Philips Hue: Automated Home Lighting Gets Colorful
by Ashu Joshi on March 1, 2013 12:50 AM EST- Posted in
- Gadgets
- Home Automation
- Philips
- Hue
- Lighting
Hue as a Home Automation Controller
Given the fact that Hue uses a ZigBee controller, one of the questions some will have is whether the Hue can be extended to support other devices. While it’s possible for Philips to create other devices that could work with Hue, I have serious doubts that the Bridge can act as a sophisticated home automation device given the choice of the microcontroller and the amount of memory on the Bridge controller. If Philips changes the firmware on the ZigBee controller in the Bridge, it could be extended to control other ZigBee devices in the home, but right now it appears that the CC2530 is being used in the Light Link profile of ZigBee.
Despite my doubts, the hacker community amazes me. A simple Google search brought me to this site, run by Ross McKillop. Ross has reverse engineered the HTTP protocol between the App and the Hue Bridge, and it appears that communication is done in the open, not with SSL. (Potentially the CPU on the Bridge just isn’t fast enough to make SSL encryption viable.) He has additional details, but then goes on to link to EveryHue as a source of further unofficial help/discussion.
Philips has stated their intention to open up the APIs and the app SDKs for developers. Once they do this I have no doubt that there is an immense potential to use the Hue in interesting ways that perhaps weren’t part of Philips’ initial plan. I can imagine Universal Remote controllers that are app-based tying into the Hue or high end systems such as those from Control4, or perhaps a GoogleTV app that controls the bulbs in your living room while watching a movie. Only time will tell what the hacking community will do with Hue as they gain more experience.
Closing Thoughts
The Philips Hue is at present a unique and interesting lighting system with elements of home automation that can be attractive to a diverse set of users. I found it was easy to set it up and I’ve really enjoyed the experience of having the lighting scenes and controls if affords. However, like any other consumer electronics device, the Hue has its pros and cons.
The good aspects include the aforementioned ease of setup; many home automation devices can get pretty complex, especially for the less technically inclined. Hue is relatively simple in terms of what it allows, and that helps to keep the learning curve pretty shallow. Once it’s up and running, it can provide some really cool functions, and it’s sure to be a great conversation topic at your next party. Finally, while we couldn’t fully test this, the Hue Bridge appears to have very good range so communicating with lights within any reasonably sized house shouldn’t be a problem—if your WiFi can cover the area, Hue should be able to do that and more (via its mesh network).
Not all is perfect, however. At present, there’s very limited extensibility or integration today. Hue does one thing and does it reasonably well, but if you want to use it as part of an existing platform you’ll have to do quite a bit more work. This is yet another app/system for home automation, and if you’re already invested into one of the other solutions you might want to wait for the APIs to open up and let someone else get Hue working with whatever platform you’re running. The other major hurdle to overcome is the price, which is often the case with home automation. At $200 for the Starter Pack with just three Connected Bulbs and the Hue Bridge, you basically only get enough lights to handle a single moderately sized room, or perhaps three smaller rooms. Additional Connected Bulbs will run $60 each (plus shipping and tax), and while the colored lighting offered by Hue is unusual, that’s still three to ten times as much as you’ll pay for other LED bulbs.
For those with the money and interest in colored lights, though, I think the Hue lighting system can be a great way to go. It provides a good base set of features and functionality right now, and over time I expect things will continue to improve as others get creative with the hardware and software. I would personally highly recommend the Philips Hue, but it’s definitely not the type of product that will appeal to everyone.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
94 Comments
View All Comments
melgross - Friday, March 1, 2013 - link
I began moving to compact fluorescents a couple of decades ago, and now I'm moving to LEDs. Until recently, LEDs have been too expensive ($125 for a 450 lumen bulb), but have dropped considerably ($30 for an 800 lumen bulb). One problem was that the brightness of LED bulbs weren't really known because standards weren't there, or being followed. I'm now finding that they are.I've experimented with a lot of these over the years, including naked chips up to 100 watts (vast light output, but terrible color, and requiring a massive heatsink. Which reminds me, the reason why these bulbs weigh so much is because of the heatsinks. That rear portion of the bulb is an aluminum casting, which you can tell by tapping on it. LEDs do get very hot. It's the lack of infrared light in the output that keeps LED light cool. But the LEDs need a sink for the self heating they undergo (a major reason why OLED phone screens are so dim. The hotter an LED gets, the shorter the lifespan, and OLEDs can't run nearly as hot as can these silicon, carbide, etc. models can.)
But one disappointing part of this review is the lack of information as to the output of these bulbs. ARsTechnica also did a review of these some months ago. I don't remember if they said what the output is. Without knowing that, it's difficult to know how useful these are. For some people, dim rooms are fine, but for others, the room must be bright. So what are these equivalent to? Are we getting 400 lumens, 500, 600?
