[roc]

As terrible as this idea is for phones -- it's perfect for home automation.

Having each and every widget doing its own network and software stack is just a mess. Nevermind having to power all these gadgets.

There's very little reason to have more than one base in a room, that could handle all the non-switch/non-outlet duties. (cameras, air quality sensors, motion sensors, mics and speakers for echo-type interaction, tv input, etc.)

If all those features were just modules that stacked on top of a base (and could be swapped independently), you'd really have something.

[UnoriginalGuy]

I don't understand at all...

Home automation is, by the nature of it, a series of distinct functions spread throughout the home (e.g. front door lock, garage control, temperature control, lights in each room, sprinkler system, washer/dryer alerts, etc); so you're going to need each of these geographically separate things communicating into a central control "hub."

You cannot physically move these things into a module on the central control hub. Most of them have to be in the location they're already at (e.g. physically in the front door).

How does making the control hub a modular unit help with the complexity of home automation? If anything it further adds to the complexity. A lot of the solutions now just use WiFi networking and a standard protocol.

I'm just not understanding your concept at all.

[plttn]

I think what he's saying is that rather than selling a bunch of different devices (or one device with every sensor under the sun), you sell a "room base", and a bunch of different monitoring plugs that can slot into the "room base".

If your laundry room doesn't really need a camera, it just needs a thermometer, you just slot in the thermometer plug into that room base, etc.