backtop


Print 21 comment(s) - last by Dr of crap.. on Apr 7 at 10:31 AM

The company is making sure the wave gesture can't be misread

Those who own a Nest Protect smoke alarm will have to say goodbye to the Nest Wave feature for awhile until the company feels it's safe for use.

According to Nest, the Nest Wave function -- which allows users to turn their alarm off by simply waving their hand -- could be activated accidentally, thus potentially endangering lives if a real fire were to occur.

Nest said customers haven't had any issues or complaints regarding this potential situation, but the company wants to fix it before it does happen. 

As a result, Nest is disabling the feature for now. It could be about two to three months before the fix is complete, but Nest said it will send out the software update turn the feature back on when it's ready. It's also holding onto any existing Nest Protect alarm's currently for sale.


The long delay is due to approval from safety agencies in the U.S., Canada and the UK. 

"We're enormously sorry for the inconvenience caused by this issue. The team and I are dedicated to ensuring that we can stand behind each Nest product that comes into your home, and your 100% satisfaction and safety are what motivates us," said Nest CEO Tony Fadell.

"Please know that the entire Nest team and I are focused on fixing this problem and continuing to improve our current products in every way possible. If you don’t want to keep your Nest Protect smoke alarm, we will give you a complete refund."

Nest unveiled its smoke detector last year for $130. It initially introduced a thermostat as well.

Earlier this year, Google bought Nest Labs for $3.2 billion in cash. 

Source: Nest



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Fool and their money
By Nortel on 4/4/2014 2:18:25 PM , Rating: 4
$130 per smoke detector and they remove one of the only selling points. Who is the target audience for this gimmick?




RE: Fool and their money
By Reclaimer77 on 4/4/14, Rating: -1
RE: Fool and their money
By Nortel on 4/4/14, Rating: -1
RE: Fool and their money
By atechfan on 4/4/2014 3:57:21 PM , Rating: 4
Or you could get one of the many, cheaper smoke detectors that work perfectly without gimmicks.


RE: Fool and their money
By Reclaimer77 on 4/4/2014 4:18:41 PM , Rating: 1
I'm not debating the usefulness of this device. Only that their decision to deactivate a potentially unsafe feature was the right one.

Is there a problem with that?


RE: Fool and their money
By atechfan on 4/4/2014 4:22:15 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see how the feature is unsafe. If you turn off the alarm, whether by accident or purposely, haven't you still been alerted that there might be a fire?


RE: Fool and their money
By Reclaimer77 on 4/4/14, Rating: -1
RE: Fool and their money
By atechfan on 4/4/2014 4:49:39 PM , Rating: 1
I didn't say you said that, but I am not one to just take what a company says at face value either. There doesn't seem to be any logical reason to take the feature away. So when something that sounds like made up bullshit is stated, then people are going to suspect their reasons. If it were not a Google subsidiary, you wouldn't be trying so hard to defend them.


RE: Fool and their money
By atechfan on 4/4/2014 5:06:46 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, and to pre-empt any "but Microsoft" comment, I'd be critical of Nest if MS had bought them too. In fact, as a MS shareholder, I'd be pissed they wasted my money on such an over-priced acquisition.


RE: Fool and their money
By Reclaimer77 on 4/5/14, Rating: 0
RE: Fool and their money
By atechfan on 4/5/2014 5:50:55 AM , Rating: 2
No of course not. You didn't respond with hostility toward Nortel when he criticized the product. That was just my imagination.


RE: Fool and their money
By Reclaimer77 on 4/5/2014 9:23:55 AM , Rating: 2
I usually always respond with hostility when Nortel posts lol. Because he always says stupid things generally. You, being sorta new, don't know his history here.

It was clear he never read the article in the first place.

I think what's really stupid is this feature being put in such a device initially. I certainly don't see a need to criticize their removing of it.


RE: Fool and their money
By atechfan on 4/5/2014 2:46:14 PM , Rating: 2
I apologize. It looked like more knee-jerk Google defense. I wasn't trying to start a fight here.


RE: Fool and their money
By Reclaimer77 on 4/5/2014 8:36:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I wasn't trying to start a fight here.


Okay but from my point of view, it certainly feels as if you were. On a variety of topics lately.


RE: Fool and their money
By Belegost on 4/4/2014 4:12:17 PM , Rating: 2
That seems a bit exaggerated.

If the alarm is active then anyone within range to activate the wave feature is aware the alarm has been triggered. (Unless they are deaf, in which case this alarm is useless and they should have the bright light strobe type) Thus the alarm must have alerted them to the possibility of fire.

At this point even if the alarm is "accidentally" turned off it has served it's purpose, people are aware.

And further I question the ability to "accidentally" turn off the alarm at this point. If you are aware of the possibility of fire, there's no value in dealing with the situation while having a piercingly loud screeching sound assaulting your ears - I mean calling 911 sort of requires having it off.


RE: Fool and their money
By Solandri on 4/4/2014 4:58:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
At this point even if the alarm is "accidentally" turned off it has served it's purpose, people are aware.

Not really. The smoke detector at my old house would trigger every time I fried something. I would then open the window and it would turn off after a minute. Several of my friends report similar behavior with their kitchen smoke detector.

A person in another room could assume that's what happened if there were a real fire, and someone accidentally turned off a Nest alarm.


RE: Fool and their money
By atechfan on 4/4/2014 5:04:50 PM , Rating: 5
So, if there was a real fire, you wouldn't alert the people in the other room? As long as you get out safe, it's all good?


RE: Fool and their money
By tng on 4/4/2014 6:57:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That seems a bit exaggerated. If the alarm is active then anyone within range to activate the wave feature is aware the alarm has been triggered. (Unless they are deaf, in which case this alarm is useless...


I kinda agree that having a device that someone can change the specs on at will remotely without you knowing is somewhat unsettling. I say that after having a NEST thermostat for almost a year and loving it.

I agree it is overkill. Also on the deaf thing, my wife is almost deaf and might not hear it if asleep. However that is why we have a dog. The dog will jump on the bed and wake her up.


RE: Fool and their money
By Belegost on 4/4/2014 7:11:36 PM , Rating: 3
My wife is profoundly deaf, we have one that has a very bright strobe light, you may want to look into it.


By Milliamp on 4/5/2014 8:03:58 AM , Rating: 2
They pulled the product from Amazon and from the Nest website. How long does waving at it disable it for? I assume people walking past it were being interpreted as waving it and thus disabling it even when it was not in an alarmed state?

Couldn't they just change the detector to only disable from wave if its already ringing instead of a non-alarmed state? That way if there is a fire you accidentally disable it its assumed since you are moving under it while ringing you would know if its a real fire or not.

Even if they disable the feature and let you disable it from your phone it beats having to get a chair and remove the batteries every time you cook something that smokes.

I considered buying it but a lot of the reviews weren't great even before this. I'm a happy owner of the thermostat though.




OK
By Dr of crap on 4/7/2014 10:31:27 AM , Rating: 2
I just went through and replaced my detectors since they were 10 years old.

I have them all wired together so that if one goes off they all do.

I DO NOT have one close to the kitchen so that we do not have to fan one to make a burnt dinner cause one to go off.

AND for the quantity of 6 detectors, I spent less than $100!
Guess the replacement detectors I just installed in my house are just not good enough.

Thanks, but no Nest for me!




“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki