[connor4312]

+1. I run entirely Zigbee devices in my home. They don't have internet access and talk to the Home Assistant[1] instance running on my home server.

The downside of Zigbee is that, as a user, there isn't a strong ecosystem of DIY IoT solutions like there is with, for example, the wifi-connected ESP8266/ESP32 chips. And, of course, it requires a hub and some degree of knowledge to set up.

At the moment I'm evaluating launching a small IoT startup/side-business in an underserved market. As much as I love Zigbee, these devices will probably end up being wifi. I'm not an expert in the hardware side of things, and the ability to pay <$1 for an ESP chip that does everything I need off the shelf is great, and I don't want to create a hub or require users to buy a (often $80+) hub just for my set of (<=$5) devices.

Although it'll be wifi-based, I plan to make these guarantees:

- The cloud service (supported by a small yearly subscription) will stay online for at least 1 year after the last device is sold.

- When the service is shut down, its software and hardware will be released under an open source license.

- The subscription fee will never be increased faster than inflation rate.

- 3rd party analytics software won't be used and data will never be shared with 3rd parties (outside from Stripe during checkout). In all cases a minimum amount of data will be collected.

Maybe this'll make my product slightly less likely to appear on the @internetofshit Twitter account[2].

1. https://www.home-assistant.io/

2. https://twitter.com/internetofshit

[StavrosK]

I think Zigbee is what IoT should be. It doesn't access the internet, it doesn't clutter the frequency band like my 30 WiFi IoT devices, it doesn't need to be in range (since other Zigbee devices can relay the messages)... I'm going to buy some Zigbee devices from IKEA just so I can play around with them.

It's a really nice standard, I hope it takes off.

[lonjil]

ZigBee sits in the same frequency band as WiFi, so it does actually clutter it.

Edit: oh and it has already taken off as much as it will, the ZigBee alliance is working on a an ipv6 based standard.

[Semaphor]

> The downside of Zigbee is that, as a user, there isn't a strong ecosystem of DIY IoT solutions like there is with, for example, the wifi-connected ESP8266/ESP32 chips.

Luckily, as you probably know, you can connect all those different protocols together with homeassistant. So you can use pre-built solutions for some devices and DIY for others and still easily connect them.

[Cu3PO42]

I really don't know anything about the availability of Zigbee chips for DIY projects, but I would just like to say that I paid just 20 EUR for Ikea's gateway [0].

But if you do go Wi-Fi, why use a cloud service at all? Is there a specific reason not to go with mDNS/DNS-SD and handle everything on the local network?

[0] https://www.ikea.com/de/de/p/tradfri-gateway-weiss-40337806/

[anaerobicover]

> They don't have internet access

Do you mean they don't as a matter of manufacturing, or that you have blocked them yourself? (I ask because I am also interested in getting some lights, but would also like them to be local-network-only.)

[Cu3PO42]

Zigbee devices don't have internet access because they're not on the network. Zigbee is a seperate wireless protocol. Lights and switches implement a pairing step which allows them to interact. If you would like to control such devices from your PC, you'll need a device with a Zigbee transceiver to talk to these devices.

Typically, manufacturers sell you a "bridge" or "gateway", which is a networked device including such a transceiver. You could isolate this single device from accessing the internet or you could just not rely on any closed option. You can buy a USB Zigbee transceiver for 30 EUR and use it with your PC or a Raspberry Pi.

[anaerobicover]

Perfect, thank you for the explanation!