I was thinking the same thing William. I am not a fan of technology that "thinks" it knows what I like. This include software. If I don't use a featue for a little while I either can find it or forget it's there. As for a "smart" thermostat, I think I can change the setting if my schedule changes....
One class of device that I avoid as much as possible are those that attempt to learn from what I do. They always wind up getting what I want wrong. Always.
What I want are things that will do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it. The "smart learning" feature adds at least one m9ore layer of complexity, and as a result is an order of magnitude less reliable, and far more likely to be less satisfactory. Besides that they always cost more.
We once tried a "learning" thermostat, and the results were not very good. fortunately it could also be programmed, which was a saving factor. Unfortunately it only lasted a year before ceasing to function at all.
One question about the pretty illuminated thermostat is about how much effect the display backlight has on the measurement accuracy. All display backlights create some temperature rise above ambient.
As a lifelong mentally disciplined communications technician, I rarely forget to set/reset my home thermostat. However, its setting, controlling a heat pump, isn't necessarily predictable on a daily basis. Since the HP efficiency varies according to the daily high temperature, I may turn it down and restore the temperature later in the day when the HP efficiency is higher, or not, as the case may be. I'm not really interested in turning my thinking process over to gadgets and doodads that promote mental laziness. To each, his own.
There are less expensive alternatives that use an internal clock. Is it that important for it to learn? There will be significant savings from a more standard clock-based one, just not maximimized savings.
I agree it's pricey. Over time, I suppose it wouldn't be hard to make up the $249 cost in energy savings, but I do wonder how many people will pass on this, even knowing that they could get the money back over time.
Appreciate the backdrop story, Jim. It does put things in perspective and design is definitely subjective when it comes to taste. I guess for me, the idea of wall thermostat is something that's functional and should blend into the surroundings, not jump out screaming, look at me, look at me. To me, that's what the Nest does regardless of its innovative and compelling functionality. Just a simple matter of taste!
Beth your comment about the styling of the Nest Product compared to a conventional wall-mounted white thermostat brings to mind an old debate related to quality and integrity of a products' design vs. its initial sex-appeal to grab a consumers attention.
Consider the case study of Motorola products in the 80's & 90's. Motorola was known in every arena (portable radios, consoles, pagers, cellular, etc) as the quality product with the innovative technologies, but styling and consumer appeal (including inter-compatibility with existing accessories) was always an afterthought.The guys in the Industrial Design Department were always the most ignored voice when it came to inputs on product definition, and always had to make the most frustrating concessions to their vision of product appearance when the design-effort hit the CAD stations.The ME & EE design teams considered the ID team as a support role only.
That all reversed in 2003 when the RAZR was first introduced.A rogue team of Industrial Designers with some supporting ME's and EE's produced the first RAZR in a Motorola closet, away from the visibility of conventional wisdom of the other product groups.
Well, the RAZR design proliferated, and as you know sold more than a hundred million units of various derivative versions; a quantity UNHEARD OF in telecom before that point in time.
Suddenly the pendulum had swung, and the ID team was now calling the shots, and were the leading team for all product development efforts in front of the more technical ME, EE and SW teams.The ID team argued, it's the appearance that grabs the attention first.Then, it's the quality and smooth operation the keeps the customers returning. A good point; hard to argue.
Unfortunately, the Motorola management culture faltered by swinging a full 180⁰, instead of seeking a more balanced blend of disciples in product definition.
Point being, there is today a huge faction of the product development community that still feel strongly about Industrial Design being the first point of a product success. The NEST Thermostat is a textbook example. – JimT.
It's not surprising that the world's first cool theromostat would come from a company run by a couple of former Apple executives. I forget to turn down/up the heating/cooling when I'm out for some time. Having a thermostat remember to do it would be a big help.
What should be the perception of a product’s real-world performance with regard to the published spec sheet? While it is easy to assume that the product will operate according to spec, what variables should be considered, and is that a designer obligation or a customer responsibility? Or both?
Biomimicry has already found its way into the development of robots and new materials, with researchers studying animals and nature to come up with new innovations. Now thanks to researchers in Boston, biomimicry could even inform the future of electrical networks for next-generation displays.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.