Comcast Offering Home Security Bundle 102
vaporland writes "Bloomberg reports that media giant Comcast has begun offering home security bundles with cable or phone service in selected markets. From the article: 'The Philadelphia-based company is starting Xfinity Home Security in seven markets for $39.95 a month. It lets users remotely adjust lights and thermostats, watch cameras, and get e-mail or text alerts when doors and windows are opened and closed. Customers can watch live video of their homes on an Xfinity website or with an Apple Inc. iPad application.'"
Re: (Score:2)
Comcast offers new, unnecessary product at exorbitant rates.
And you just know every bit of that service will count against their cap.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if when you buy things from Comcast you get the privilege of paying twice what people in other markets pay for comparable products.
Re: (Score:2)
OMG, Comcast is pinky and the brain!
Re: (Score:1)
Kaspersky is not home security, moron.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I was scratching my head on that. Kaspersky? Home Security? Nahhhh - but maybe I should google it?
Re: (Score:3)
RTFA FTW.
I can already do all these things Comcast is trying to sell, and it didn't take much for the customers employee's to destroy it all and go back to robbing the employer blind.
I can only imagine the fun consumers will have with this. Or the free tap Comcast may be giving the Govt...
- Dan.
Convergance (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
.
And that conglomerate has one of the worst customer service records of any corporation in America. It sounds like the making of a success story to me.
Re: (Score:1)
When fanboyism goes way too far...
Linking physical security to the Intertubes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not just Comcast (Score:2)
Re:Not just Comcast (Score:4, Insightful)
Sasktel over here in Saskatchewan has offered this for years.
Uplinks (Score:2)
Well maybe they'll finally start providing some decent upstream bandwidth then. Who woulda thunk it.
Re:Uplinks (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
they'll specifically run all their blessed-and-packaged stuff over a separate logical link
But isn't this what you want in a home security product?
Re:Uplinks (Score:4, Interesting)
Since the two logical links(Comcast qua ISP, and whatever in-house Comcast services you are subscribed to) travel over the same line and assorted hardware, reliability is unlikely to be better over one than over the other, and having Comcast able to carve out swaths of untouchable bandwidth for its own services really just makes product bundling and squelching internet-based competitors easier and more tempting.
For non-technical users, the partition probably does have the virtue of providing a crude form of QoS; but the overall market effect of it is hard to be optimistic about.
Re: (Score:1)
But remember, unlike DSL where the line.runs to the calamity, on cable you're on the same loop as all your neighbors,
Re: (Score:1)
2- I'd rather share a firehose than have my own drinking straw. The gross capacity of a coax cable is roughly 4.1 gbps (38 mbps times 110 channels). DSL is what, 4 mbps, tops, unless you are living out back of the "calamity" facility?
Re: (Score:1)
Ya I wouldn't be too optimistic about upstream bandwidth or any other decent service from them until they get some competition. For what it's worth, my cable provider is pretty darn good in all respects except one: upstream bandwidth. I get a decent price, fast down speed, high reliability so far, quick resolution when it does go down, and they even showed up on time to install it. But VNC or RDP into the home box from the lab is painful. Ah well, good things take time right?
Re: (Score:2)
no, they will just lower the cap so you will get to pay more due to overage.
Umm... (Score:1)
" Customers can watch live video of their homes on an Xfinity website "
And what makes anyone think Comcast won't be doing the same whenever they want?
Re: (Score:1)
Centralized Burglary Map (Score:5, Interesting)
So now, someone can break into Comcast and easily see which houses have good stuff and don't have anyone at home. That must be very handy for thieves.
As a customer, I already don't trust Comcast and think they cost too much. Why would I pay them $40 a month for this? Especially since it would take away from my internet bandwidth?
added equipment like needed low on Sensors / keypa (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Only thing missing seems to be razor wire fencing and automated gun turrets...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it would take away from your Internet bandwidth - when you're not watching it, there is no data to be streamed. And when you're watching you're normally away from home so no problem there.
Anyway, while I basically like the idea to keep an eye on your property from afar, the one thing I'd be most worried about is the security of the system itself. How to make sure that only authorised people can access the cameras, and no-one else, not even Comcast staff?
