The “Internet of Things” Needs a Fix

The Internet of Things will remain a cumbersome wireless landscape until it finds a way to connect to us

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In the late 1970s my parents bought a new family TV, the first we'd ever owned that came with a remote control. My mom was appalled: “How hard can it be to walk six feet from the couch to change the channel?”

Ah, but here's the thing: History shows us that convenience is a key driver in consumer acceptance of new technology. No matter how trivial the gift to our laziness, a product that saves us effort is likely to be a winner.

That, for example, was supposed to be the appeal of the Internet of Things.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


That awkward term refers to everyday objects that have been blessed with wireless networking. Usually it means that you can use phone apps to control them: lights, thermostats, refrigerators, baby monitors, coffeemakers, security cameras, lawn sprinklers, doorbell cams, robo vacuums, and so on.

You can start your car remotely a few minutes before you leave the house, so its heat or A/C has had some time to kick in. You can see who's ringing your doorbell when you're away and even unlock the door if you're expecting them.

So far, though, the Internet of Things has turned out to be the Internet of Poor Sales. At this moment, it's a good bet that you, dear reader, cannot control your washer/dryer from your phone.

But if convenience always wins, why isn't the public eating this stuff up?

Ironically, it's because today's Internet of Things things just aren't very convenient.

The first moments of ownership usually involve downloading an app, creating an account and connecting the thing to your Wi-Fi network. Sometimes that all goes well. Sometimes there goes your Saturday afternoon.

Then you've got the Tower of Things Babel to contend with: The apps don't talk to one another. You must open one app to adjust the lighting, another to change your speakers' volume, a third to tweak the temperature.

The industry knows about these problems. They're frantically developing standards to unify all this stuff. Trouble is, each big company has developed its own standard. There's Thread (from Google), HomeKit (Apple), AllJoyn (originally Qualcomm) and SmartThings (Samsung), among others.

That's right: the very act of trying to settle the standards war has resulted in … a new standards war.

Then there's security. Do we really want to connect our kitchens, heating and cooling, and other home systems to the great wide world of hackers? Especially our door locks?

Now, it's not true that nobody is buying Internet of Things things. Internet-connected thermostats, such as those from Nest and Honeywell, have had mild success. So have the home security cams.

But the surprise hit of the fledgling Internet of Things era is the Amazon Echo: a black cylinder that responds to voice commands, like a Siri voice assistant for your home. From across the room, you can command it to play any kind of music, answer questions, check the weather, and so on.

With each passing month, Amazon has been adding more features to the Echo—and quietly making inroads into the Internet of Things. Your spoken Echo commands can now control your networked thermostat (“Set the temperature to 70”), lights (“Turn off the downstairs lights”), music system (“Play romantic guitar on Sonos”) and power-strip outlets (“Turn on the fan”). It does all this, you understand, without your having to find (or even own) a phone or open an app.

Voice control is, in other words, a breakthrough in convenience—in exactly the place where the Internet of Things is least convenient.

But even the Echo and its inevitable imitators don't fully solve the Internet of Things' problems. Voice control doesn't address the security problems or the initial setup hassles and works only with certain compatible devices. Above all, it doesn't tackle the biggest challenge: that maybe, just maybe, people don't want phone control of their appliances. Sometimes you might as well walk the six feet from the couch.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe