back to article HomeKit is where the dearth is – no one wants Apple's IoT tech

It's been four months since Apple half-launched its smart-home/internet-of-things service through the introduction of a new app in iOS 10 called "Home." At the time, we asked "where are the products?" and unfortunately it's a question we're still asking in the lead-up to what should be a holiday push for the smart home. One …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    But I don't want any of them

    Google, Apple, and all the rest can stuff off until the products really do something useful. I spent today at my second trade exhibition of the month covering this sort of stuff and despite many home hubs and a plethora of Internet of Tat gadgets, I didn't see a single thing that made me think "I must have one of them".

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: But I don't want any of them

      Agreed. It is not surprising Apple is not getting any traction in a market where no one is getting any traction pushing useless IoT gimmicks on unwilling consumers.

      Nest has been cleverly marketed at geeks who think it offers advantages over a standard programmable thermostat (which it doesn't) but that's about the only IoT product that has had any mass market success. But even despite that success Google will never recoup even half of the $3.2 billion they wasted buying them.

      Another problem is there are way too many "standards" in IoT - too many for communication and too many for APIs. Apple adding one more is just more salt in the gaping wound on a patient that is bleeding out while the doctor is telling everyone its just a scratch.

      1. Tessier-Ashpool

        Re: But I don't want any of them

        Your standard programmable thermostat doesn't sense when your living room is unusually empty and take appropriate action, figure out the response characteristics of your radiators, pay attention to the outside temperature, have the ability to activate if you're coming home unexpectedly early on the train, etc. It's all well being a Luddite, but get your facts straight.

        I'm pleased with the operation of my non-HomeKit Nest controller. It saved me quite a bit of money last year (evidence available). It's a pity it doesn't have the HomeKit interface because I'd rather that Google not know how my house is doing.

        1. Sandtitz Silver badge

          Re: But I don't want any of them

          "Your standard programmable thermostat doesn't sense when your living room is unusually empty and take appropriate action, figure out the response characteristics of your radiators, pay attention to the outside temperature, have the ability to activate if you're coming home unexpectedly early on the train, etc."

          My boiler room thermostat is older than Nest thermostats, and it knows the outside temperature very well - there's a cable to an outdoor sensor and it's likely more accurate than the weather services Nest utilizes. It also has an ethernet connection for remote control.

          "I'm pleased with the operation of my non-HomeKit Nest controller. It saved me quite a bit of money last year (evidence available)"

          Show the evidence then. Did you compare it to a modern thermostat or the one you had fitted 50 years ago? I'm not saying you're wrong.

          I'm not against Nest or any IoT stuff per se, but I wouldn't buy one until the benefits and hazards are well known. Some usually require an internet connection to "cloud" and when Google decides to shut down the Nest services or decide to deprecate Nest products over X years old, what then? How many features will you lose?

          I can happily wait until standard arise (e.g. a single ZigBee controller for all ZigBee devices) and devices from different manufacturers can communicate with each other when necessary (e.g. smoke alarm disables A/C and sends me a picture or video). All these are attainable at the moment, but only if you work with a single vendor.

          1. Tessier-Ashpool

            Re: But I don't want any of them

            Nest will carry on working without cloud access. Your 'standard thermostat' with an ethernet connection is more than some standard thermostat, mate; you're one step away from a thing of the internet, especially if your bag is to plug external sensors into it. The evidence I have for savings is produced in a monthly report that shows how much time the thermostat overruled its default heating pattern, and how many hours of heating was saved.

          2. M_W

            Re: But I don't want any of them

            Google Nest and Philips Hue talk together via Zigbee.

            If the Nest Protect smoke alarm detects CO, it turns off the boiler, and at the same time the hue lights turn on in the house. If the fire alarm goes off, you get the early warning first where it makes the lights flash yellow then turn on, and if it gets worse, it pulses the lights red a couple of times (like 50% to 100%) and then turns them all on full.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: But I don't want any of them

          Programmable thermostats can easily "figure out the response characteristics of your radiators". The $50 programmable thermostat I have will reach temperature X at time Y, not start warming up at time Y. Apparently you were comparing your $250 Nest to a $10 bargain basement thermostat your house originally came with.

          As for detecting whether your living room is unusually empty, occupancy sensors are hardly a new idea that Nest came up with. They've just been able to successfully con you with phrases like "response characteristics of your radiators" into thinking they are doing something novel in the world of thermostats.

