I recently learned about Home Assistant here on Lemmy. It looks like a replacement for Google Home, etc. However, it requires an entire hardware installation. Proprietary products just use a simple app to manage and control devices, so can someone explain why a pretty robust dedicated device is necessary as a replacement? The base model has a quad core processor, 4 gigs of ram, and a 32 gig hard drive. Admittedly it’s no gaming PC, but it’s no arduino either.
What actually happens when I turn on a smart switch in my home? Does that command have to be sent to a server somewhere to be processed? What really has to be processed, and why can’t a smartphone app do it?
Edit: I am still getting new replies to this (which are appreciated!), but I wanted to share what I’ve learned from those who have posted already. I fundamentally misunderstood how smart switches work. I had very wrongly assumed that when my phone is connected to the WiFi, it sends a signal over the local network to toggle the switch, which is connected to the same network, and it turns on/off. While there are technologies that work like this (zigbee, kinda?), most smart home devices rely on a cloud server to communicate the signal. This enables features like using the switches from outside the home network, automation, voice controls, etc. The remote server is what’s being replaced.
You must log in or # to comment.
Proprietary products just use a simple app to manage and control devices
They have a dedicated set of servers your devices and app are connecting to, that’s what home assistant is essentially replacing.
It’s not just app > device, it’s app > server > device.
I think others have generally caught this, but I wanted to simplify the point: the apps on your phone are not controlling your home, a computer is. If you don’t use Google’s, then you’ll need to provide one.
That’s helpful. It seems like a system an insane person would come up with, but I understand it.
A dedicated server is needed because something needs to keep a catalog of the smart devices available on your network and ideally be accessible to many people in one household. You could make a system that went phone -> device but you would need to set up each device on each phone you wanted to use, which isn’t a great user experience. You could also run into issues where devices would need to handle multiple conflicting commands from different users coming in at once. Since smart devices are usually trying to use as little power as possible, that extra complexity would hurt you in that department. The third reason is that having a separate server enables automated workflows that would depend on an always online server that orchestrates multiple devices. For example, let’s say you have some automatic insulating blinds, a smart thermostat. You want to raise and lower the blinds to maximize your energy efficiency. Since you have the dedicated server, that server can check the temperature set point of your thermostat, current weather, and sunrise\sunset times. If it’s sunny out, and your set point is higher than the outdoor temperature, the server can raise the blinds to let warm sunlight in, and vice versa. If only your phone could control the devices a workflow like this couldn’t work when you were out of the house.
so can someone explain why a pretty robust dedicated device is necessary as a replacement?
The cloud is just someone else’s computer, so when you cut the cord from the cloud, you gotta run your own server.
And you don’t need to buy a (robust) device to run HA, just install it on a spare system and start playing with it. I started building mine about 1.5yrs ago when I bought a house and I think I only gave mine like 2 CPU and 8gb ram.
What actually happens when I turn on a smart switch in my home? Does that command have to be sent to a server somewhere to be processed?
Yes, you have to have something that accepts your commands and sends the action to the end device. Just like your Google home did.
What really has to be processed, and why can’t a smartphone app do it?
Because that’s not how things work. Your app has to talk to a server to send the commands, Google home has cloud servers and a local bridge. HA has an app that you can use to control your stuff, same as Google Home.
Smart Home apps are worthless without hardware required to connect the app to your home.
While there are technologies that work like this (zigbee, kinda?),
Yes, there are many. You probably know them as “remote control”. Your TV, your garage door…
Home Assistant can also control them via gateway devices, turn them into “smart” devices and include them in larger automation scenarios.
in a nutshell
This is how the control and information exchange of smart devices work:
Phone App -> [Server] … [Server] -> Smart Device and vice versa
There’s no way around this concept.
Now, Google gives you the phone app and the (public) server part. but these only work with their servers and apps, keeping you locked in.
HA gives you the same, a server and an app, but allows you to keep the server private (access via vpn for public)
Also who guarantees that Google Home will be there in the next few years? HA will still keep running even if it ever gets abandoned.
Technically there is. If the device uses BLE or the phone has some built in hardware shenanigans. There is also a local gateway via ble. I’d argue a simple gateway is not a “server”. Scheduling can be done by the device via internal non-volatile storage and RTC
Gateway is a more specific name for a server.
Like web host is a more specific name for a server.A server isn’t anything fancy, it just serves a service.
If that is just a relay between your phone and local devices, that’s what it’s servingSure, but I was talking about the basic concept of how things work in general to keep it simple for OP.
I never understood the want or desire for such things honestly
Also you don’t want proprietary cloud based products because of things like this:
https://www.newsweek.com/amazon-smart-home-brandon-jackson-echo-racial-slur-allegation-1806947
In my case it was a specific use case in that I have a number of outdoor lights that I want to control without needing to go back in the house every time. Folks here have given a few options that would work well for this without relying on the internet, but I already have the setup installed at this point
A service needs a server, not just a phone. Do you want to self host, or use the entire hardware installation in someone’s cloud data center?
You can run HA on lighter hardware, or use a VM or docker, but it needs something to host.
When I say “hey Siri open my garage door”, my phone does voice recognition, calls the Apple Home app, which calls my local Home Assistant server, which calls the RATGDO which opens the door.
Plus the benefit of running HA on this hardware is that you can often eliminate the proprietary hubs and sometimes cloud-based communication.
