<<Marvell's EZ-Connect SDK target's their "Wi-Fi Microcontroller IoT platform".>> I'm not usually a stickler for these things but this jumped right out at me.
if you think about it as >Marvell's XYZ target is their "UVW platform". it's not wrong. It's very unusual to see "is" abbreviated that way though. Probably a typo.
If it's not an open standard, I wouldn't get near it. This home automation stuff is really pricey and not the sort of thing you'd want to be replacing every two years. Apple has a tenancy to require frequent hardware replacements. As an example, the new MacBook.
In a totally new market, the road to specs goes through a whole lot of proprietary initial offerings. When has it not been so? Half the specs you use today are either proprietary or began that way. x86? SMB? Ethernet? USB? SQL? OpenGL?
That's the way the world works. A new market needs a period of chaos and experimentation free of the slowness and constraints of specs, until we've all mostly agreed on how the new devices should work, at which point worrying about specs and interop becomes feasible.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
14 Comments
Back to Article
close - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
<<Marvell's EZ-Connect SDK target's their "Wi-Fi Microcontroller IoT platform".>>I'm not usually a stickler for these things but this jumped right out at me.
Murloc - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
if you think about it as>Marvell's XYZ target is their "UVW platform".
it's not wrong.
It's very unusual to see "is" abbreviated that way though.
Probably a typo.
extide - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
You're both wrong, the article has the correct grammar.SirPerro - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
One must be completely crazy to tightly couple *home* devices to the Apple ecosystem. That sounds like the worst idea ever.melgross - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
Good for you. I suppose you'd do it with Microsoft though, or perhaps Google. Apple released this as open source. Google already supports it.Flunk - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
If it's not an open standard, I wouldn't get near it. This home automation stuff is really pricey and not the sort of thing you'd want to be replacing every two years. Apple has a tenancy to require frequent hardware replacements. As an example, the new MacBook.eanazag - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
What hardware manufacturer in the PC world could get by only upgrading their offerings every four years?Home automation is pricey now. This just sounds like Apple hate.
SirPerro - Wednesday, March 11, 2015 - link
I'm not commiting to a proprietary system for either three EVER. I hope that answers your question.If they play together as part of one standard and provide an SDK for their ecosystem apps, that's fine. Otherwise don't count me in.
jann5s - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
The chunk of copper on the right side, is that the wifi-antenna?Stephen Barrett - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
Yesfteoath64 - Wednesday, March 11, 2015 - link
Looks to me like BT4.0 antenna. The mini-bnc plug marked ANT1 is surely the wifi antenna. Bottom right.r3loaded - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
I'll buy IoT devices as soon as the industry settles on a single standard, implements security robustly and deliver regular firmware updates.In other words it'll be quite a long time.
shabby - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
Actually that'll never happen.name99 - Wednesday, March 11, 2015 - link
In a totally new market, the road to specs goes through a whole lot of proprietary initial offerings.When has it not been so? Half the specs you use today are either proprietary or began that way. x86? SMB? Ethernet? USB? SQL? OpenGL?
That's the way the world works. A new market needs a period of chaos and experimentation free of the slowness and constraints of specs, until we've all mostly agreed on how the new devices should work, at which point worrying about specs and interop becomes feasible.