Apple HomeKit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • G4RHL
    Automated Home Legend
    • Jan 2015
    • 1580

    Apple HomeKit

    A question, more for our Honeywell forum users really. It is rumoured Apple are to release an updated version of HomeKit very soon (late May or June) so that it is an app in its own right and presumably that it reduces the need for lots and lots of different apps all operating things around the house. Is Evohome going to be able to work with HomeKit or is that a question Honeywell employees are not permitted to answer?
  • WiteWulf
    Automated Home Jr Member
    • Mar 2016
    • 40

    #2
    Two years ago they seemed to be, nothing since then, though

    Comment

    • basiluk
      Automated Home Sr Member
      • Oct 2008
      • 89

      #3
      Originally posted by G4RHL View Post
      A question, more for our Honeywell forum users really. It is rumoured Apple are to release an updated version of HomeKit very soon (late May or June) so that it is an app in its own right and presumably that it reduces the need for lots and lots of different apps all operating things around the house. Is Evohome going to be able to work with HomeKit or is that a question Honeywell employees are not permitted to answer?
      A unified, Apple-designed HomeKit app has been desired by HomeKit users since HomeKit first debuted, and it appears Apple is planning to introduce...

      Comment

      • The EVOHOME Shop
        Site Sponsor
        • Dec 2014
        • 483

        #4
        Originally posted by WiteWulf View Post
        Two years ago they seemed to be, nothing since then, though

        https://twitter.com/honeywell_home/s...01064645058560
        Well looking at Apple's Homekit device list (https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT204903), Honeywell have produced thermostats compatible with Homekit so true to their word.

        Each device produced for the Homekit requires an Apple ID chip and as far as I know evohome doesn't have one - yet lol!

        Comment

        • paulockenden
          Automated Home Legend
          • Apr 2015
          • 1719

          #5
          There's no cloud level integration like there is with IFTTT or SmartThings. You'd need to have a device in your home which, like Richard says, contains an MFi processor chip, and which can also receive commands from other devices on the local wireless network (the Apple side all tuns off an Apple TV box). As far as I'm aware the current Evohome controller has / can do neither.

          The easiest thing Honeywell could do would be to build/sell an external box which 'talks' MFi wifi or Bluetooth, and which communicates with the Evohome system much like an HGI80 does (although perhaps with added security!)

          Comment

          • G4RHL
            Automated Home Legend
            • Jan 2015
            • 1580

            #6
            Originally posted by paulockenden View Post

            The easiest thing Honeywell could do would be to build/sell an external box which 'talks' MFi wifi or Bluetooth, and which communicates with the Evohome system much like an HGI80 does (although perhaps with added security!)
            If the panel needs an additional chip them I am surprised as for those designing these things looking to the future and what is happening is crucial and this would be an obvious thing to include. A lot of us have spent money upgrading to the latest Control Panel and having to do so again will not go down well. If you are right about the panel needing a chip then it's quite a c..k up for we know Honeywell have been involved/had the eye on HomeKit use for a long time.

            Comment

            • paulockenden
              Automated Home Legend
              • Apr 2015
              • 1719

              #7
              I'm sure that when the new controller was designed the requirement for an MFi chip hadn't been announced by Apple. I think that only happened about a year ago. So it's not Honeywell you should be beating up over this silly requirement, it's Apple.

              P.

              [Update - less than a year - July 2015].
              Last edited by paulockenden; 11 May 2016, 09:31 AM.

              Comment

              • WiteWulf
                Automated Home Jr Member
                • Mar 2016
                • 40

                #8
                Just got a response from them via Twitter:

                no_homekit_evohome.jpg

                Not what I was hoping for, but no shocker...

                Comment

                • G4RHL
                  Automated Home Legend
                  • Jan 2015
                  • 1580

                  #9
                  Originally posted by paulockenden View Post
                  I'm sure that when the new controller was designed the requirement for an MFi chip hadn't been announced by Apple. I think that only happened about a year ago. So it's not Honeywell you should be beating up over this silly requirement, it's Apple.

                  P.

                  [Update - less than a year - July 2015].
                  Am not convinced.

                  Comment

                  • WiteWulf
                    Automated Home Jr Member
                    • Mar 2016
                    • 40

                    #10
                    Oh, don't get me started on Apple! I love Apple products, have done for years, but their restrictive practice re. chips in devices that work with their kit and certification of Bluetooth devices and similar is just a money-making scheme.

                    /rant

                    Comment

                    • paulockenden
                      Automated Home Legend
                      • Apr 2015
                      • 1719

                      #11
                      Originally posted by G4RHL View Post
                      Am not convinced.
                      By what? The timeline is out there.

                      Big hoo-ha when Apple dropped the bombshell in July last year, lots of manufacturers up in arms.

                      Evohome Wi-Fi had launched the previous month.

                      So I think you can get down off the grumpy step. And possibly apologise to Honeywell too!

                      Comment

                      • paulockenden
                        Automated Home Legend
                        • Apr 2015
                        • 1719

                        #12
                        Originally posted by WiteWulf View Post
                        Oh, don't get me started on Apple! I love Apple products, have done for years, but their restrictive practice re. chips in devices that work with their kit and certification of Bluetooth devices and similar is just a money-making scheme.
                        Now that I Do agree with! Even lightning cables have to have a chip in them!

                        Comment

                        • DBMandrake
                          Automated Home Legend
                          • Sep 2014
                          • 2361

                          #13
                          Originally posted by paulockenden View Post
                          Now that I Do agree with! Even lightning cables have to have a chip in them!
                          The nature of the lighting interface (multiplexed pins) makes it impossible to make one without some sort of chip, however what I think you're grumbling about is that the chip also provides cryptographic "authentication" to the iDevice, without which communication won't be accepted. And that authentication key is per hardware manufacturer and must be licensed from Apple.

                          Grumbling about this requirement I do agree with, especially when rumours are the next generation iPhone will not even have a 3.5mm headphone socket, requiring a lightning adaptor for standard headphones...

                          Comment

                          • WiteWulf
                            Automated Home Jr Member
                            • Mar 2016
                            • 40

                            #14
                            Originally posted by DBMandrake View Post
                            The nature of the lighting interface (multiplexed pins) makes it impossible to make one without some sort of chip, however what I think you're grumbling about is that the chip also provides cryptographic "authentication" to the iDevice, without which communication won't be accepted. And that authentication key is per hardware manufacturer and must be licensed from Apple.

                            Grumbling about this requirement I do agree with, especially when rumours are the next generation iPhone will not even have a 3.5mm headphone socket, requiring a lightning adaptor for standard headphones...
                            But the Lightning interface, particularly for iPhones and iPads, is completely unnecessary. It still connects to the host by USB and so provides no benefit to the user and just puts more money in Apple's purse due to licensing. Micro USB would have been a perfect alternative to the old 30-pin connector, but Apple have no control over that. Having said all that, why they chose to go with USB-C for the MacBook I'll never know...

                            Anways, we're getting waaaay off topic here, so I'll get off my soapbox ��

                            Comment

                            • DBMandrake
                              Automated Home Legend
                              • Sep 2014
                              • 2361

                              #15
                              If you think Lightning is just an over expensive USB-like interface you need to read the technical specs.

                              It can do vastly more than USB, even OTG USB. For example can you output a full HD HDMI signal over USB ? Nope... You can with lightning.

                              It is not just a method of connecting to a USB host such as a PC.

                              The technology behind the lightning interface is actually pretty neat and it is very flexible and powerful. It's just the mandatory "authentication" that I object to, which requires licensing to do legally.
                              Last edited by DBMandrake; 11 May 2016, 01:09 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X