Forced "upgrade": sufficient for lawsuit?

  • 6
  • Problem
  • Updated 3 months ago
The forced "upgrade" from Smarthub (10 sensors supported) to Accurite Access (7 sensors supported) smells like Lawsuit material. Pretty sure there is no technical reason to switch off the support for SmartHub after Aug 31. Keeping a legacy API running for these laughable simple data costs nothing, the number of devices reporting to the server will not change. I rather assume they want to re-coup the cost of the debacle 2 years ago when the migration to My-Accurite and the mandatory firmware update bricked thousands of SmartHubs and they needed to send free replacements. I am besides myself. No way I will upgrade, a rather stop reporting my sensor data to Wundermaps etc.
Photo of Fribur

Fribur

  • 2 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
  • frustrated

Posted 3 months ago

  • 6
Photo of Jon

Jon

  • 88 Posts
  • 124 Reply Likes
Totally agree. I have been developing web apps since the 90s. There is no reason to block the old hubs from a backend standpoint. All it is doing is transmitting a few numbers every 5 minutes. There is virtually nothing to it and no good technical reason to block the old hubs. It is ridiculous. And as you mentioned, they reduced the number of supported sensors. Funny how CPUs get faster every year, yet somehow the number of supported devices went down, not up. Not only that, they increased the cost of the hub from $80 to $130. And it hasn't even been 2 years since SmartHub came out. I looked around awhile ago. I think someone figured out how to setup a proxy to capture the data being transmitted and send it somewhere else. I need to look into it some more.
Photo of George D. Nincehelser

George D. Nincehelser

  • 6512 Posts
  • 1209 Reply Likes
Your experience developing web apps doesn't mean much if you haven't taken a look at how the data flows.
Photo of Nugchompa

Nugchompa

  • 55 Posts
  • 64 Reply Likes
I have 18 working sensors, one 5 in 1 and 4 hubs.
Photo of Jon

Jon

  • 88 Posts
  • 124 Reply Likes
@George Well, I looked at your web page, all it is doing is passing some query parameters. Even simpler than I thought. Maybe that is for an older setup, but, again, all they are doing is passing a few numbers. This isn't rocket science. Acurite and you are just trying to come up with something justify their bad business practices and hoodwink people. Maybe I will run my SmartHub through my transparent firewall today and see exactly how often it is transmitting data.
Photo of George D. Nincehelser

George D. Nincehelser

  • 6512 Posts
  • 1209 Reply Likes
I guess you're talking about my old ipwx page?  That was for the Bridge, pre-SmartHUB.  It doesn't mean anything now.

What you don't understand is the sensor update rate and how it affects the data flow.

In short, the SmartHUB sends data for every sensor transmission it hears.  For example, the 5n1 will generate a report every 18 seconds.  If you have an additional tower sensor, it will also send another report every 16 seconds, and so on and so forth.

The Access bundles all sensor data together and sends it to myAcurite at 5-minute intervals.

This results in a HUGE traffic savings, as well as reduces the number of database transactions necessary to sort and store the data. 
Photo of John Z

John Z

  • 889 Posts
  • 185 Reply Likes
Jon,

Do some math. Start with Nugchompa's sensor count, above. Factor in the transmission intervals George quoted. Calculate the number of resulting AWS API calls in an hour, then in a year. Apply AWS' published charge rate per million calls. Be prepared to be blown away.
(Edited)