If you sell a device that relies on an external service to function, then you are no longer in the hardware business, you are in the services business, and should sell the <i>service</i> as such.<p>Likewise, if you are a consumer and buying a physical device that needs an upstream service, you dont really own, or really even need to own the device. What you really want is the value the device brings, without any of the headaches that go along with devices becoming obsolete.<p>Logitech is so used to selling hardware products that they didn't realize that they became a service provider as soon as their Harmony Link required connectivity. They should not be marketing or selling <i>devices</i>, despite their history of being a physical product vendor.
If users had purchased a "Harmony Link" service agreement, and Logitech was responsible for keeping their users devices up to date and functioning with their service, then nobody would complain.<p>Cable companies figured this out a <i>long</i> time ago. When was the last time anyone had to care about cable modem or set top boxes being deprecated? The cable companies have always sold the <i>service</i>, and the hardware was either rentable, or, sometimes, provided by the consumer, but always with the understanding that the hardware wasnt why people bought cable.<p>I've avoided any of these connected home hardware specifically because the manufacturers try and push ownership to the consumers. As soon as its the service providers responsibility to ensure the devices are secure and work with their service, I'll sign right up.
There was apparently a period of time following the announcement on the Logitech forum where the words "class action lawsuit" were being censored as profanity.<p>My guess would be the company lawyers told them they were digging themselves into a very deep hole, and that replacing the Harmony Links would be the <i>least</i> damaging / expensive option.
Lesson 1: Don't buy stuff like this that depends on an online component to locally control your electronics.
Lesson 2: Don't buy Logitech, as they make the things from lesson 1. The new hub is the same as the old hub and will probably break once they get tired of its online service too.
Last year's version of this story featured Nest in the role of Logitech, and Revolv in the role of Link. It ended with refunds to Revolv owners [5].<p>[1] "Nest's Hub Shutdown Proves You're Crazy to Buy Into the Internet of Things", Kint Finley, Wired, 15 Mar 16. <a href="https://www.wired.com/2016/04/nests-hub-shutdown-proves-youre-crazy-buy-internet-things/" rel="nofollow">https://www.wired.com/2016/04/nests-hub-shutdown-proves-your...</a><p>[2] "What Nest's Product Shutdown Says about the Internet of Things", Christina Warren, 4 Apr 2016 Mashable. <a href="http://mashable.com/2016/04/04/revolv-smart-home-shutdown/#02WJZKAr8sqb" rel="nofollow">http://mashable.com/2016/04/04/revolv-smart-home-shutdown/#0...</a><p>[3] "Nest's Meager Response To Revolv Users Falls Short", Aaron Pressman, Fortune , 6 Apr 2016. <a href="http://fortune.com/2016/04/06/nest-meager-response-google-revolv/" rel="nofollow">http://fortune.com/2016/04/06/nest-meager-response-google-re...</a><p>[4] "Here's How Google Is Handling a Big Controversy", By Lisa Eadicicco, 6 April 6 2016, Time. <a href="http://time.com/4283408/nest-google-shuts-down-revolv/" rel="nofollow">http://time.com/4283408/nest-google-shuts-down-revolv/</a><p>[5] Revolv is now closed. <a href="https://revolv.com" rel="nofollow">https://revolv.com</a>
For those looking for an alternate hacker-friendly solution, you can make your own smart remote with a Raspberry Pi Zero W. I made an IR blaster that replaced all my IR based remotes [1]. I’m sure you can make one for RF ones as well. And they’re not too hard to integrate with Amazon Echo or Home Kit.<p>[1]: <a href="http://www.instructables.com/id/Amazon-Echo-Controlled-IR-Remote/" rel="nofollow">http://www.instructables.com/id/Amazon-Echo-Controlled-IR-Re...</a>
I wonder if Logitech will be willing to share of their roadmap and plans for the Harmony Hub.<p>It might be fair to presume the security certificates are needed to communicate with the Logitech cloud and not for the operation of the device itself, and this product might not be affected if there was no cloud.<p>Logitech should provide options to keep their existing devices running.<p>You wouldn't expect a keyboard or a mouse to stop working when software updates end.<p>Cloud only connected devices by Logitech have been exposed in this case to remain at the mercy of Logitech.<p>"Looking out for users security" could also have been carried out proactively to communicate the reasons and an exchange program.<p>Potential solutions:<p>- release something open source for users to to handle the back end once a device is eol<p>- update the harmony mobile app to directly update the Harmony Hub on your local network and not need the Logitech cloud.<p>- if the software and possibility exists, load a locally hosted offline first progressive web app if possible on the hub device itself. The harmony mobile app at last glance was a Microsoft Silverlight based app so the one codebase to multiple platform philosophy should not be new.<p>These type of solutions could allow updates to Logitech's cloud while it's available, and responsibly allow the devices to survive when Logitech moves forward.<p>I just don't want to be buying a Harmony Hub when in fact I'm renting it and could be turfed at any time. That's a bait and switch, however unintended and it is probably a fair question for a lot of our cloud connected devices to answer, not just Logitech.
