?
Addressing that perception is always releasing the next "one true chat app". If they hear by not hearing - that whole "we hear you" blog post reads like it's been run through a comedy empty corporate speak generator, that's set too heavy-handed - I think hoping for self-awareness is a bit of a reach. Be thankful they aren't designing our mains sockets. :)
Also, did no one at Google ever get the memo you never remove APIs, you deprecate - precisely because people depend on them?
On the consumer side Google wants to build billion user products (I’ve heard Google product managers say this). Products that cross that threshold like GMail, Chrome and Android don’t get cancelled. I’m not sure what the enterprise equivalent is to a billion users, perhaps a billion dollars? Regardless offerings like Google App Engine have been around for decades now.
The "We hear you" portion of this just screams "devised by the same marketing team that handled BP's oil scandal". Just talk straight Google, you'll get less hate for it.
That's interesting - Google haven't traditionally "listened" to their end users so far as I can see. This seems to be in the grand Google tradition of moving the carpet from under users' feet.
Home Assistant [1] has been a Github-topping repo for a while. You've seen it here on HN several times [2]. It's a Python 3 open-source home automation platform that runs on a Raspberry Pi or other home server. Local data, local control. It's been being bootstrapped by tinkerers who can handle YAML config files for a while but is getting much fancier these days.
When Google shut down Revolv hubs in 2016, they posted rationale about why your hub should be open and local [3]. This kind of move further justifies the argument.
As big companies clamor over access to your home, let's take a stand by demanding open standards, local data options, and local control.
[1] https://www.home-assistant.io/
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15521743
[3] https://www.home-assistant.io/blog/2016/04/05/your-hub-shoul...
[4] https://www.home-assistant.io/blog/2018/09/17/thinking-big/