Arlo|Smart Home Security|Wireless HD Security Cameras

Re: Arlo Light announcement. Cool! But, why do I have to buy 2, and why do I need yet another brid

Reply
Discussion stats
  • 16 Replies
  • 25020 Views
  • 17 Likes
  • 10 In Conversation
NickSTL Initiate
Initiate

I currently have a 5 camera Arlo 2 Pro system in place at home, and it's working like a champ.  With the recent announcement of Arlo Light, I'll undoubtedly be looking very hard at the use cases for adding one or more of them at home as well.  

 

However, I really am disappointed to see that, according to the marketing info I just saw from Netgear, I will have to buy at least 2 lights, but even worse, another bridge?  Is this really necessary?

 

I already have a SmartThings hub, a Hue bridge, a Harmony Hub, and an Arlo hub.  Not to mention, of course, all the wifi equipment for the home network.  There is a growing issue here of extreme hardware bloat for every new idea that comes down the block.  Can the Arlo Hub really not be updated to understand how to conrtol the Arlo Light product?  This seems like either a lazy development team, or greed.  Not sure which I would prefer.  But, hopefully I'm interpreting the information wrong and we don't really need yet another bridge.

Highlighted
brh Master
Master

@NickSTL

Initially I was excited by this product, but now, not so much. I live in an older house where wall outlets are at a premium and I always assumed the base station would control these lights. I also have 5 cameras being controlled by Smartthings and at this point I don't see anyway to incorporate these into that system to use the motion sensors for anything else but trigger video recordings and turn on these lights. Since we don't have very much information at this point in time, I will hold off purchasing them until I see a real beneficial use for them. At this price, especially since I would have to purchase 2 additional solar panels, it would probably cheaper for me to hire an electrician to install some regular floodlights and let the Smartthings and camera motion sensors do the work for me.

 

Brian

andcesaro Guide
Guide

Completely agree. I wonder if the lack of answers from Netgear on this topic indicates that the lights actually do connect to the Base station but for marketing purposes this is not fully disclosed. It would be ridicolous that the existing base cannot act as it does with the cameras. 

 

JamesC Community Manager
Community Manager

Arlo® Bridge is a compact indoor wall-plug device that connects your Light to your home’s WiFi, so you can unlock its smart features. With the Arlo® Bridge, you can customize your Light Settings and receive instant alerts whether you’re home or away. Extend Arlo Security Light placement, with over 90ft of coverage from every Arlo® Bridge.

 

The Arlo Bridge must be used with the security lights, they will not connect to a base station.

 

JamesC

azbrd Star
Star

It is an extream stupid design choice to requrire another bridge for the Arlo light, the light should be fully compatable with the existing base that we all have.  Many of us with existing systems will pass because of this poor design choice.  The next question is, does the LIght use a different battery than the cameras?  It probably does which would require another charger & spare battery.

Guru jguerdat Guru
Guru

Your choice but you and I aren't in the engineering process to understand why it's needed. Also, not every installation uses a base station (the Q and Go models). How would you suggest they be able to use the lights? 

azbrd Star
Star

No, i'm on the consumer end where I'm forced to purchase and install another bridge IF i want the light when I already have one for the Arlo cameras.  I can appriciate the need for one if a customer has one of the camera systems that does not have a bridge so this light bridge should be an option and the light be engineered to work with either bridge.

 

Why not make us all buy another Netgear router while you are at it!

andcesaro Guide
Guide

Totally agree. Very poor choice on Netgear side. Up to couple of years ago the struggle was to find smart home devices. Now the struggle, for me at least, is to streamline the number of devices, whether they sit with the router or in the open. Ring already has cameras w integrated floodlights and no hub required at all. I would not be thinking about those if these lights connected with the existing hub but now i need two hubs basically (yes, one is an extender - yet another device), cameras and floodlights. How is that better than just one integrated product that Ring offers. Seriously considering the switch.  

Model: VMC4030| Arlo Pro Wire-Free Camera
NickSTL Initiate
Initiate

@jguerdat wrote:

Your choice but you and I aren't in the engineering process to understand why it's needed. Also, not every installation uses a base station (the Q and Go models). How would you suggest they be able to use the lights? 


