So, since a decision hasn’t been made, we can assume this is not included in the brand new cloud infrastructure mentioned below?
IF you’re an old dude managing even ONE Wyze Cam on a “smart phone” can be daunting with the tiny text.
Time for me to go back to my Raspberry Pi setup and re-learn Python and get going on a GOOD system that will drop files where “I” want them - and that is NOT the cloud. AND Wyze stated a year or more ago, maybe much longer that an outside model was coming soon. DUH, that is NOT soon. Raspebby Pi, here I come!!!
3 Likes
Excellent. I’ve got an unused Rasberry pi sitting on my desk.
Let us know what you come up with.
1 Like
Agree. Been wanting to get a pi to goof around with. But also got an old 11” notebook I been wanting to put Linux on - too many projects and too little time!
2 Likes
PC/Browser viewing doesn’t really depend on the cloud infrastructure, per se – not any moreso than the app anyway. They’d just need to build a web portal that accesses the same cloud data.
When they talked about “cloud infrastructure,” I assumed they were talking about revamping the backend. Some of those changes might not be immediately obvious to end-users, but it might have some implications for the notification system, since the notifications are tied to the cloud recordings now. I’m hoping it might make immediate alerts possible in the future. We’ll see.
With the Raspberry Pi you should buy a GOOD case with it AND the latest camera version. ALSO check out their forum as you need to download the OS and flip it over to a chip. Once your RPi is up and running the camera is simple to plug in. Make sure and buy the long connector for it also as you might want to place the camera where the RPi cannot be seen. It has most of the functions that Wyze has and it may cost more, HOWEVER, you have your own files on your own system. I haven’t done it yet, but (with a wi-fi dongle if necessary on your computer) you should be able to port files onto your computer. I believe that you can also run the camera off of a much smaller Raspberry board also, although you MAY have to set it up on the RPi 2, or 3, or 4. Good luck if you jump ship with Wyze as too many promises and not enough action there.
1 Like
Adding to the thread that a way to login and view streams from a browser would be very helpful! One of the top features i’d like to see.
1 Like
Even a snapshot mode to let you verify a camera is working would be great!
1 Like
There obviously already is a Wyze API. That’s what the Wyze app is using. That’s what Tinycam is using. It’s just not published. If Wyze doesn’t have the manpower to develop a PC/mac client, they should publish this API so third-parties can.
If they want, they can publish only a subset, so they can keep some features to themselves. But a PC/mac client is pretty much a necessity.
2 Likes
Windows, Linux, Mac client would be nice, they could easily build one using Electron.
I’ve submitted a concept device called a “Wyze Hub” for centralized camera upgrades, easier video playback/scrubbing, multiple device streaming, wireless network extension, and viewing/configuring devices from a PC/MAC/LINUX device (like a raspberry pi).
Having a centralized and dedicated device for this feature would eliminate the complexity of implementing this from scratch and the expense of using an online service. (For the Wyze App on computers it could connect to the online service for accessing devices when away from home and using UPNP and Hole-Punching access the HUB from anywhere.)
My concept Wishlist post is pending approval, so for now here is the concept image:
2 Likes
ehhh… could be cool I guess. I just want to be able to pull images off the camera automatically. And feed them to a website. However you make this possible is cool with me.
Adding an app to the imac store is not really different than an app on my iphone. With Catalina, that makes it much better than browsing through the web–seems like a no brainer… Then I don’t have to tie up my smaller devices to monitor an area
To everyone suggesting a work around or excuse please just stop. The subject at hand is viewing cam feeds using a browser. It doesn’t matter why, doesn’t matter other options, doesn’t matter how cheap cams are, or anything else. The ability to request and a voting system has been provided by wyze. If they aren’t going to use these things then take them away. Anything mentioned or discussed besides viewing cams on a browser should be split off into a separate discussion.
3 Likes
Some appreciate the work arounds as a temporary solution and this is the best place for them to easily find them.
1 Like
They use the voting a lot. That doesn’t mean they’re immediately implementing everything that gets requested. They’re well-aware that this is the most requested feature that hasn’t yet been implemented, and I suspect it will come eventually. But some things are easier to implement than others. This would require a lot of resources.
I suspect there are also things happening behind the scenes that affect the trajectory of this. During the Wyzies, they mentioned that they’ve hired a lot of people to rewrite a lot of the cloud architecture in the upcoming months. That would have implications for the app and for any potential web interface. So if they create the web interface before they revamp the cloud architecture, they’re likely doubling the work for themselves. Not a good allocation of resources.
I doubt people are going to stop suggesting workarounds in the meantime. The workarounds are useful for plenty of people. But feel free to ignore them. 
1 Like
Not sure they really use the voting since this topic seems to be winning by a landslide yet is has not risen from maybe later. Meanwhile they said they are working on things like a scale, and as I had figured a pay service - their focus is clearly in revenue/profits. The unicorns such as wyze are not finding investment cash an easy win anymore since the big private equity players are being burned by too many failing to turn a profit.
1 Like
Which, given they are not a philanthropic organization, is exactly where their focus should be.
2 Likes
Well I would gladly pay $10 for a browser option or for the API. That is almost double the cost of the camera.
1 Like
The thing is a cloud subscription is long term cash flow. A one time charge for a software package is limited cash flow. Nothing wrong with profits. I’m just not a big fan of subscription services although it’s hard to avoid them. I guess they could put out a PC/Mac piece of software dependent on a periodic fee. It’s irritating, but it might offer enough return to move this up from maybe later.
1 Like
I think that’s not a good assumption. (That they don’t use the voting.) The post you were responding to explains why. It DOES mean that the voting is not a direct one-to-one reflection of how they prioritize projects. “Maybe later” means they haven’t allocated resources to it yet, which may have several good reasons, as I explained in the previous post. It doesn’t mean they haven’t thought about it, and it doesn’t mean they’ve ruled it out. On the contrary, in this case, I assume they WILL do it eventually.
As for other products, do you assume companies can/should only work on ONE thing at a time? That doesn’t really make a lot of sense. They have a team. Some people work on certain things, some work on others. The people working on new hardware products probably have very little to do with the people who would be working on new software features.
As for revenue/profits – Yes, obviously. They’re a business. If you’d like their products to continue to exist in the future, and for your existing products to continue to be supported, that’s a requirement. It’s a requirement for any business. That also explains why they’d naturally devote more resources to new products than enhancements to current products like this one that don’t provide a direct return on investment.
1 Like