Personally I think I prefer devices which offload the UI to a smartphone. I was thinking of something like this years ago where you could use something like Bluetooth to push a web UI so devices like thermostats would no longer need to have a shitty UI for things like programming schedules.
Unfortunately in this case the greed of the manufacturer hoping to monetize their UI has ruined an otherwise decent idea(although the device really should function on some basic level without a phone).
I believe the other person was talking about having the devices serve up webpage UIs, so you wouldn't need their specific app, just a browser. A lot of makers do this with their 3D printers and CNC machines, as it avoids the cost and hassle of installing a display on the machine.
Two of the more popular ones, for those interested:
Personally I don’t like those either. I’ve experienced it with printers (which can only be configured initially via USB and some app), 3D printers (configured by putting an SD card in your computer), and other gizmos. They’re all a pain to deal with, especially if your WiFi details change or their IP does.
Some others expect you to connect to THEIR Wi-Fi network instead. Which is also a complete pain.
I don’t mind having an app to make the device more useful, but it needs to have enough controls on the front to use the thing and preferably reconfigure the Wi-Fi if necessary.
At the time I was considering it, I figured there should be a dedicated protocol for serving things like this. Something simple, like a subset of bluetooth, with easy discoverability. Sort of like NFC perhaps. Something that you can implement with minimal software and hardware support. Obviously you risk the protocol dying and devices becoming bricks. I'm not sure how you avoid that.
Heck, we've even seen that model simply to use goods you've purchased, as with digital restrictions malignant books, music, videos, and games, where the restrictions-management servers were discontinued and access to the goods (bads) bought requiring them became useless.
3d printers and CNC machines almost always involve using a computer anyway and good chance they are physically connected. Not the case with my washing machine or toaster
I'm not a big fan of this. If I want to see a device's status, I look at it. Or in the case of certain devices, I listen for a specific hum. This requires no setup and no maintenance. I can check the status of my washing machine, as can anyone else in the house.
> Personally I think I prefer devices which offload the UI to a smartphone.
In concept, I agree. As you mention, in practice, the apps used nearly always collect data about you and the use of your devices to send back to the mothership.
That makes their use unacceptable to me. Requiring the use of a smartphone app is a showstopper.
But even if that wasn't the case, it seems odd to require me to provide a device of my own in order to use a machine. There are a lot of people who don't own a smartphone at all (and I will join their ranks once my current one dies). Why exclude that part of the market?
This could be great, if the interfaces were to adhere to some standard. Like, if there was a single web server on a chip thingie which would expose http endpoints, and even that could be replaced with something else, because the signals that it sends on the wires are also documented.
But of course, this lessens the control of the manufacturers, and increases the control of the users. So it won't happen until it's up to the manufacturers.
Unfortunately in this case the greed of the manufacturer hoping to monetize their UI has ruined an otherwise decent idea(although the device really should function on some basic level without a phone).