Arlo Pro 5S - unreliable junk (missing events, taking snapshots). Pro 4 in same location works f

[chicane]

I've had ongoing headaches with my Pro 5S cameras not detecting events or taking snapshots instead.

Today I did a side by side test with a Pro 4 camera in the same location. Both devices are on 2.4GHz and connected to an outdoor Ubiquiti AP (great signal strength for both). I did try the device on 5GHz and found it to be similarly flaky so reverted to a hopefully more stable 2.4GHz connection. Unfortunately not.

Since I have done this side by side test, the Pro 4 is detecting every event (and recording a video). 

The pro 5 recorded video once, completely missed one event and recorded a snapshot instead for the third event. With the video was choppy and audio partially missing at the start, while the Pro4 was smooth and had audio for the full clip.

Both devices are active under my subscription, set identical under the routine (to record video), and smart notifications set the same.

I've had this replaced with a new sealed unit by support for the second time with the same outcome.

Are these devices inherently faulty? anyone else experiencing similar?

[BrookeN]

The firmware has started rolling out. It should be completed within the next week. As soon as that is fully rolled out the behavior you are seeing will be resolved. 

[BrookeN]

I have this escalated to the engineering team. I will update the community as soon as possible. 

[WLynne]

I just got back from vacation and have no idea.

I am trying to catch up on what is happening with our Arlo Pro5S.

[Edinburgh_lad1]

So, yeah, it seems you're part of the group of beta testers that top level support mentioned in response to my complaint about the poor execution of the whole system. Here's the quote:

"As for the firmware updates, I can assure you that before any new firmware update is released, it is firmly tested by our Developers Team. In addition, we have a group of users chosen for the beta tests of the new firmware or Arlo Secure app versions. I understand that each situation and environment is different. We are testing the firmware on multiple Arlo products and new app versions on various mobile devices, with operating systems in different versions. If any bug or issue is detected, the firmware or app version is not released until it is fixed."

So, just to be clear in case of any doubt 😹

[chicane]

@Edinburgh_lad1 

Sounds like they are quoting what their goal is in an ideal world, we know the reality is somewhat different. 

[roundball]

@chicane @Edinburgh_lad1 

Beta Testing With Customers ???

😅😅😅

Instead of identifying, contacting, communicating with, explaining test plans, asking for Beta testers, explaining what to look for, providing contact / reporting information, etc…

They just download stuff !!!

And some of what they download is wrong / in error to begin with !!!

This Community would be an excellent place to start with Beta Testing, but the Arlo management mentality about honest customer communications would have to be completely revamped.  They need many more people like BrookeN…

[chicane]

I've been an Arlo customer for 2 years now. I've seen multiple bugs in firmware.

I think their development cycle is more along the lines of "just send it"

[roundball]

@chicane 

“Try this / Try That” 

[chicane]

@roundball you forgot the script readers in support blaming the customer for issues with their setup to deflect from taking any real responsibility (@BrookeN is the exception).. 

[roundball]

Amen !

I stopped bothering with them…just a waste of time.

[WLynne]

Interestingly, I discovered a firmware update for the Arlo Pro 5S 2K that is different from ours, which I presume is intended for the general public.

Arlo Pro 5S 2K

VMC4060

1.040.28.17_195_ac8359b

August 07, 2024

https://community.arlo.com/t5/Firmware-Release-Notes/Arlo-Firmware-Release-Table/m-p/1920885#M791

[Edinburgh_lad1]

So, it seems to me that you're beta testing firmware, but the question is whether you explicitly expressed a wish to be doing it, as one doesn't enter a beta programme with Arlo in the same way one does with any other respectable company. 

I explicitly remember that at some point firmware on my cameras, more specifically Arlo HD, was well ahead of what was the official firmware, and especially that Arlo HD is EOL; what happened then it was rolled back on my camera to the official firmware a couple of weeks later, and I found that very strange, without thinking at the time that it was probably some kind of field trial firmware.

Now, I'd never explicitly expressed a wish to be beta testing any firmware - and with a CCTV system one has to express that kind of wish, I think - so I'm concerned about such practices. I wish I'd taken a screenshot but I will remember next time.

[chicane]

@Edinburgh_lad1 the problem is the latest prod firmware has this issue. 

Just like the Crowdstrike incident, this is what happens when there are flaws in the development system. The text ramble you've been given from Support is simply the ideal world not the reality that we are in.

The business would prefer to keep customers in the dark and pretend issues don't exist. 

[StephenB]

---

@Edinburgh_lad1 wrote:

So, it seems to me that you're beta testing firmware, but the question is whether you explicitly expressed a wish to be doing it, as one doesn't enter a beta programme with Arlo in the same way one does with any other respectable company. 