That's what the engineering process is supposed to do -- improve the engineering so additional cumbersome hardware is not needed when the product gets to market.

 

You're correct, Q and Go would need a base station.  Given they don't have to have one natively, it wouldn't be a big ask to get your customer to buy the base.  But when you've just sold someone an unsightly Arlo hub for their cameras, telling them if you want to use the Netgear brand light you'll have to go buy yet another base station to stack in your living room.  

 

It really boils down to a laziness and greed.  Think about it, these base stations are just a low performance piece of hardware running code to interface with the devices in a common language.  There is no reason that additional software modules couldn't be ported onto the existing Arlo Hub as part of a firmware update.  Sadly, it's much easier for them to just push another little box on us and as an added bonus we have to pay Netgear for it.  They've no incentive to avoid hardware bloat unless we start holding these vendors accountable for these types of lazy practices.

azbrd Star
Star

Since Arlo engineering is set on forcing me to integrate a separate bridge for their secuirty light I will be switching to the Ring solution.  Good Job Arlo!

The_Wraith Apprentice
Apprentice

> There is no reason that additional software modules couldn't be ported onto the existing Arlo Hub as part of a firmware update.

The issue is hardware.  The Arlo cameras utilize standard WiFi communications.  The Arlo lights use Bluetooth.  The existing Arlo base stations do not have Bluetooth radios in them and while they could, it would be a complete hardware replacement for all customers who have a base station today.  I imagine some subsequent product offering of Arlo base station will eventually include Bluetooth so a "light hub" is not needed - but today, in order for Netgear to roll the product out the door, they had to implement a stand-alone hub.


Regards,
The Wraith
ShipShape Initiate
Initiate

I stupidly ordered these overpriced lights, but returned them after opening the box. That's whebn I discovered that even though I already have an Arlo bridge for my Pro cameras, the lights require yet another bridge of their own.  Hard to truly call it an Arlo ecosystem.  

 

Before long, my bridge will require a bridge.  Thumbs down.

azbrd Star
Star

You might be able to answer a question, did the Arlo light use the same battery as the camera's or was it a different one?

What surprises me is that Netgear is not requiring us to purchase a new router in addtion to the new light bridge!

ShipShape Initiate
Initiate

Yes.  The Arlo light uses the same battery as the Arlo Pro and Arlo Pro 2 cameras.

Master st_shaw Master
Master

 

 


@ShipShape wrote:

I stupidly ordered these overpriced lights, but returned them after opening the box. That's whebn I discovered that even though I already have an Arlo bridge for my Pro cameras, the lights require yet another bridge of their own.  Hard to truly call it an Arlo ecosystem.  

 

Before long, my bridge will require a bridge.  Thumbs down.


 

There's a good technical reason the lights have a separate bridge.  The lights use Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) and the Arlo cameras use WiFi.  WiFi is not needed for the lights, because all they need is to receive ON/OF commands and send detection reports.  The cameras need WiFi, because they need to stream video. BLE uses less power but cannot stream video.

 

The separate bridge for the lights also allows you to install the lights out of range from the Arlo base, or even at a totally different location than the rest of your Arlo kit, if desired.

 

 

azbrd Star
Star

Netgear engineering keeps trying to justify a very bad technical choice that requires a separate bridge for their light.  What they dont mention is that the original bridge we already have should have been designed with BLE built in, that would have been good, customer friendly engineering.  

 

Hey Netgear engineering, why not require all of us to buy a new router that has BLE built it while you are at it!

 

I should mentiont that the net result of this bad design decision will be for many of us to switch to Ring!

Sensei michaelkenward Sensei
Sensei

@ShipShape wrote:

Yes.  The Arlo light uses the same battery as the Arlo Pro and Arlo Pro 2 cameras.


Indeed. Same "part number".


My Arlo hardware: Q Plus, Pro 2 (X2), Security Light, Ultra, Doorbell, Chime
Discussion stats
  • 16 Replies
  • 25021 Views
  • 17 Likes
  • 10 In Conversation