Not just replies but actual votes far outdistance the next closest - votes are restricted to one per user while replies can be multitudinous. Many replies are those offering workaround suggestions or follow ups explaining why a workaround is not suitable for a particular user or circumstance. The other point is that this has been on the wishlist for well over a year. So it is likely @masterep got it right, their focus is on wowing the market and the ensuing free PR - maybe add to that, meanwhile hoping to keep the customer base happy with the quick and easy wishlist items. On the bright side @UserCustomerGwen has been more active recently posting that this is not yet a dead item. No upgrade of status yet, but hope.
I try to walk the balance of not taking over conversations and putting in updates. I apologize for apparently not successfully walking that line earlier.
2 Likes
Thanks Gwendolyn! I appreciate that.
I am working with 32 home owners on my street and we are considering using Wyze for our street facing cameras and sharing each other’s feeds.
1 Like
You’re welcome!
That’s a nifty idea. 
1 Like
I think a hub would be the easiest and best option for wyze. Simply put, hosting a web-service isn’t cost effective, The hub can host a secured webpage on itself so any type of device can be used to view and access the cameras. Windows, Linux, MacOS, etc. It also can host its own wireless to keep congestion low on the primary router and connect cameras on the fringe of wireless signal. This can also allow the WyzeCam to function and be configured without an internet connection to work as a standalone product in places where internet access is neither affordable or practical. Personally, I’d buy a wyze hub if it were ever announced and I think that is the best and easiest option to implement, everything else requires web-hosting or a custom written application which is OS specific. This simplifies everything, you’ve already got the hardware and most of the software to make this happen quite easily.(I’ve poked around the firmware of the cameras, it’s a simple arm based board running a small linux os, the same can be used to make the hub itself, just use a slightly more powerful board, etc.)
And another added bonus would be the ability to save videos to external media like an external SSD/HDD for extra backup in the event a camera was damaged, etc. I know this conflicts with the cloud service model, but it would provide an option to those of us without stable network connections (My mother in-law forgets to pay the bill quite often.) and would be a nice central management point for those who want better storage/rollover/playback as well.
2 Likes
Oh I see, so to rehash, the idea is to install an emulator on the PC so that you can install the Wyze app within it, and then run the app in the emulator? Thanks for clarifying that. I was concerned that some app would need to be installed on the phone to act as an interface between the phone app and the PC, and that would be problematic for me because the Wyze app alone in streaming mode is killing my battery. Thanks again!
1 Like
Hopefully that helps until there is an official way to do it!I’ll vote for this idea. It’s the best so far - plus maybe it could allow for connecting all their devices so they could all function when the internet goes down, assuming power remains. Makes far more sense than what came to mind last night - had a thought of the current cam limitation of too little capacity to host sufficient code to do much else, so maybe use a usb connected add on device that could attach to back of cam - but then I realized the usb is most likely only connected to pass thru power, not data. But I guess that device could communicate over WiFi to the cam or maybe pass data via short cable connected to the sd socket - so depending on size, power requirements or other issues, maybe there is some merit to an add on, but I’m guessing those more knowledgeable (my expertise is chemical processes) on this forum will explain why it’s most likely not practical. But if possible it could be an intermediary between existing cams and a hub if current cams are too technically limited.
The hub idea is brilliant, as you mention it could possibly help extend WiFi and allow for onsite stg to a nas, nfs, or connected stg device. I got a feeling the outdoor cam may be coming with a hub in mind, as well as the doorbell cam which is going out to beta testing hopefully soon. I’ve only used the cam and plug so not really familiar with the full line, but I think hubs are being used to some extent. Expanding capabilities via hubs may just be the thing to address this and the nas wishlist items and elevate wyze in the surveillance and security market.
1 Like
I have purchased 6 for my business, need more. Will be looking for a camera that can be viewed on a computer monitor. Thats what I need. Hope yours will do that prior to my next purchase. Thank you, Bert McDowell
I have an Android emulator on my window 10 computer called Andy and I’ve downloaded the Android Wyze App into the emulator and I can stream my camera(s)
1 Like
just seen this today. not sure if its been mentioned on this forum yet, but at first glace it seems to be a great solution be it at an additional cost…
Dude, I don’t know how to thank you! Installing BlueStacks was pretty straight forward. The only issue for me was that I needed to enable virtualization; otherwise, graphics are extremely extremely slow (and BlueStacks tells you that). This workaround is good enough for me. The added bonus for me as an iOS user is that I was able to adjust the detection zone in the Android emulator! 
2 birds, 1 stone. Both of my issues have been resolved. Many thanks!
2 Likes
RTSP is great for monitoring using VLC and other media players but it’s limited to viewing only.
A dedicated Windows/Mac/Linux applications with the same features as the Wyze app would greatly enhance the user experience.
Also, by doing this, Wyze would reduce a security incident when using emulator’s.
1 Like
So will this feature ever be made?
As of right now, the official answer from Wyze that they’ve given here in the forums is maybe. They said they’re are looking into it and and it’s a highly requested feature, but no decision has been made either way.
2 Likes
For myself, if I was on the management team, and I had to satisfy the investors that gave them all that money to expand their business as disclose in their video. I would have to justify how large cost of developing a software application for two platforms, Mac and PC, and how this would generate additional revenue for all the already sold Wyzecams.
The justification for the financial model is a very huge barrier, In addition to all the future updates moving forward for years and years.
1 Like
Browser applications do not need to be made for Mac and PC platforms. Other brands allow you to connect to all of their devices by simply logging into their website. There is not even a browser application involved and certainly no Mac or PC specific application. It is because of this, that I am left with no choice but to buy another brand when I purchase 20 window sensors, 12 more cameras, and several other devices similar to Wyze smart bulbs for one of my properties in a couple months. I would like to purchase Wyze products. But you won’t let me. Because like you said, you are basing your decision on how much revenue can be generated for already sold Wyzecams instead of basing your decision on how much revenue you are losing in future Wyzecam purchases. I am one of dozens of people I know who are in the same situation and want to completely saturate our properties with surveillance equipment. But a phone app doesn’t work for us, so our decision is out of our hands. It’s in your hands.
1 Like
I’m sure you’re right that it would help them sell a few more cameras. It’s just a question of return on investment, resource allocation, security, etc. Whether they’d sell enough more cameras to justify the expense is a more difficult question to answer. It would also be an ongoing commitment, since it would require them to maintain 3 separate platforms instead of only two. But as the most popular wishlist item, you can be sure they’re paying attention.
1 Like
They would sell a lot more than a few more cameras. And creating a web interface to access their already existing system is not as difficult or expensive as people are making it out to be. They could even charge a subscription fee for the service so that those of us who need it can use it and those of you who don’t want it don’t have to use it. I would gladly pay. I don’t expect things to be free.
1 Like