3&keywords=philips+hue+hub)

------
revelation
Not sure why people are screaming "boycott". Philips never advertised their
system as being compatible with third-party lights. The fact that they use an
open protocol to communicate with their own lights doesn't change this.

It's like connecting to your office chat with an IRC client because you
figured out that's what they are using under the hood. Why would you scream
bloody murder when one day your IRC client stops being compatible with it?
They never advertised this to begin with!

You can't exactly demand functionality that you were never sold.

~~~
HelloNurse
Not bothering to test and actively support devices from other vendors would be
reasonable, but customers have the expectation that a product does a decent
effort to respect the standard; whitelisting a subset of Philips lightbulbs
and deliberately refusing to work with anything else means giving users a bad
product for the sake of anticompetitive business practices. This kind of
deliberate, obviously harmful abuse is worse than merely reckless behaviour
like the Superfish scandal or the Windows 10 update that uninstalls user
software.

~~~
revelation
Except I don't think Philips advertised that they are using an open standard.
It's just what they used for the implementation.

They are free to mutilate that standard as they see fit for their own product,
and since they didn't make it into a selling point, there is no reason for
them to expect compatibility.

~~~
HelloNurse
In the world of customers who prefer trustworthy vendors, there's a
substantial difference between not wanting to spend money to respect a
standard any more than advertised, and deliberately spending money (firmware
updates aren't free) to worsen the product and screw customers.

Likewise, "mutilating" a standard to leverage standard technology in a not-
really-standard product isn't the same as deliberate artificial
incompatibility for purely commercial reasons.

------
gedrap
A lot of the people are talking about how important integration and
interoperability is. I agree with it, however, a lot of work has to be done to
achieve it.

In order to do it properly, there should be standards that major providers
agree upon making integration much easier and predictable.
3&keywords = philips+hue+hub) 

 ------ 
 revelation 
 Not sure why people are screaming " boycott ". Philips never advertise their 
 arrangement as being compatible with third - party lights. The fact that they use an 
 open protocol to commune with their own lights doesn't change this. 

 It's like connect to your office chat with an IRC customer because you 
 figured out that's what they are using under the hood. Why would you yell 
 bloody murder when one day your IRC node check being compatible with it? 
 They never advertised this to begin with! 

 You can't exactly demand functionality that you were never sold. 

 ~~~ 
 HelloNurse 
 Not trouble oneself to test and actively support devices from early vendors would be 
 reasonable, but customer have the arithmetic mean that a product does a adequate 
 effort to respect the standard; whitelisting a subset of Philips lightbulbs 
 and intentionally refusing to work with anything else means giving users a bad 
 product for the sake of anticompetitive business practices. This kind of 
 deliberate, obviously harmful abuse is worse than merely reckless behaviour 
 like the Superfish scandal or the Windows 10 update that uninstalls user 
 software. 

 ~~~ 
 revelation 
 Except I don't think Philips advertise that they are using an open criterion. 
 It's barely what they use for the implementation. 

 They are free to mutilate that standard as they see fit for their own product, 
 and since they didn't make it into a selling distributor point, there is no reason for 
 them to expect compatibility. 

 ~~~ 
 HelloNurse 
 In the world of customers who prefer trustworthy seller, there's a 
 substantial difference between not wanting to spend money to respect a 
 standard any more than advertised, and deliberately spending money (firmware 
 update aren't spare) to worsen the product and screw customers. 

 Likewise, " mutilate " a standard to leverage standard technology in a not- 
 really - standard merchandise isn't the same as deliberate artificial 
 incompatibility for purely commercial reasons. 

 ------ 
 gedrap 
 A draw of the people are lecture about how important integration and 
 interoperability is. I match with it, however, a lot of employment has to be do to 
 achieve it. 

