An actual Roadmap?


This is really a bad name for what this forum section is about.

Roadmap implies that Wyze will be implementing it at some point. Look at all the tech companies posting roadmaps, and you would see that every one of them shows what the company will be doing in X amount of time. That isn’t to say roadmaps don’t change, they do.

Here, we got everyone posting feature requests or ideas that may or may not be implemented.

So, this is really confusing to people that don’t understand that “Roadmap” in this context means it is a feature request.

Would be nice if we see an actual Roadmap section for what Wyze is working on now, (a product or feature that Wyze has solid plans for).


Thanks for your feedback! The reason this is being called a roadmap is because you can filter based on tags and actually see where we’re at on everything. We’re looking into ways to adjust grouping so it’s more obvious. We’re hesitant to give firm deadlines until we’re a good chunk of the way through the development process with features but we want to be transparent about where everyone’s feature requests are on the list. We also use this to help guide where we should allocate our dev resources. :slight_smile:


Then How about changing the name to, “On Ramp” ?

That moniker implies, “You can get on that Road or Pass it by!” ?

Or even “Wyze-Trek” , as in, “To go where no other Affordable Security Cam. Has gone Before!” ?

just my 2cents ¡


My nerdy heart is leaping at the idea of Wyze-Trek. Big fan!

Do you two feel okay with the idea of waiting until we do a restructuring that we’re looking into and seeing if that helps with this issue? I’m totally up for revisiting this. :slight_smile:


lol. Nice.

The terminology is just wrong, you are not supposed to be able to filter anything on a roadmap, a roadmap is supposed to be a clear presentation, something that people / investors and so on can look at, and see where the company is heading, and what is coming up. It doesn’t have to be specific either, just “New product coming in Q3 2019” or whatever. Things that will never be done shouldn’t even be in the roadmap at all.

Don’t think groupings would help, since, again, things that can’t be implemented shouldn’t be listed.

Feature requests on the other hand, can and are filtered to see what is feasible, those that are, and there is enough interest in them get moved to the roadmap, showing that, yes, they WILL be implemented. Those feature requests that are not feasible would NEVER be on the roadmap, so, why change the terminology here?


Ok, I
I get it
Will get use to it!

For the explanation / clarification, as far as I’m concerned.