The decision leaves customers who paid $300 “with a useless device” that will no longer turn their lights on and off or trigger ‘geofenced’ automations as of 15 May 2016.
“Having a device rendered useless because of a shutdown in cloud service highlights the need for open standards in IoT devices,” says Cesare Garlati, Chief Security Strategist for prpl Foundation. “This will mean users aren’t locked into a provider and gives the consumer more control over the way in which they can use the device.”
Nest Labs clearly didn’t buy Revolv in 2014 because of the Revolv Hub itself; the Google-owned developer of programmable thermostats and smoke detectors stopped selling the device as soon as the acquisition went through.
Nest Labs – which recently made its first forays into home security – gave Revolv’s remaining user base 75 days’ notice that their device was coming to the end if its life. The company has responded to a barrage of criticism by promising to “work together with customers on a case-by-case basis to determine the best resolution, including compensation.”
The lack of common standards for smart-home devices (unlike the physical security industry, which has benefitted from the widely adopted ONVIF standards) has long been seen as one of the biggest barriers to growth in a market which fundamentally remains a minority pursuit.
Without them, consumers have to commit to one of many standards and are limited in terms of the devices they can buy. Nest’s decision to jettison Revolv serves as a reminder that the lifespan of any standard they buy into is potentially limited.
Garlati also believes Nest’s decision to leave “Revolv home IoT hub users with a useless device highlights a few key problems with this kind cloud-dependent IoT home hub. Consumers should not buy into IoT that is dependent on the cloud as a middle man.
“The device, to have true benefit to the consumer, needs to ensure that consumers are in control and not reliant on another service. In other words, consumers want to pay for what they own.”
Garlati also has misgivings about privacy where cloud services are concerned. “Privacy is affected when the cloud is introduced,” he says. “Not only does the provider have access to – and sell – your data, whether it’s location, what time of day you’re turning your heating up – basically any of the information you are sending to the cloud – but you’re also paying the provider for the ‘privilege’.”
In a statement announcing the demise of Revolv Nest said the device ” was a great first step toward the connected home “but we believe that Works with Nest is a better solution and are allocating resources toward that program accordingly.”
Enjoy the latest fire and security news, updates and expert opinions sent straight to your inbox with IFSEC Insider's essential weekly newsletters. Subscribe today to make sure you're never left behind by the fast-evolving industry landscape.
Sign up now!
A lot wrong about this. The open standards with IoT is communication between devices, such as Zigbee. You’re talking a product and product support from a company, and there is no effort underway to define an open standard for this type of functionality. As for cloud based, well, if you want to control a device from your mobile phone in another state, you have to have the cloud. Right? Even if a device does most of its functionality locally, and the cloud access is minimal, it still requires company support for security and maintenance fixes, as well as new device… Read more »