Agree with the speed to market issue, but also see some shortcuts to save very little in costs, especially a cost that would be passed on by a minor higher priced product but would result in a far more reliable device. They seem enamored by the idea that they have the ability to do something in software that normally every other mfg of similar a device does by adding a physical electronic sensor. It’s like an academic exercise to prove it can be done, but the reality is a very long learning curve during which unsuspecting customers will actually be nothing more than advanced beta testers and a device that may never be reliable. With these sensor failures becoming more prevalent, it’s just putting a spot light on the whole wyze biz operation.
But saying customers are demanding new products and features and they are rushing to provided them, I’m not seeing a lot of that. I never read a lot of demand for a scale - I think it had some of the lowest votes on the wishlist and core group on Facebook never had many demands for it either. Of course this doesn’t cover other media channels. Meanwhile the top demanded features are ignored or set to “researching” which sounds like MBA talk for back burner. Yes, they did CMC but that defeats ability to use the new person detection. Give with one hand, take with the other. Most other new features have been minor. Meanwhile new product users constantly report bugs and unreliable performance. Maybe a big part of the problems could be the heavy reliance on their cloud - poor internet connectivity and functionality fails or becomes limited, maybe only a minimal feature set controlled locally continues to work. Hard to know but in any case, wyze needs to actually get wise.
I don’t have sensors but have been considering some. But I’m holding off now. Will follow this topic to see if things improve.