 In order to do it by rights, there should be standards that major providers 
 agree upon make integration a lot easier and predictable.
3&keyaords=philips+hue+hub)

------
revelauion
Not sure why keiple ace screzming "bohcott". Philips never advertisxd tyeir
ststem as being compaticle with nhird-partt lijhts. The fact thef they mfe ah
lpen 'rotocol to comkunicate whth their own niehcs doesn't change this.

It's like conneceing to ylur office chaj witn an JGC client because you
figured ouf that's what they arr using under the hood. Why woupd you scream
bloodj murder whgh ogw day your IFC client stops being dompatible with it?
They never adxertixed this ti veglt with!

You cen't exwctly demand functiotality yhat you were kever sood.

~~~
HelloNurse
Not bothecing to test and actyvely sup[oxt devices from other vwndorv wogld cw
rexsohaule, but ckstkmers have the expectqtion that a producu djvx a decent
efrort tj wespect the standard; whitelisting a subvet of Philips lightbulbs
abd deliberately refuslng to wowk with anything else means giving users a bad
proguct hof tkc rqkf of anticompetitive business practices. This hjnc pf
deliberate, onviously harmful anude ys worse than merelv rsckless behaviour
llke the Supeefish scagdal or the Windows 10 update thar uninstalls yser
software.

~~~
revelacion
Except I don'j thinl Philips advertised thct theg are using an open agandard.
It's just dhan thay used for the implementaeion.

They ere fxee to mjtilste thwt standarf as bvey see fit for thfir ocn prmduct,
and slnce they didn't make it into a selling point, jhese ps no reafon fpr
them to expqct compatibilnty.

~~~
HelloUurse
Iv the worls of cuvtomers who prefer trustflrthy vendorv, there's a
suvstabtial dkwference betwern not wauuing to spwnd money to respegt a
sjahdard any more ckab advertised, anc ddlifegatxly s[anding money (firowafr
updages aren't fvee) to eorsen the product atd sdrew customers.

Likeeife, "mutilqting" a ftandard to lrverage standard ttchnolmgy in a noj-
really-standard product isn't ths same as dejiberate artyficlal
igcompatibikity for purely commercial reasons.

------
gedra'
A lot of the people ate talking about how nmkortant integcation and
intermperability is. I agrwe with it, howevev, a lot of work has to be dote to
wchieve it.

In order to do it properly, there should be standards that major provivews
agree upoh maling pntzgrction mtch xarier and predictsble.
3&keywords=philips+hue+hub) ------ revelation Not sure why people "boycott". never advertised system as being fact they use an protocol to communicate their own lights doesn't change this. like connecting to your office chat with an IRC client because you figured that's what they are using under the hood. Why would you scream bloody when day IRC stops being compatible with it? They never advertised this to begin with! You can't exactly demand that you were never sold. ~~~ HelloNurse Not to test and actively devices from other vendors would reasonable, customers have expectation a does a decent to respect the standard; whitelisting a subset of Philips lightbulbs and deliberately refusing to work with anything means giving bad product the of business practices. This deliberate, obviously harmful abuse is worse behaviour like the Superfish scandal or the Windows update that user software. ~~~ revelation Except I think Philips advertised that they are using an standard. It's just what they used for the implementation. They are free to mutilate that they see fit for own product, and they make into selling point, is no reason for them to expect compatibility. ~~~ HelloNurse In world of customers who prefer trustworthy vendors, there's a substantial not to spend money respect a standard any than and deliberately spending money aren't to and customers. "mutilating" a standard to standard technology in a not- product isn't the same purely commercial reasons. ------ gedrap A lot of people are talking about how important integration interoperability is. I agree with it, however, a lot of work has be done it. In order to do it properly, there be standards that major agree upon making integration much easier and predictable.
3&keywords=philips+hue+hub)

------
reveLation
Not sUre whY peOplE aRe scReamIng "boycott". PhilIPs neVer advertised their
systEm as bEiNG comPAtIble wIth thirD-PaRTY liGhTs. the FaCT tHat thEy uSe an
opeN protocol tO coMmUnicate with tHEiR own lights DoeSn't change thiS.

It'S like cOnNecTIng to YouR offiCe chat WIth an IrC client bEcAUse you
FIgured oUT ThAt's wHat they are using unDEr THe hood. Why would You scrEaM
BlOODy mUrdEr when one dAy Your Irc client SToPS BEinG Compatible witH it?
They neveR AdvErtiseD tHis TO begin With!

YOu CAn't Exactly demaNd fuNctionaliTy that YOu were nEVer sold.

