• VitulusAureus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Both Zigbee and Matter do not rely on cloud connectivity as a protocol

    In my ideal world, no devices would not rely on cloud connectivity ever, regardless of their choice wireless transport layer. The fact that the nature of Zigbee or Thread stop device manufacturers from stupid practices (such as relying on direct WAN access) is nice, sure, but does being less capable really make them better suited for the job? I would prefer to appreciate Zigbee or Thread for what they are and have, rather than by the fortunate side effects of what they can’t do.

    • Creat@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Zigbee or Thread doesn’t actually stop them from adding cloud connectivity, they all still do. But you yourself can stop it. Similar to the “gateway” you suggested with dedicated WiFi, they sell you a gateway for Zigbee or Thread, which then connects to the cloud/internet to allow you to control your stuff. As they would with a WiFi gateway. The protocol isn’t “less capable”, it’s intended use is around (home-)automation. It is low power, low bandwidth and most importantly both are a mesh network. That means that while you have a central point to access them (at least Zigbee has exactly 1), they all talk to each other and for a fully connected mesh. A device doesn’t need to be able to see/hear that central point. It can send it through a multi-hop route, and that route is dynamic so when a device leaves (out of power, turned off, …) the packets basically just find their way. Generally anything that has a stable power sounce will act as a router and forward packets. The low power part means that if you have a battery powered thing (remote switch, thermometer, …) it can run off a single button cell for like a year or so. With wifi it would last a week, maybe two. The bandwidth thing is related to that as well, as a thermoeter needs to send the temperature and/or humidity maybe every few minutes, or even just when it changes and there is no need for that. That comes with power usage, complexity and many other downsides, but of course a zigbee device can’t stream video or something (like a security camera would need to).

      When using wifi, any device needs to be in range of the access point. You can have multiple access point but those aren’t that cheap, and should be wired in. Devices only ever talk to the access point. When multiple devices talk to each other, it goes to the access point who then sends it out again to the other device.

      There are great writeups on the internet, just google “zigbee vs wifi” or something. I’m not gonna repeat what

      Side note: you can reply to more than 1 paragraph in a reply. No need to reply three times, but I guess I’ll stick with it now.

    • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      I also don’t want devices I’m actively using to needlessly compete with random logistical packets from a dozens of devices around my house. I also don’t want the devices themselves to need all the power of a WiFi connection when another protocol suited to low power home automation devices is sufficient.

      ZigBee/zwave were fine for me, though. I personally haven’t seen a clear benefit to matter+thread yet.

    • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      My favourite thing about these non-wifi wireless protocols is that devices using them seem to want cloud connectivity a lot less than those that come with wifi.