armistace

I admit my voice is probably not the greatest but I played around over the Australian summer with a "blog" creator using ollama and I thought I'd share some results... This is the first time I've done something like this so 1. feedback is appreciated 2. Apologies if it is terrible

I'm on Arch on my work machine and it started working with pipewire about 3 months ago... no config necessary just works as intended both screen and window. There are some others at work on Ubuntu LTS but that is because Ubuntu is using ancient packages.

agree with most points, recently upgraded to OH 3.x though and I have to say they have abstracted a lot of their complexity (particulary like the new semantic model) HomeAssistant I found harder to use for a very very specific reason, it didn't have a MySensors binding. thats it :/ so yes in general HomeAssistant is better, until it doesn't support what you want.

Looks interesting I am looking for a new private file sync application. Any plans for Arch Linux (Can build it myself but find AUR easier) and android?

I want to thank everyone for those links. I am learning R at the moment and I am finding them immensely helpful

Ok makes some sense but why not just provide the API and a mechanism to change where data is sent after you have decided not to support the device anymore? Surely that is not to burdensome and will give someone out there the option to continue using the device (and probably save some goodwill over the dropping of support)?

I am not by any means an engineer so you can most definitely take what I say with a grain of salt. But my understanding is that all that really needs to happen for IoT devices to be usable by a third party is for the manufacturer to simply publish the API and provide a mechanism for the end user to control what interfaces with the API. It doesn't actually require you to standardise the API as you have never guaranteed compatibility with any third party it simply requires documentation, which would have to already exist internally for development purposes, and on some level some loss of control. But surely, this way you then get to maintain control and development for as long as you want to support it and for those people that then want to support it themselves after you have abandoned it can as API is a known entity. I am probably fundamentally misunderstanding an aspect of the development of this somewhere but this does not seem that burdensome to me I don't even see the necessity of a standard that needs maintaining here just documentation of the API and a mechanism to change where the data is sent. Hell if you want to maintain control for the life of the device fine, but what is so hard about releasing that information when you no longer want anything to do with it, what possible commercial value does that information hold then?