Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes!

33 (97.1%)

No!

0 (0%)

I don't care!

1 (2.9%)

Total Members Voted: 34

[HA Dave]

Releasing the protocol would open up many possibilities and many more apps.

True. But you snooze you lose. The original X10 kept clinging to their tiny little cameras... and depended on a voyeur trade to stay afloat. Meanwhile every HA guy was thinking infinite code addresses using the IP protocol. Long before it was done. We also thought and experimented with voice control LONG before it was made easy.

I think... there is a lot to be said for NOT being completely WiFi and/or cloud dependent. X10 has a niche... and that's good. But I also think it's a good idea to pander to the MILLIONS of new HA guys with a Echo or Google Home on the desktop or by their easy chair.

IMHO.... X10 needs a skill... yesterday.

[Tuicemen]

Actually this is not the thread to be discussing the merits of another wish.
Those argument should be placed in that poll thread to keep it in the lime light.

True WM100 firmware upgrades would mean a protocol update in most cases, but it should not stop existing things created with it from working. True things made with Cm15 SDK first version will not work with todays AHP but that was due to a simple coding error where case sensitivity was an issue. (the protocol never changed for it that would have required a hardware upgrade as the firmware was not upgradable)
The CM11 is so popular still because the protocol was released for it.
The CM15 managed to stay afloat because of the SDK(not the Protocol)
The CM15 protocol would have meant any OS could have an app for it.

I argued to X10 WTI the need for Phone control when the SDK was first release and was told there was no demand.
With the SDK I created a program that allowed Phone control from anywhere in the world using a touch tone phone.
This was long before smartphones were on the scene. Most homes only had dial up internet then and wi-fi capable routers were only in their infancy . That application still works today and no internet connection is required.

The protocol will keep the WM100 alive should something happen to the developer of the app.

[HA Dave]

The protocol will keep the WM100 alive should something happen to the developer of the app.

I am all in for the protocol release. But I don't expect to see it. I think its best to plow ahead with control over what we actually have control over. I am old man, former military. And once a boy scout, I like being prepared. I can even about half-way relate to preppers.

But I would NOT plan on modules and existing programing to be functional for years into the future.... as they were in decades past. Things are changing FAST. Preppers worry and stockpile for future use. But this is a dynamic technology now. Todays most valued devices and functions will be useless and worthless in a short time. We can't automate the future! We can only automate today.

We don't want to concern ourselves with re-fighting yesterdays battles... with tomorrows technology. No one can actually do that. 

[Tuicemen]

I also like to be prepared (old boy scout too).   But I'm not a Prepper ( at least I don't see my self as that)
I don't expect to see the protocol any time soon but I'm hopeful!
True many electronics don't last long now a days nor does much software if not kept upto date.
Many of my old X10 devices just refuse to die 
I just hope the Willy 100 out lasts them.

[Tuicemen]

I started to mess around with wireshark listening in on traffic to & from the WM100 while it was in beta testing.
I believe the WM100 to be using MQTT which a few others have reported as well.
My experiance with MQTT is next to nill.
However using Google I have discovered some disturbing info. Although MQTT is capable of using authorization less then half of the brokers use it.
It may be possible to hack the WM100 with MQTT most MQTT devices use the mac address of the device as authorization (if any).
The apps require a scanning of the QR code so this info as well could be the authorization if the developer is using authorization.
There is lots of info on hacking IOT devices with MQTT on the web so I suspect an end user will have hacked this and setup their own broker before long. If they publish their progress we may have no need for an official WM100 protocol.

[bevhoward]

>> It doesn't require an internet connection but does require a WiFi router to connect to your Phone and the app. <<

fwiw, I've spent some time delving into how the VM100 communicates and I have found that it is both very interesting and very confusing.

...but, then things begin to make sense.  (Apologies if this information has been posted elsewhere)

The WM100 does indeed require an internet connection, but it apparently does not use that connection the way most devices do... i.e. to "phone home"

As others have done, I disconnected my lan from the internet and when I tried to connect, the app error message explicitly stated that it could not connect to the "Hub" ...the WM100 five feet away from me.

The WM100 uses the internet to communicate with the app on the user's device even if the user and the WM100 are on the same LAN and Wifi network.  The key to this discovery was in the line in the product description that explains;

"control all your same X10 units you have grown to love from your Apple or Android smart device anywhere you have internet access"

On a hunch, I connected my lan back to the internet, and then turned wifi OFF on my phone.   I still had a cellphone data connection which is completely outside of my lan, and when I started the WM100 app, the phone connected instantly to the WM100. 

So, in normal use at home, when you use your phone to connect to the WM100, the phone uses wifi to connect to the internet and when connected to the internet, the app uses the lan's wifi to internet connection to then connect via the internet back to the wifi lan where the WM100 resides.

Ironically, this resolved my primary concern, needing to program lights in a vacation home at a location that was subject to frequent blackouts.  I had already determined that if there was a power failure while I was away, the WM100's clock time would then be incorrect.  Another example is that if a DST change happens between connections, the WM100 does not update the time, but rather, detects the time difference when the phone connects and asks to update the time at that point.

Since, in this case, our vacation home location has an internet connection.  This means that I can address my concern by connecting to the WM100 remotely to assure that the time is updated and the schedules are still in place as well as edit or add them if necessary and there is no need to configure ways to tunnel or otherwise set up firewall crossing access options to access the remote lan.

During an earlier conversation with the vendor I was told that since communication between the phone and WM100 was direct and restricted by the unique QR code on every WM100 so that security concerns had been met by the direct connect schema.  I am cautiously optimistic that this is the case, especially since this is the only cross firewall control connection that I have, that they are correct.

Looking forward to learning more.
Beverly Howard