          The only "new" thing they do is this idea that they will figure out your habits and program themselves. If someone is too stupid or lazy to figure out "this is when we wake up, this is when we go to work/school, this is when the kids come home from school except on Thursdays when they get out an hour early, this is when we go to bed" to program it for each day, I guess spending the extra $200 for a Nest is worth it.

          You can always tell when someone is defending pointless technology because the first thing they resort to is calling people who don't agree with them "Luddites".

        3. Darryl

          Re: But I don't want any of them

          "Your standard programmable thermostat doesn't sense when your living room is unusually empty and take appropriate action"

          And neither would a Nest, if I replaced my $39 Home Depot programmable with one. Because the thermostat isn't in the living room. So I guess it could tell when someone is walking down the hallway to the bathroom. Also, in our house, we don't walk in the door and then go sit in one room all evening. Sometimes we go downstairs. Sometimes we go read in the bedroom.

          I'm sure this can be rectified with adding sensors all over the house, but that's yet another added cost


        Re: But I don't want any of them

        Actually, Nest does offer advantages over traditional programmable thermostats - especially when you live in a seasonal country such as the UK.

        For example, every night can vary in temperature here.

        My Nest is programmed so my house will be 20 degrees C at 07:30 every morning. It knows the outside temperature (due to location information plus internet fed current outside temp), it knows the temperature of my house and it knows exactly how long it takes to raise my house per degree.

        So on a normal night the heating will usually kick in at about 06:45.

        But on a warm night, it might not start until 07:15. Saves me 30 mins of heating. It knows if it comes on at 06:45 the house will be at 20 degrees to early. So it waits.

        This over a whole winter has saves me approx £100 per year. Plus the house is always just right. It doesn't feel colder as we slide further into winter. It just starts slightly earlier. Something a time only based system cannot do.

        The other bonus is that I never have to re-program it every spring / autumn to account for the seasonal change.

        Also Since it has learnt my temperature preferences at different times of the day I don't think i have adjusted the heating in my house for about a year or so now. Never need to touch it. Worrying about the heating (turning it up or down by 1 degree) is a chore of the past.

        There are other benefits with it as well, but the main one is that at the end of the day its paid for itself twice over in the time i have owned it. It's not just for geeks. It genuinely does save cash on your heating bills.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: But I don't want any of them

          Nights vary in temperature everywhere, but like I said even my $50 Honeywell figures out when it needs to start heating to get the house to temperature so if I have it set to have the house at temperature X at 7:30 it will start heating earlier and have it at that temperature at 7:30. Nest provides no advantage there.

          I could buy an external temperature sensor for it, but I've never seen the value of having a thermostat inside my house know what temperature it is outside. It can already tell when it is 0F outside versus 40F outside based on how quickly the house loses heat, there's little point to giving it exact information whether via an external sensor or having it able to access the weather over the internet. My house is at the programmed temperature in the morning regardless of how cold it was outside that night, so whatever it is doing doesn't need improvement as far as I'm concerned.

          Besides the outside temperature is only part of the picture. I have an older house that despite my best efforts is more drafty / not as well insulated as a new one, so it loses heat more quickly when it is really windy out. I wonder if the Nest is smart enough to take that into account - and exactly how it knows how well insulated your house is? My thermostat is (as far as I know) basing it on how quickly heat is being lost, so if the heat loss of 20F and 20 mph winds is equal to 0F and 0mph winds, it will start heating the same number of minutes before the designated time.

          Yes yes, knowing the outside temperature does have one use - it helps if the temp is changing dramatically over a short time, as when a cold front is coming through. If it was 40F and calm at night and my house was losing heat very slowly, and then a couple hours before I was due to wake up a strong cold front blew in with gusty winds, my thermostat may start adjusting the temperature up "too late", because it wouldn't know that it is now 20F with a 30 mph north wind. If I had an outdoor temperature sensor (and it used it, I think in mine it would be used for controlling auxiliary heat if you have a heat pump instead of a gas furnace like I have) it would know it has suddenly grown colder and start heating earlier. If I cared about that I'd get a thermostat that could handle it, but having it be a couple degrees colder than it "should" when I wake up is something I probably wouldn't even notice, and wouldn't care about for the two or three days a year this sort of thing might happen. I have more variability than that in my body's internal "thermostat" :)

    2. Naselus

      Re: But I don't want any of them

      Well, I can kinda see a point to them, tbh. Just not the point that everyone keeps saying it is.

