@jjhudak - I would respectfully disagree. It is not possible to pre-plan for every possible feature from the start and plan the architecture for it. Startups always try to build as much as need to get the features they know/planed for to get out. And as needed they will make architectural changes.
Having said that, if the cost of re-architecture (if any needed) is high, it will get prioritized lower “appropriately” - hope it is not the case with this feature. If the demand and business values for the feature is big enough, they end up doing faster.
As of now, Wyze doesn’t have any subscription model etc. which actually makes it different from so many other like products (Nest, Arlo, Foscam, Yi etc etc etc). If Wyze decideto continue this route, then this feature could be implemented - but if Wyze gets greedy and becomes one among many others, then they will lose their differentiation and will not extend this feature.
My request to Wyze is - please don’t use feature blockage as a way to make revenue - instead use “ease of use” to make a compelling case for why customers should subscribe to a feature. I see a good amount of DIY user interest in this product - just like RasberryPi etc. - Wyze should leverage and benefit from it and even use that for customer demand validation of features at 0 cost and then implementing the feature in demand with higher quality and better integration making it worth while for folks to pay for the service.