Anyone here work for/with Logitech? I'd love to know the nitty gritty behind the "encryption certificate expires" PR simplification and why a new one can't/won't be cut. (sole embedded root expiring? something else?)
Let's not continue to find a reason to be outraged. That's the stuff mass media wants people to do. I feel like this community is better than that.<p>They made a mistake and they've owned up to it and are doing the right thing.<p>Thank you, Logitech, for listening to your customers.
I have a Sony Dash, even though I don't really use much of it, I find it irreplaceable for the ability to program complex alarms. It's been working fine for at least 4 years.<p>A couple of days ago we had a power failure, the thing hadn't been rebooted in looong time. Since the reboot it hasn't been able to get passed an 'Authorizing...' screen.<p>Long story short, Sony discontinued some servers, the thing is a brick now.<p>I knew there were some cloud services been consumed but had no idea it wouldn't work at all without those services. It's a freaking alarm clock!!!!<p>Even if Sony would make this same move, and I would happily take the replacement, I would never buy another thing like this.<p>Dodge this bullet, what about the next one?
They should make a FOSS tool for configuring their devices. Current approach is a horrible mess. Using some on-line server to configure a remote is very wrong.
Idea: insurance (that looks like or is part of an extended warranty or service contract) for cloud services.<p>Companies should be required to label whether a device depends on cloud service. Customers could buy a guarantee, like a service contract, that the service will keep running {for some amount of time, forever}.<p>If the company itself sells the guarantee, then it has to price the cost of breaking these contracts into decisions about whether to maintain the service. This doesn't protect the customer from a company going out of business, though. Maybe the provider is required to put the money in escrow; or maybe they're backed by re-insurer.<p>This allows customers to opt in or out, depending on their risk aversion and other factors. And it's more predictable, and maybe more efficient, than a class action lawsuit.<p>There's a model for this: consumers buy extended warranties and service contracts for some goods, especially appliances.
Why I'm a fan of open source home automation: <a href="https://home-assistant.io/blog/2016/04/05/your-hub-should-be-local-and-open/" rel="nofollow">https://home-assistant.io/blog/2016/04/05/your-hub-should-be...</a>
I think some context is necessary - I wasn't sure what this was about. Here's an article from The Verge: <a href="https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/11/8/16623076/logitech-harmony-link-discontinued-bricked" rel="nofollow">https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/11/8/16623076/l...</a>
The worst part about this whole thing is the lack of clarity (or a simple landing page) describing the difference between a Logitech Hub & Logitech Link. I've had a Hub for years and didn't know the difference; had a hard time the last week or so determining whether I was affected or not.
Now the real question is what Logitech hardware is safe and what Logitech hardware supports network-based firmware updates or the like.<p>Currently I only have a M235 wireless mouse; it works well, but what about its drivers? Microsoft and Trust sell similar mice, and the choices for a replacement have just reduced.
> If you are a Harmony Link user, we will reach out to you between now and March 2018<p>Am I the only one who's thinking its a long deadline or does this have some sort of explanation?
From their post it seems like their SSL/TLS certificate is expiring? Seems rather overkill to discontinue an entire product in the first place just because of that.
This still feels scummy.<p>I've long since switched to mechanical keyboards, but run a logitech mouse. What's everybody like for a non-logitech mouse when mine dies?