      There's barely any IoT stuff that does anything better than a non-IoT thing can do. Yes, I'm sure the Nest supports will pile on this to tell me about how it's saved them $100 dollars a year or that it can heat their bath water in advance. But you can just as easily hook your boiler up to an outside line or use a $200 offline thermostat with a bunch of cool features that makes no attempt to connect a weather server. I have a (non-IoT) thermostat which saves me about $100 a year too; it knows the temperature inside the house and is connected to a sensor outside too. It does not need to hook into the Cloud to gather local data.

      What IoT can do that these other solutions can't, however, is sell your data. Now all the anti-IoT guys can jump on and scream about how they don't want it to. Go on, the Nest guys have had their fun; you guys might as well too. I do agree - I don't particularly see why Google needs to know when I'm having a bath, or that I make medium toast at 07:45 Monday to Friday.

      But there IS a potential advantage for the consumer here. A company like Google, which is using the home hub to harvest data, can supply the original item at a substantial loss. You don't need to lash out on a $200 thermostat to get all the environmentally-friendly, wallet-friendly advantages of smart home heating, because Google will pay for it for you; they'll just install the thing at $10 and then your data pays your way, while you save $100 a year from it's presence. It's a win-win.

      If you don't want your data taken, then by all means, buy offline. You have to foot the initial bill, but you get to stay offline. But having the option available for cheap or free smart homes means that everyone can have one, which sharply reduces domestic carbon footprint and energy consumption.

      THAT is how they ought to be selling IoT. Not sticking a $300 price tag on an item which does nothing extra except spy on you. It should give you the 'we're spying on you' discount - which is exactly how Google did Android.

      1. SImon Hobson Silver badge

        Re: But I don't want any of them

        ... or that it can heat their bath water in advance

        How very 1960s !

        Really, how many people under the age of ... ooh ... around 60 - 70 don't just leave their hot water on automatic ? If you have a cylinder then you just let the system keep it hot - if you think that's expensive, spend a fraction of the cost of a Nest on insulating it ! Besides, most new houses I've seen lately have had a combi boiler<spit> so there's nothing to control - you turn the tap on, the boiler fires up.

        And these combi boilers are truly horrible things anyway. They either have horrible lags (turn the tap on, wait a minute or two for hot water), or they have very significant standing losses. A few years ago I had the opportunity to compare the two - the well lagged thermal store I'd just installed in the flat had half the standing losses (around 80W) as the combi boiler in the house next door that I'd just bought. It's quite common that if I'm in the bathroom during the night, I'll be able to hear the noise through the radiator pipes of the combi boiler firing up to keep itself hot.

        Now, as to the remotely controllable thermostat ...

        As others have pointed out, good luck trying to use one stat to properly control heat to the whole house. I'm signed up at and waiting for the kickstarter campaign to start. Last I heard they were looking to be selling a pack of intelligent TRVs and a boiler relay for something like £150. If they manage that, then you'll get proper multi-room control - without the security issues (no internet connection unless you choose to do it) and without the complexity. Just a simple TRV where you turn one way for warmer and the other for cooler, and it works out when the rooms are occupied on it's own. Ie, I think even granny should be able to cope with it.

        And absolutely no flippin way on earth would I consider having WiFi and the like as part of the fire alarm system - that's just crazy.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: But I don't want any of them

      As with the other icons on the iPhone updates I can't remove, they go to the special last page after the blank one

      I dont need weather, news (which overrides the "do not use mobile data" if you have it as a widget), health, home or whatever....If i wanted it, i'd have downloaded it.

  2. John 104

    IOT for Apple Punters? Funny

    What do they expect from the user base? Pretty much every Apple product user I have ever encountered was very UN-tech savvy (nice people, in some cases, total douche bags in others). Why would they pursue something that requires any sort of systems oriented thinking? It is destined to fail and should not come as a surprise to anyone who observes the industry. Except Apple, of course.

    1. Doug Petrosky 1

      Re: IOT for Apple Punters? Funny

      It is obvious that some non Apple users are also douche bags! But to answer your statement, many Apple users are also very technical but as the article states, home kit helps make setup of what is often a very difficult thing and making it very easy. When this works it is like magic!