BravoRomeo - Sunday, April 7, 2013 - link
Philips specs the Hue at 600, depending on color temperature. Supposedly it derates itself if it gets too hot, so you might loose some brightness in a poorly ventilated fixture.I found the Hue bulbs comparable to a 60W GE Reveal incandescent. In fact, it was able to tune the color of Hue to exactly match the Reveal bulb, but without the heat... All you do is shift the hue a notch or two towards red/yellow and away from green, and a touch less saturated, which is what the filtering on the Reveal bulb does. Very impressive.
foxalopex - Friday, March 1, 2013 - link
I've bought a few LED bulbs over history and they've impressed me. They're definitely the next generation compared to compact fluorescents. They turn on instantly and you never have to worry about breaking the bulb if you turn it on and off a lot. Granted there are some problems too. Cheapo LED bulbs like the ones you can get from Walmart sometimes have the problem of the ballast dying if used for a long time. I have some expensive ones too and they've worked great except for slight FM radio interference. They're also horrifically expensive but that's not a surprise since the LED components are pretty pricy. Still I think it's just a matter of time.JeffFlanagan - Friday, March 1, 2013 - link
Changing colors don't seem very useful unless the user is on LSD, but being able to red-shift home lighting after sunset could be very helpful for people who have trouble sleeping.Installing f.Lux on my PC to dim and redden the screen at night has greatly improved my ability to fall asleep, and I'd like to do the same with all my lighting.
halbhh2 - Friday, March 1, 2013 - link
"not to mention compared to incandescent lights you’re already cutting power use per light by about 55W, so it should come out as a large net savings..."'should' ??
Not.
Why did the reviewer stop there, without doing the very easy math?
Perhaps because the real cost comparison is the *opposite* in reality.
For instance, you might run 10 bulbs an average of 10 hours a day 365/year, saving about $200 on electricity in 1 year vs. incandescent.
And incandescent is *not* even the competition here, since most households run a mix of bulbs which include numerous compact flourescents. That's the real comparison.
In other words, the opposite conclusion is more valid: instead of a "large net savings" expect a *significant net cost*.
And that's fine if you really want these. Just don't fool yourself into thinking you are saving money.
Shame on the reviewer.
JarredWalton - Friday, March 1, 2013 - link
Full quote instead of your ellipses:"For the Starter Pack and three bulbs, you’re looking at around $1 per year, not to mention compared to incandescent lights you’re already cutting power use per light by about 55W, so it should come out as a large net savings (though not compared to running non-connected LED lights everywhere)."
Obviously, we could have listed CFLs along with LEDs, but that's not the point. The point is whether the additional power draw incurred by the use of ZigBee (home automation) is a concern, and the answer is that no, it's not. Compared to CFL (14W), even running 24/7 for a year you'd only be spending an extra $7-$8 per light. If you can get the CFL for about $2 compared to $60, you might break even over the life of the bulb but probably not. But then, a $2 CFL doesn't offer the colored lighting options or home automation, which is the main attraction here.
halbhh2 - Friday, March 1, 2013 - link
Ok, but I just did not read it that way, and I'm not a poor reader. Perhaps you should clarify the text, so that it doesn't give the wrong impression.Qwertilot - Monday, March 4, 2013 - link
Surely the energy use should be a concern?Its seemingly 0.4 watt continous vs 5 watt for the actual bulb, so if the light bulb is on for an average of two hours a day you've just *doubled* its yearly power usage. For many bulbs it'll be worse than that.
While the overall amounts aren't massive it really does seem to be horribly gratitious.
If this is going to scale out to whole houses/lots more devices then it badly needs some way to power the radios almost entirely off when not required. Some master controller device and a mode where they poll every minute or something.
darkcrayon - Wednesday, March 6, 2013 - link
You could help save energy with them in other more unusual ways... I have mine set to turn off automatically when I leave my apartment which guarantees I can never leave them on by mistake - Using a proximity app that senses if my iPhone is in range. And my hallway light comes on to greet me when I get home after a certain hour. Of course, running a server to handle that easily negates that power difference (of course the server is for a myriad of other purposes and not just for home automation control).glugglug - Tuesday, March 5, 2013 - link
> And incandescent is *not* even the competition here, since most households run a mix > of bulbs which include numerous compact flourescents. That's the real comparison.Which brings up what for me is the main flaw in this product.
The bulbs are type A (LED approximation of a standard light bulb).
Most fixtures where you would use that type of bulb have a cover over them so a CFL is suitable and already uses almost the same power as an LED.
This would be a lot better if they made the bulbs for PAR30/PAR20/PAR38 where LEDs are a much better fit, and the only 2 real choices are LED or incandescent/halogen, because CFLs are absolutely blinding in those types of fixtures.