---

FWIW, I agree that what they are doing now is inadequate.   I don't know if this is due to

1. missing serious bugs in testing
2. poor prioritization, so releasing firmware with too many unfixed bugs
3. or both.

As far as the process goes, they have two tracks:

• field trial users, which is opt-in.
• formal beta with beta agreements the testers need to execute for each beta - so also opt-in.  Note beta testing uses a beta Arlo Cloud, not the production Cloud.

They also slow-roll their production firmware updates, which lets them pause the rollout if they see a lot of problems in production.

Several of the folks on posting on this discussion thread did ask to be on field trial.

IMO, the problem isn't the field trial/beta process itself.  But the quality of the outcomes isn't what it should be.

[Edinburgh_lad1]

@StephenB you'd make a very good manager in charge of that development team.

There's a difference between loosely saying on the forum, 'I want this firmware, too' (= trial firmware) and participating in the trial fully knowing the conditions and implications thereof (firmware bugs, reporting of how this field trial firmware work etc.). This, I'm afraid, is a discussion board, not a feedback reporting site to the company of how one finds the firmware.  @@@l (sorry can't seem to remove these characters!) Clearly also, a number of users in this thread are fed up with how long it's been to have the issues address. I'm surprised the likes of Shayne and BrookeN are keeping up with everything in terms of reporting problems and keeping a track record of them, and I'm sorry to says this, but I don't envy their role on here: it must be very difficult. 

I'd rather have fewer updates with new features/bug fixes but with the knowledge that firmware issues have been addressed and firmware has been tested beforehand. This company has clearly a history of just firing whatever comes out of production, and then with users complaining that basic functionality isn't working at all (storage, notifications etc), not just minor issues. I'm not on here all the time, but what I've observed it's constant, with some firmware having to be stopped from being deployed in the middle of the process. I find this unacceptable and unbelievable, and I would consider a group complaint about that to Arlo Europe if there were enough users to join in.

For the money I paid for the system, I have no intention to be a tester for free and to *constantly* report bugs every time there is a release. It's exhausting, especially that support always asks you to reset the system, restart it etc.

[WLynne]

Yes, I expressed a wish to be part of the beta testing firmware.

I was frustrated at the time due to missing video footage, particularly when it failed to capture the incident of my front tire being slashed in the driveway and another time when my camera did not record when my neighbour's home was burglarized at 8:15 in the morning. On both occasions, the police were involved and asked for video footage which I was unable to provide.  Although I live in a nice neighbourhood, I am now hesitant to leave my home empty for a lengthy period of time.

[StephenB]

@Edinburgh_lad1 wrote:

There's a difference between loosely saying on the forum, 'I want this firmware, too' (= trial firmware) and participating in the trial fully knowing the conditions and implications thereof (firmware bugs, reporting of how this field trial firmware work etc.).

---

Very true.  But there is separate site used for both Beta and Field Trial that covers that stuff.  No idea if the folks in this thread who opted in were directed to that site or not.

---

@Edinburgh_lad1 wrote:

Clearly also, a number of users in this thread are fed up with how long it's been to have the issues address.

It clearly does take a long time to have bugs closed, and IMO their backlog of bugs and feature requests is too large.  And some bugs keep coming back (issues with badge counter and geofencing problems being two examples).

I don't know why that is, but I do think one factor is that they have a lot of products in the system solution that they need to keep running.  At the moment (by my count) that includes at least:

• 25 camera models (not counting doorbells)
• 6 base stations
• 5 Doorbells (1 audio and 4 video)
• 4 Solar Panels
• 2 Chimes
• 1 Security System
• 1 Security Light

That's quite a bit of stuff for a medium-size company like Arlo to support (and full regression testing has to be a big effort).

[WLynne]

I am one of those people who insist that things are done correctly and properly. 

I was invited by Brooke after several postings and accepted.  

[Edinburgh_lad1]

Lots of products indeed, @StephenB , but also remember that some haven't been upgraded for a long period of time, like HD, Pro, Pro 2, Audio doorbell, chime etc. So, the list of products is actually shorter than what it appears to be.

I'd also think producing firmware for both Ultra and Ultra 2 wouldn't be too much of a problem (in terms of the number of devices), as both are nearly the same, and this would apply to wire-free and wired doorbells. The improvements on the 2k doorbell are minimal in comparison to the previous generation doorbell and so it's not like a new product altogether that all of a sudden requires completely new firmware.

Also, I found issues sometimes affecting all cameras/hubs across the board (like local storage), so clearly some big mistakes were made in the firmware production process in general. The Pro 5 seems to be a complete disaster, though. 