      I set up a Schlage lock on my phone and without any further setup, and no hubs in my house it was accessible remotely over the internet. The problem comes it when the magic doesn't work and you need to understand that the system is working though a combination of your AppleID and the appleTV or iPad in your house in range of that door lock.

      1. AMBxx Silver badge

        Re: IOT for Apple Punters? Funny

        Apple users are also more likely to be high earners (the stuff isn't cheap). Surely that's the perfect target market for nice looking, clever IoT stuff?

        If even they're not buying it....

      2. John 104

        Re: IOT for Apple Punters? Funny

        You used the word "Magic" to describe interaction with iThingies twice in one post. You've been drinking the Apple marketing Koolaid a little too much. Nothing about technology is "Magic", "Magical", or otherwise mystical.

  3. Mage Silver badge


    IoT is mostly sold by accident? You buy the expensive coffee maker and it happens to have it?

    Yes SOME people deliberately go out and buy Nest or an IoT door etc, rather than reliable traditional products from established suppliers that won't be closed by Google tomorrow or ditched by Amazon or Apple for something with more profit.

    Amazon Echo and Google Home are madness anyway. Ask Harry Harrison's teddy.

    Apple Homekit isn't as show-offable as their iPhone and iPad. I'm sure Apple can't understand why the apple TV (stupid name for something that's an over priced locked to iTunes streaming box with no screen) isn't the money spinner that iPod + iTunes was. I wonder do Apple actually understand why the iPod and then then the iPhone were so successful? It wasn't the price, security or technology.

    iPod: The iTunes compelling content deal with Record Labels of selling tracks instead of full albums.

    iPhone: The compelling Carrier deals with unlimited or massive caps, when all other smart phone users were paying a fortune per megabyte! Or even per second connect time!

    It was never purely the technology or even the box, despite what Apple or Apple fans like to think.

    There is simply no compelling reason to have an Apple TV vs a Roku, Chromecast, Amazon FireTV, PS4, Xbox or Sky Box.

    There is no compelling reason to have an Apple Watch, unless you already have an iPhone and you want to look like you have a high disposable income (it's a product that should and does sell less than $60)

    Why would anyone especially buy Apple Homekit compared to any other IoT, given that IoT is a minority sport in the first place? Hardly anyone will know you have it and it's not even shiny in an an Apple Store. It's laudable the commitment to security in it. I wish all IoT had it but elsewhere I point out that security is never coming to IoT.

    1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      Re: Also

      Good point. You can't casually show off your smart home iOT gear while sitting in a Starbuck's.

  4. Individual #6/42

    Interesting but not borne out by experience of user wants

    It's obviously only limited data but the only IOT things I'm into are LIFX and Hive. HomeKit integration is the #3 most requested feature on hive (after graphs and radiator thermostats) and the #2 most popular topic on LIFX's site after "I can't connect to wifi".

    The customers want it. It's just a pain and cost to implement and pulls people into an apple experience instead of a Hive or LIFX one. The gap is still there for a manufacturer to fill. Elgato's Eve is looking like the best option so far but nobody's going to hit mainstream until a hardware manufacturer sorts out the option of physical buttons. Flic etc, do the job but inelegantly; even Apple requires you to use an iDevice.

    1. Jon B

      Re: Interesting but not borne out by experience of user wants

      Adding HomeKit installation seems like a short cut to commoditising your product.

  5. This post has been deleted by a moderator

  6. Frank N. Stein


    I don't need any of this IOT junk. Just new crap for these clowns to get rich selling. I'll pass.

  7. This post has been deleted by a moderator

  8. Fazal Majid

    No one wants IoT tech period, whether Apple's or otherwise

    HomeKit has a good security and privacy story, thanks in part to its dedicated chip ans OS, but that's also why it is rather late to the market.

    That said, there is very little consumer appetite for IoT in general due to an underwhelming value proposition, sub-par and buggy user experience, serious security and privacy issues and a bad habit of companies abandoning products and turning them into doorstops long before the end of their reasonable lifetime.

    1. Kevin Johnston Silver badge

      Re: No one wants IoT tech period, whether Apple's or otherwise

      Exactly, and ask Blackberry about what happens when you turn up late with something a bit better than everyone else's toys.

      The only way to take a chunk of the market is to be 2nd/3rd team in and offer a step change over what is already available. First through the door has to make the public aware there is something they didn't know they wanted and tends to fade away to niche (or be bought out for the expertise). Even second may be too quick unless your product is a big step up and you have an upgrade rolling through R&D which can make use of at least some of the original kit.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Would somebody...

    please show me an IoT device that is actually useful ? Remote thermostats, fridges that tell you to buy milk, lights that you can shout at etc, all come under the heading of 'flimflam' in my world

    1. agurney

      Re: Would somebody...

      I have a Raspberry Pi on my boat, about 150 miles away, with a couple of sensors and a webcam.

      The sensors sample atmospheric pressure and temperature every fifteen minutes, and upload that to a web server at home whenever it can connect to the local wifi.

      So, with that small amount of information: I can see the current and past weather, both visually and from the sensors; I can see pressure trends for the previous few days; I know the boat is still afloat and not been moved; it confirms that my wind generator's providing enough power to run the automatic bilge pump if it's required; it confirms that the marina's intermittent wifi is up and running so I'll be able to work remotely if I drive over.

      That's not flimflam in my eyes.


      Re: Would somebody...

      Erm, Nest is not just a 'Remote Thermostat'.

      It's saved me about £100 per year on heating costs. I find that useful.

      It does this by not arbitrarily firing up my boiler at 6:30am in order to heat my house to my desired temperature for when i get up at 7:30am like traditional time based thermostats do.

      It knows it's warm outside tonight as its pulled that info from the internet. It knows the temperature of the room its in, and it knows how long it takes to raise the temperature of that room by one degree.

      So on a warm night it will delay firing the boiler until 7:15am as it knows it will still manage to reach my desired temperature by 7:30am. Saved me 30 mins of gas i would have normally have burnt when my dumb thermostat blindly kicked in at 06:30am as usual. Repeat this over a winter and you see proper cost savings.

      1. SImon Hobson Silver badge

        Re: Would somebody...

        I have a Raspberry Pi on my boat, about 150 miles away, with a couple of sensors and a webcam.

        That's not the IoT crap that most people are talking about. That's something designed to do something actually useful, in a way that isn't really doable any other way. A far cry from taking something simple and mundane (eg a thermostat) and adding cost, complexity, and security issues by making it "internet" for little or zero actual benefit.

        It knows it's warm outside tonight as its pulled that info from the internet

        Guess what, that's one of those "why ?" features. You can get the local outside temperature without the internet, and more accurately, by ... measuring the local outside temperature. Back in the 1990s the office building I rented space in had just such a function and it didn't need the internet !

  10. fidodogbreath Silver badge

    Ah, standards's not compatible with Thread or ZigBee or Z-Wave...

    ...neither the Amazon Echo nor the Google Home will work with Apple's HomeKit.

    And none of them is compatible with "security" or "privacy."

  11. J. R. Hartley

    Proprietary shite

    Only a madman would let Apple be the basis for their IOT system.

  12. Tac Eht Xilef

    Yeah, right ...

    "The problem is that Apple is trying to do what it always does – control everything. It's our way or the highway."

    Uh ... yeah, OK. But remind me again how the others are different?

    ""Their approach is just onerous and unnecessary," says Hemphill, referring to the need to include an Apple chip and go through its certification program ... And it's not compatible with Thread or ZigBee or Z-Wave".

    Unlike, say ...

    Thread? Not compatible with HomeKit, ZigBee, or Z-Wave. Closed spec, requires paid (US$2500) membership to access & have devices certified. A partial open source (BSD licence) unsupported implementation is available.

    ZigBee? Not compatible with Homekit, Thread, or Z-Wave. Closed spec, ZigBee branding, and compiance certification is "free" as in "all you can eat (after paying minimum US$4000 entry fee)".

    Z-Wave? Not compatible with Homekit, Thread, or ZigBee. Tied to Sigma Designs (& licencees e.g. Mitsumi) chips, with a US$250/yr licence required to access specs & purchase devkits & chips. Previous open-source implementations and the recently-announced "open" protocol are basically a partial set of "how to communicate with Sigma Designs chips" instructions...

    "The Apple security advantage will likely be gone in 2017"

    Good. Let me know when you've got your act together. I've been burned multiple time over the past 20+ years, so excuse me if I wait until you've actually delivered what you promise before I even think about buying it...

