Why the Smart Home Still Is Not Smart
A single standard was supposed to end the era of incompatible devices. Adoption is real, but the industry keeps inventing new layers to disagree on.
The promise was simple: buy any device with the logo, and it will work with everything else you own, whichever company made it. The industry even built the standard to deliver it — a shared protocol, backed by the major platform owners, designed so a light bulb and a door lock and a thermostat could all speak the same language. Years in, adoption is genuinely broad. The smart home is still, in daily practice, not very smart.
The standard worked at the layer it targeted. Connectivity is mostly solved: devices join networks, are discovered, and respond to basic commands across brands. A household can now reasonably expect that a certified sensor will pair without a weekend of forum threads. This is real progress over the bad old days of proprietary hubs and abandoned apps, and it should be acknowledged before the complaint begins.
The complaint is that interoperability at the transport layer is not interoperability at the experience layer. A camera that technically shares its feed may still hide its person detection behind a subscription. A lock that pairs perfectly may still keep its auto-unlock feature exclusive to one platform. Features live above the standard, and features are where the money is. Manufacturers comply with the protocol and differentiate on everything the protocol does not cover — which turns out to be almost everything a buyer actually cares about.
The deeper problem is economic, not technical. A device sold once, at a thin margin, does not pay for a decade of cloud service, security updates and app maintenance. The industry answer has been subscriptions, which users resent, or abandonment, which users resent more when their thermostat loses its app. Standards bodies can standardise protocols; they cannot standardise business models, and the business model is where longevity is decided. A connected device with a dead manufacturer is not interoperable with anything.
Security adds a third layer of difficulty. A shared protocol means a shared attack surface, and the update practices of the device industry remain dismal. Cheap devices with no update path now fail politely inside the standard instead of outside it.
The practical advice for buyers: prefer devices that work locally rather than requiring a cloud round-trip, check how long the maker has supported past products before reading the feature list, and treat any device whose core function requires a subscription as a rental, priced accordingly. For the industry, the next standard worth writing is not a protocol — it is a minimum support lifetime, stated on the box.
The limitations of this assessment: the standard continues to improve with each revision, some ecosystems are markedly better than others at honouring its spirit, and published data on device longevity and update compliance is thin enough that specific claims about specific brands should be treated cautiously.
Every claim above is sourced to a document, a named person, or a record we hold. Where we could not verify a claim, we say so. Read our standards and corrections policy →