Finally, if one manages a company and expands the portfolio, it doesn't really require a lot to realise that more people will be needed to manage that.

[chicane]

I posted the other day that my Pro 4 and Pro 5 cameras stopped recording videos (however the orange motion detected icon was still being triggered reliably). 

I posted on the Arlo Secure sub-forum, someone replied stating Arlo recently changed Smart Notifications to not only cover the notification but also recording as well (I had filtered out some notifications for this camera location). 

I have asked them how they found this out and if they are an Arlo employee. I am not sure where this has been enabled, via camera firmware, application or on the cloud hosting/server side.

I can't see this documented anywhere, feature is categorically incorrect - smart notifications should be only for notifications. Otherwise it should be called Smart Recordings to not mislead customers.

I wonder if this is another poorly thought out knee-jerk reaction by Arlo to reduce their cloud storage costs (I gather they use AWS).

[StephenB]

---

@Edinburgh_lad1 wrote:

Lots of products indeed, @StephenB , but also remember that some haven't been upgraded for a long period of time, like HD, Pro, Pro 2, Audio doorbell, chime etc. So, the list of products is actually shorter than what it appears to be.

---

I agree I counted some variants that have identical firmware (for instance, XL versions of Pro and Ultra).

While the firmware hasn't been updated for many in quite a while, the Arlo Cloud and App still need both to support the old equipment.  That can make the back-end code complicated.  And the old firmware doesn't help much as far as regression testing goes, since when the cloud and app change, they still need (at least ought) to re-test all the old stuff too.  And at the moment, they need to test against both Library and Feed.

I suspect this issue was one of the motivations behind the EoL policy.

---

@Edinburgh_lad1 wrote:

Finally, if one manages a company and expands the portfolio, it doesn't really require a lot to realise that more people will be needed to manage that.

---

True, but I've found that companies I've worked for often don't scope that properly - either completely ignoring downstream software support costs in their product managment decisions, or just underestimating how long their old hardware will be in use.

This is also related to customer expectations.  Most customers understand that they won't get any support for a 5+ year old smartphone or laptop.   But they often expect/demand long term support for other electronics.  Clearly that is the case for security cameras.  

---

@Edinburgh_lad1 wrote:

Also, I found issues sometimes affecting all cameras/hubs across the board (like local storage), so clearly some big mistakes were made in the firmware production process in general. 

---

No disagreement here.  Lots of issues across the board.

FWIW, the recent reports of people

• not being able to onboard old bases
• not being able to select "Cameras" in add device (when they use Library)

suggests they aren't doing full regression tests when they update the Arlo Cloud (and perhaps the apps).

[Killhippie]

Thankfully my Pro 5 camera received the latest update last night It took almost a monnth but I guess there are a lot of cameras out there. I noticed its holding the Wi-Fi signal much better since the update, I may get another after seeing how the new firmware behaves to replace my Pro 4 XL, depending if you can use an XL body on a Pro 5. But thanks to all with advice and help, it was much appreciated.

[roundball]

@Killhippie 

Could you please share the full firmware # that downloaded?

thanks

[Killhippie]

Sure it was version 1.040.28.17_195_ac8359b hope that helps. 

[roundball]

@Killhippie @BrookeN

Thanks, that’s what 2 of my 4 cams received a couple weeks ago as the 5s production version that replaced the Field Trial Version.

The other 2 5s cams received some old March’24 version that didn’t work, had to escalate THEIR replacement.

And incredibly they sent yet another pair of completely different, apparently brand new firmware !

Been waiting to get past the holiday to work with @BrookeN to get those resolved…

[roundball]

@BrookeN…hope you had good holiday break.

Just following up on this in case you have time to identify a new firmware that was surprisingly installed on two of my 5s cams?

………………………………………………………………….

08.31.24 – UPDATE – Two of my 5s cams Firmware were changed last night.  FWIW.....The replacement firmware is a brand new / never before seen #...and is not listed on the Arlo Firmware Release Table.

............................................................................................

Cam#1 was old March 2024 # 1.040.28.7_93_caa9491
Now has firmware # 1.050.33.6_71_393f539.

[ Cam#2 still has # 1.040.28.17_195_ac8359b installed ]

Cam#3 was old March 2024 # 1.040.28.7_93_caa9491.
Now has firmware # 1.050.33.6_71_393f539.

[ Cam#4 still has # 1.040.28.17_195_ac8359b installed ]

..........................................................................................

What is the brand new DIFFERENT firmware # 1.050.33.6_71_393f539 version installed on two of my 5s cams?
1) New Field Trial version ??
2) New Production version ??
3) Why is it different from the from my other two 5s cams ?

Thanks much…

[BrookeN]

@roundball I will look into this and update you as soon as possible.