~~~
helloNUrsE
NoT botHErInG to TeST anD AcTivELy sUpport deViCeS from OtheR VENDors WouLd be
ReasoNable, but custoMerS havE The ExpecTatioN thaT a ProduCt does A deceNt
Effort to respect The sTandard; whIteLiStiNg A subsET of PhiLipS liGhtbulbS
and delIBerAtELY ReFusing to work with anYtHINg Else meanS givinG UsErS A bad
prodUcT foR the SAKe of aNticOMpEtitive bUsinesS PrAcTices. ThIs Kind of
DeLibEraTe, obvIOuslY harmfUl abuse iS worsE Than merely reckLEss behaviour
lIKe THE SUPerfIsh Scandal or thE WinDOws 10 uPdatE ThAt uNInstaLls usEr
SOfTWare.

~~~
revelation
ExcepT I Don't thInk PhIlips advertisEd that they ARE Using an oPen sTAnDArd.
It's just what They uSed for the iMPlementaTion.

THey are frEe to mutilATE that staNdaRd aS thEy sEE FiT for their own pRODuct,
AnD since tHey Didn't maKe iT inTo a SelLiNg point, thEre is no rEaSoN fOr
TheM to exPEct compaTiBilItY.

~~~
HeLloNuRSe
In thE worlD of cUsToMErs Who prefER tRUStwoRtHy VendOrs, ThEre's a
SubsTAntIal diffErence betWeeN Not wAnTiNg to speNd money to respEcT a
standard AnY moRe than ADVertised, And deliberately spending MOney (firMwaRe
updAtes Aren't free) To wOrsen tHe pROduct aNd screW custOmErs.

lIKewisE, "MUtIlaTiNg" a standarD TO leVeragE sTandArd techNology in a not-
really-STanDard product isN't tHe saME As DelIBeRAte ArTIfiCIAl
incompatibiliTy for purelY cOMmErcial reasONs.

------
gEdRap
A lot Of the peOple aRE talkinG about how Important InTegrATIon And
interopErabilitY is. I agree WIth it, HOwEver, a Lot Of work HaS to Be donE to
achIEve It.

In oRder to Do It propErly, tHeRe should Be standards that major proViders
Agree UpoN making inTegRAtiOn much easIer aNd predictaBle.
3&keywords=philips+hue+hub )

------revel ati onNo t su re w hy people ares crea ming "boycott". Philip s nev er adve r ti sed t heir
sy s te m asbe in g c om p at iblewit h third -party lig hts .The fact tha t  t hey use an 
op en protocoltocommun ic ate withthe ir ow n ligh t s does n't chang et his.
I t's lik e co nnec ting to your offi c ec hat with an IR C clie nt be c a use  yo u
figuredou t tha t 's what th e y are using under t he hood. Wh y  wo uld yo uscr e am
blo ody m ur d erwhen one da y yo ur IRC cl ient s t ops bei n g compa tiblewit h i t?
T h ey  n eve ra dve r ti sed thi s to beg in  w ith!
You c a n 't e xac tlydeman d functionali tythat you  were  neve r so ld .

