@Nando, thank you for your thoughtful comments. As you say, I, too, see this as a good start.
Your speculation on ZigBee merging to Thread may not be far off. Who knows? Actually, I am encouraged that some people like Skip Ashton working in a multiple groups. Life isn't always about a horse race. It's time to mix and mingle different talents from different groups, and come up with a solution.
Great interview: It was time someone put the accent on the ''Things''.
IoT prophets from the Internet talk about trillion sensors ...I was told that would be 40 times the current silicon capability in the world
IoT heralds form the cloud talk about 20 Billions more connected objects by 2020 ...but if we have to put battery in it, there will be no Lithium enough around!
Let's take a pause in guessing about hot to connect billions of devices and actually think about how to make them ! (Unless all these objects are AC-connected Philips bulbs...:) )
So, it's good to look at the ''Things'' first. Anyway, Mr.Ashton is not 100% convincing yet. Here are some thing I'd like to be clearer:
- Lock concerns are OK bur they can be marginal in the whole IoT application scenario (Yale is a founder member of Thread, are we sure that Ashton is talking on behalf of the whole ''Lockers'' community ?)
- The phrase '' But if new wirelessly connected light switches worked only 95 or 97% of the time for some reason, we'd have to cancel the project'' is perfect for battery-driven system, but EnOcen battery-less switches don't reach 99% effectiveness . Anyway, people like me can still find interesting to have to press a switch twice every 96 times to let the signal go through, in front of cost and maintenance benefits coming from battery-free applications. Thread is an evolution of ZigBee, but maybe not seizing yet the battery-less challenge.
Conclusion: it is worth to start looking at things, but Silicon Labs view and Thread consortium suggest that we are actually midway, not yet getting to the point.
Anyway, the path has started, and it is a good trend.
A curiosity: I discover that Mr. Ashton is in Thread and in ZigBee at the same time. In my personal vision, it is like to be both in Coca and Pepsi...
Can we add to speculation that ZigBee will eventually merge to Thread?
This is a great interview. I guess sometimes you have to put things in just the right words, to get the point across. Indeed, just talking about the IP part of the equation is missing the point.
My only potential disagreement would be that every IoT gadget manufacturer would ever be made to follow a given set of application layer standards for his gadget. We know how well that works. Just see how successful iOS and Android devices are at streaming videos that don't follow their own, specialized, unnecessarily different streaming protocols. What makes anyone think that IoT solutions adopted by Maytag would ever be compatible with Whirlpool?
My take is, instead, that if IoT does become a big deal in homes, it will be another excuse for manufacturers to wall up their ecosystems. Unless the public strongly resists, which all too often the public does not.
Adding the cloud into the Nest control loop is an unecessary complication. What's the benefit vs. the potential problem? If you lost Intertnet connection, do you want to lose control of your furnace or AC? I think not. Also, power line networking has proved to be less than reliable, that's why WiFi is by far more popular.
The more reliable network archtecture is to have a hub with hard-wired control and remote sensors to gather temperature data from a remote locations to report to the hub. The hub (or gateway) can connect to the cloud to allow remote monitoring and control.
Maybe the Nest is not such a bad example. A future Nest working in tandem with a future furnace wouldn't have to have a wire connected between them just like the Philips Hue light bulbs don't have to be wired to a wall switch. Then you could put the Nest anywhere in your house.
A future house could have much simpler wiring: everthing just connects to power (even thermostat controls). All control is done through the network.
You see the same thing going on in cars except it is a wired network instead of wireless.
Hi, Patrick. Considering ZigBee has already done it -- in terns of defining function sof the end node devices (efen not in an IP-friendly format), that seems to be is the natural place to start with it. But non-ZigBee folks may object.
Meanwhile, as to Philips Hue light bulbs, what cracks me up is that they ended up launching a new product called Philips Hue "tap" this past smmer. The Tap acts as a switch.
You know, something like flicking a switch is so easy and everyone is used to it. So the fact that Philips Hue Light Bulbs with zero switches come back with a "Tap" is, just so ironic, in my humble opinion.
I'm looking forward to seeing what the mystery standards body comes up with for coalescing all the protocols and translating them into straight IP so we can get IoT on the fast lane. Wouldn't the home/building gateways that we've seen to date from the likes of Intel be the natural hub for this translation, or is the intent to tandardize at the individual device level?
And the Philips Hue: Now I know what I'm getting my wife for Christmas: She and my daughter would have a field day controlling outside and inside lights. And they're efficient too!