  13. chivo243 Silver badge

    Solution looking for a problem

    or a bad accident looking for a place to happen... Really, this is just crazy. I don't want my toaster talking to the coffee maker or to the thermostat, or worse yet, someone who isn't part of my household.

    1. SImon Hobson Silver badge

      Re: Solution looking for a problem

      Not only that, but there is pretty well zero point in a connected toaster - until we also have a robot that can get the bread out, pick out a couple of slices, spot that it's not turned green and fuzzy yet, and pop it in the toaster. But of course, if we have such a robot, it can pop the lever down to turn on the toaster.

      Ditto the kettle - what point is there being able to turn it on remotely unless you can fill it remotely. Fill it up beforehand, well doesn't that make the "you can do stuff remotely when you forgot before going out" bit rather moot ?

  14. Dan 55 Silver badge

    Sirs, I'm cancelling my subscription

    "Right now, you can go buy products that work and are cheap and don't need HomeKit."

    And the security is non-existent.

    "But that concern is being rapidly addressed by the market."

    No it's not, that's why sites are being hosed off the Internet with 1Tb DDoSes. If Apple make security a feature of their HomeKit marketing, people will go for it. The vast majority of Internet o' Tat sold today would still take part in the next DDoS.

  15. PassiveSmoking

    I'm not buying Apple IoT gear...

    ... but then again I'm not buying anybody else's either. I have no need for a door lock that's connected to the internet with a default password of "password"

  16. sleepy

    I'd like a remote door lock for many reasons. But it appears they don't work adequately for many use cases.(eg someone doesn't shut the door properly). I have some Philips Hue lights. They simply popped up individually in Homekit with no action by me. They aren't Homekit compatible, but I presume the zigbee hub which connects to the network is compatible.

    The internet of things does have a place, and Homekit will too.

  17. cambsukguy

    Attack Surface

    ...No, not a request to damage MS equipment.

    The attack surface of my drill-proof, dead-locked, 12-lever Chubb door lock is small, by any reasonable standard. I bought it because of the small key (used for Safety Deposit boxes originally apparently).

    The house is much better attacked in other ways, which is the point really.

    To allow even the possibility that it could be opened by anyone, from anywhere, seems to widen the attack surface by a considerable margin - to almost anyone on earth in fact.

    So, despite the fact that I can open my car remotely, I won't be doing the same with my door lock.

    However, I might consider it if it required, like my car lock, proprietary hardware, short-range RF and thus physical proximity to reduce the surface back again.

    I would also consider a good biometric device for the same reason (an iris scanner for instance).

    Just like my car isn't worth breaking into really (manufacturers specific radio unit and no money), my house isn't worth any real effort to break into either (heavy TV, attached to a wall, mid-range laptop, no jewels, old tablet, pitiful amounts of cash).

    The lock is really to stop twats walking in off the street and the more desperate opportunist who thinks they might get lucky.

    The biggest danger from burglars (since I would not get hung up on the 'intrusion' at all) is the fact that they might trash the place after a poor 'take'.

  18. Andrew Jones 2

    "put its firmware and chipset inside their products was because, the company said, it was concerned about security."

    Apple can require the most over the top, most complicated, practically impossible to breach security it wants - but - if someone can run up to the house and shout very loudly "Siri, unlock the door" and Siri responds "OK" - then it's all been pretty pointless.

    (Yes there was a comment here recently from someone who had encountered their neighbour doing exactly that)

  19. kcwookie

    I want it

    I use Apple Healthkit and like it a lot. All my data is in one place and everything talks to one another. I want my house to do the same. My son has new door locks, when I walk up to his door, it unlocks and I go in. If he wants we to keep out, he overrides the door. I gave up on keyed doors 20 years ago. I've had mechanical locks that require a code to get in. No keys to carry. My next lock will be phone controled, just like my thermostat. Eventually I will have only one remote for everything. That is my wish.

  20. DerekCurrie

    Anything That Provides Real IoT Security Is Fine With Me

    What is the point of the usual Apple bashing if they're providing real IoT security?

    ANY company that kicks, shoves, pounds, bulldozes forward real security in IoT is fine with me. Otherwise, I personally consider IoT to be D.O.A. And it's going to stay that way until SECURITY.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020