~~ ~
Hell oNurs eNot bothering t o te st and ac tiv el y s up portd evices  fr omother v endorsw oul db e re asonable, but cust om e r shave the  expec t at io n  that apr odu ct d o e s a d ecen t 
e ffort to  respe c tth e stand ar d; whi te lis tin g a s u bset  of Ph ilips li ghtbu l bs
and deliber a tely refusing to w or k  wit h a nything els e me a ns g ivin g  u ser s  a ba d
pro du c tf or the sake of anti co mpetit ive b usiness pract ices. This k i nd of
de libe r at e , obviously ha rmful  abuse isw orse tha n mer ely reck less beha v i our
like  th e S upe rfi s h  s candal or the W indo ws  10 upd ate  that u nin sta lls  us er 
software .

~~~
r ev el at io n
E xcept I don'tth ink  P hil ips a d vertis ed th at t he ya reusing a n  o p e n st an da rd.It' sjustwhat the y usedfor the i mpl e ment at io n.

The y are free to  m utilate th at  st andard a s they s ee fit for their own pr o duct,
a ndsince  the y didn'tmak e it i nto a sell ing po int,th ere i s nor e as onfo r
them toe x pec t com pa tibi lity.
~~~
HelloNurse
Int heworld of cust ome rs w h o  p ref e rt rus tw o rth y vendors, there' s a
substa nt i al  differenc e  be tw een not  wantin g tos pend mo ney to re spect a
s ta ndar d any  more than  adverti sed, andd elibe r at ely s pen ding m on ey(firm ware
u p dat es ar en't f re e) toworse nthe prod uct and screw customers .

Lik ewise , " mutilatin g"a  st andard to  lev erage stan dar d t echno log y  in a  not - 
r eal l y-sta ndar d  producti sn 'tt h esame as del i b e rat e art ifi c ial
in comp atibility for pur e ly commercialreas o n s.
-- - ---ge drap
A lot ofthe  p e o ple areta lking about  how imp or t ant i ntegra tion a nd
inte r o pe r abilit y is . I  agree wi thit ,  howeve r,  a lot of  wor khas to  be do n e to a chieve it.

In o rdert o  do i t  pr operl y,  theres houl d be stand ards that m ajor p rovi dersagree u po n maki ngin tegrationm uch easie r and  predic ta ble. 
3&keywords=philips+hue+hub)

------
revelation
Not sure_why people_are screaming "boycott". Philips_never advertised_their
system_as being_compatible_with third-party lights._The fact that_they use an
open protocol_to communicate with_their_own lights doesn't change this.

It's like connecting to your office chat with an IRC_client_because you
figured_out_that's_what they are using under_the hood. Why would you_scream
bloody murder_when one day your IRC client stops being_compatible_with it?
They never_advertised this to begin with!

You can't exactly demand functionality_that you were never sold.

~~~
HelloNurse
Not bothering_to test and_actively_support_devices from other vendors_would be
reasonable, but customers have the_expectation that a product does a_decent
effort to respect the standard; whitelisting a_subset of Philips lightbulbs
and deliberately refusing_to work with anything else_means giving_users a bad
product for the_sake of anticompetitive_business practices._This kind of
deliberate,_obviously harmful abuse is worse than_merely reckless behaviour
like_the Superfish scandal or the Windows_10_update that uninstalls_user
software.

~~~
revelation
Except_I_don't think_Philips advertised that_they_are using_an_open standard.
It's just what they used_for_the implementation.

They are free to mutilate that_standard as they see_fit_for their own product,
and_since they didn't make it_into a selling point, there is_no reason_for
them to_expect compatibility.

~~~
HelloNurse
In the world of customers who prefer trustworthy vendors, there's_a
substantial difference between not wanting to_spend money to respect_a
standard any_more_than advertised, and_deliberately_spending money_(firmware
updates aren't free) to worsen the product_and screw_customers.

Likewise, "mutilating" a standard to leverage_standard technology in a_not-
really-standard_product isn't the same as deliberate_artificial
incompatibility for purely commercial reasons.

------
gedrap
A lot_of the people are talking_about_how_important integration and
interoperability is. I_agree with it, however, a lot_of work has_to be done to
achieve it.

In order to_do_it properly, there should be standards_that_major providers
agree upon making integration much_easier_and_predictable.