Wifi smart devices can have that sort of completely local control, not just zigbee. LIFX devices use local control if you don’t connect them to the cloud. However, you’re then limited in lots of ways, such as you can’t then use a smart switch from a different manufacturer to control the lights. Home Assistant takes over the job of Google/Apple Home, which allows different manufacturer’s devices to all work together harmoniously. Those services also provide things like automations, turning the lights on when your smartphone arrives within a geofence for example. HA can do even better because those automations will work across Android as well as iOS. It also maintains the advantage of just one app to control your entire home.
As well, as far hardware, I think you’re misunderstanding a bit. Nabu Casa, the org that controls the open-source HA project, sells a couple of pre-built devices that run home assistant already. They’re designed as turn-key solutions for people with less technical know-how, and provide a bunch of expansibility so people don’t waste money needing to upgrade. The proceeds from those go back into supporting the projects costs. But you can go out and buy a Raspberry Pi Zero 2 W (512mb RAM) for $15 and it’ll happily run the kind of basic setup you’re after. But you will almost immediately run into it’s limitations if you try to do anything more complicated.
My HA server is running on an x86 VM with 2c/4t and 8gb of RAM to itself. Have a full music server running on it serving ~6 devices around the house though. Edit: 6 fixed devices. It can also be cast to a bunch of places from mobile devices. My music collection is in FLAC so it’s transcoding to lossy on the fly where needed.
I have a proxmox hassio VM with 2gb ram and it runs everything smart in my house. The main purpose would be for automations IMO. Like when my phone chargers at night the house lights, TVs locks all shut down and the cameras go into alerting mode. Home assistant is amazing since you don’t have to have 5 apps to control stuff and your data is completely private unlike when using Google home etc. When buying IOT devices I would say stick with zigbee, zwave and only buy WiFi stuff if it works locally without having to have internet wccess.
My homeassistant is running on a pi2 with 2GB RAM. it doesn’t need much.
But yes, it is a central place for processing and recording data, either from phone, imstalled electrical hardware or other devices.
HA doesn’t require 4/4/32, that’s just the hardware the HA people sell. (which, given that your phone may be 8/16/128, is hardly “robust”). Generally, the Home Assistant crowd kind of target an audience that’s probably already running some kind of home server, NAS, or router, and HA can probably be installed on that device.
Theoretically, there’s no reason the HA server couldn’t be installed on your phone, except then your smart home functions would only work while your phone is in the house and not sleeping. Kind of defeats the point of a lot of it, unless you’re just thinking of smart home like “remote control for everything.” Regardless, much smaller niche for an already-small market, and apparently not a priority for the dev team.
Also, the point of HA is usually to avoid 3rd party servers, so you don’t just need something that runs HA, you need something that can receive data signals that may not be over wifi. Unless you can connect 3rd party receiver dongles to your phone, it’ll end up limiting which devices you can use on your network.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
Fewer Letters More Letters DNS Domain Name Service/System Git Popular version control system, primarily for code HA Home Assistant automation software ~ High Availability IP Internet Protocol NAS Network-Attached Storage SBC Single-Board Computer SSD Solid State Drive mass storage Zigbee Wireless mesh network for low-power devices
8 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 12 acronyms.
[Thread #718 for this sub, first seen 28th Apr 2024, 05:25] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
Depending. But yes. A lot of the time they go the long way around, and head out to some server and back to your local network.
If the internet is down, or the vendor shits off the server, the device stops working.
Home assistant is attempting to localise everything, and get different vendors devices to work together.
Note, for your hass install, it can be installed on any server. Though I am using the green device
vendor shits off the server
Oh, autocorrect, sometimes you really say things better than intended
This is really amazing to me. I had no idea that it was using the internet to send the on/off signal from my phone, up to a server (multiple servers), just to send the command back to my home network, and to the device. That seems like an absolutely bonkers system to turn on a switch. I would be better off to repurpose an old RC toy to control the switch!
My words.
When you read “Cloud” change the word in your head to “Someone else’s computer”
So when I was using Tuya lightbulbs I was connecting Tuya’s Computer to Googles Computer to turn my lights on.
Now I use Home Assistant, I’m connecting MY computer to Googles Computer to turn the lights on, since I’m asking Google to turn MY lights on.
I can just not use the Google Cloud and have a voice assistant in Home Assistant do it, then I’m just using my own computer.
Now then, you don’t think that all the photos you’ve ever taken reside in an app on your phone do you, because if you do I’ve got some news for you…
Except Google likes to collect that data
I don’t really understand why a computer is necessary at all, is the thing. I know that it’s possible to use wifi network to send a signal between two devices. I have a sound board that works this way, and manages to communicate precise multichannel instructions directly over the network without an internet connection.
If I want to turn on a light switch, it seems like all I should need to send is the location of the light switch on the network and the on/off command. I know that there is not the computing power in the light switch itself to process much more than that.
Do these devices all connect to a remote server to switch on and off??
It’s crazy, given that all these devices have something powerful like an esp32, isn’t it?
I’ve done some of my home stuff this way, but I had to program it myself. Tasmota has some features which can be used without a server, but that’s just for simple stuff like switches. For whatever reason (simplicity for non tech people?), out of the box products don’t work this way.
If you don’t have days of spare time, you buy ready made products and set them up in minutes in Home Assistant
Yes. That’s why it’s called the Internet of things. Every “smart”, wifi connected, device you have uses that connection to communicate with a remote server. The app on your phone does the same to control the light.
Check out Zigbee for an example local control.
It doesn’t take much to run home assistant. I just have a raspberry pi going and it never fails. I plan to upgrade it to something more powerful in the future, but for now it is more than capable of running home assistant for me with no issues.
You might want to have some other storage than a cheap SD card though
