This was actually a decision before that and is more of a resource issue. But now we’re adding wearables to our line so, now that you mention that, it may end up being part of the discussion. The actual answer at this point is that there are issues with our existing integrations so we want to resolve those and add the features we’re already committed to before we start going more broad with these.
As a long time Apple Watch owner, I can assure wyze there is zero chance I’ll ever switch. There are simply too many functions and integrations that enhance my life and device experience, especially due to the tight integration with my phone. Since being stuck home, I’ve had more phone conversations on my watch than my phone. I generally leave my phone on a table or desk so it’s often not handy. I can reply to text by voice dictation while I’m in the midst of a messy food prep. I get some wyze notifications but I can’t do anything with them. If the doorbell does not end up with some watch integration or app, it’s going to be of limited value. I’m not sure any others have Apple Watch apps, so it may be that none will be extremely useful for our needs.
I have a 3 rd party fitness app that allows me to adjust my hr zones since I have multiple heart issues. This allows me to realistically monitor my workouts. When I was at the gym last summer, the heart rate warned me of low bpm at some odd times, like when using weight machines after a cardio workout, and the ekg showed an irregularity which ultimately saved my life. After clinical confirmation of the problem, I had a pacemaker inserted that corrected the irregularities. Anyway, the Apple Watch is in a different category of wearable than the wyze band and those of us who have come to rely on its multitude of features may be a minority, but for us, the ecosystems that are more apple compatible may win out in the end.
@ChemEngr Thanks for making this case in such detail. I one hundred percent agree that I will not trade my Apple Watch for a Wyze Band. There are just too many features in the watch along with its tight integration into the Apple ecosystem that make it so compelling.
I would add from my marketing experience that is would be a mistake to say that adding the best Wyze device support to only the Wyze Band to give it a “marketing advantage” is a losing strategy. Instead give the best support to the devices your users are using the most or that best fit your desired profile.
Perhaps I’m going down a rabbit hole here, but perhaps a solution would be HomeKit integration? I know this is a large hurdle in and of itself, but it would also potentially eliminate the need for a watchOS stand-alone binary or watch extension. As HomeKit already has its own dedicated app on watchOS.
I for one have always wanted HomeKit integration.
I get that HomeKit requires some hardware overhauls that aren’t quite compatible with the current generation. So integration with Siri Shortcuts in the interim could allow us to add some cool, helpful automations.
I setup an old netbook to run lubuntu and homebridge via hoobs with the wyze plugin just so I could try some devices in the home app. It works surprisingly well for the bulbs and plugs and does offer a higher level of convenience and makes the devices that much more useful. As a longtime iOS user, this feature never interested me until I tried it and now with access via my watch, there’s no turning back for me. I’ve already decided when we move for retirement hopefully next year, if wyze devices are not HomeKit compatible, we will move on from wyze. It sad because they’ve pretty much said the existing cams will never meet the apple requirements and have never committed to new devices being HomeKit compatible.
#wishlist please integrate wyze lock with Apple Watch. I always have the watch on and it would be super awesome to use Bluetooth on watch to open the lock.