Having this over a centralised system
The real added value: (Score:5, Funny)
You get relevant targeted advertisements from consumer electronics companies right after you stereo gets stolen.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Or you get an email from GoodVibrations that says "Hi, we noticed your bottle of lube is about to run out. Please click the instant-order button below, to be taken to our website and purchase a fresh bottle.!"
get interactive (Score:4, Funny)
Comcast Exec: [logs into service] hmm, why does my home thermostat read 666?
Re: (Score:1)
Because I'd otherwise sweat and swelter to death in a neoprene suit.
Re: (Score:2)
None of them do, of course. Why would they pay that much money for a crappy service?
Oblig. (Score:1)
In Soviet Russia, cable watches you.
Taking it into the 21st Century... (Score:2)
"...Customers can watch live video of their homes on an Xfinity website or with an Apple Inc. iPad application.'"
You misspelled Criminals.
Oh yeah, "security" (Score:3)
Homeowner: Who is he?
Philadelphia Police: He claims he is from "Verizon" and that he was here to "install FiOS", whatever that means.
comcast (Score:1)
this better be SELinux compatible
I would NEVER put the security of the house in the hands of Microsoft
No downside (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because Larry Ellison wasn't available to personally menace that many people?
How hard is security to do? (Score:1)
Has anyone else considered this as a business?
My experience with it (Score:4, Informative)
I have the service. Allow me to enlighten you as to what it is ( and isn't ).
First, you MUST have a router feeding the house network. You need an available eth connection as well for the alarm head unit. The unit is NOT static IP configured, it's dhcp so it will be begging the router for an IP address. Force a static on it from the router and it will be thrilled. Head unit is listening on port 80 so you need to forward the port through the firewall to allow net access. Yeah every scan on Earth will see it so I suspect your router logs are gonna jump an order of magnitude or so. Hitting the unit asks for the install code ( 16 digit ) but I didn't test it past that.
The whole system is wireless so the main unit needs to be centralized if possible so the sensors can talk to it. The install tech has to add the sensors to the head unit and you don't get to play in the config once they're done. Preferred package is four door / window sensors and one motion sensor. Additional sensors are horrendously expensive ( $170 for a motion sensor ?! ) but the system is General Electric based so you may be able to buy your own ( Z-Wave compatible ) but they will have to configure them in the head unit. Head unit also has a battery backup with a cellular system in the event of a power failure or loss of cable signal. Head unit is broadcasting it's own SSID and appears to be running with at least WPA.
They fail to mention on their site that the customer is required to obtain an Alarm Operators Permit from your local municipality. Not expensive ($25 first year, $15 renewal) but necessary as the fine for the police showing up on an alarm call if you don't have one is expensive.
Email and text messages for damn near anything can be configured. System arm / disarm, tamper switches trigger, individual triggers for every sensor, etc. Make sure you have a decent messaging plan.
Remote monitoring, arm / disarm and system / sensor history are available once you log in using your info. Same for the IPhone app.
They need to add a swivel bracket to the motion sensors for better placement options IMO. Three year contract. $200 install and $39.95 month. Qualifies for insurance discount. IS a monitored service. Seems to perform fairly well. No real complaints to speak of so far.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually... this would be totally worth the 40 bucks if the police get called on every time the internet service drops.
It's about time (Score:3)
Maybe now all the established security vendors will create a decent offering that works over IP, rather than plugging their old technology into a voip box. I wouldn't trust my home security to Comcast, but the established security vendors need to upgrade their products off of telephone modem technology badly.
If you were on IP, a simple "ping" could be run periodically to make sure you haven't had your connection cut. And you can get more advanced, like viewing the status on a web page (we already have banking online, so this can be done right) or getting a feed of the audio and video during a break-in to give police a heads up if it's a likely false alarm or send pictures of the criminal so police know who to look for. The alerts would also be sent faster, and can be encrypted over IP, rather than waiting for the modem to dial out.
Call me paranoid... (Score:3)
... but the first I think of is the irony that Orwell had it wrong. The govt won't have to force people to install cameras into their homes, we will do it ourselves...
Re: (Score:2)
when I originally posted this to firehose... (Score:1)
I asked the question: Will Comcast charge me extra when intruders hack their security and start monitoring my cameras 24/7, pushing me over my 2.5GB monthly data quota?
Who else?? (Score:2)
Who else .. .. gets to see this feed .. gets to know my entry and leaving times .. gets to enable and disable my alarm?
I like the idea, but there is no chance in hell I'll ever allow anyone else to place a camera inside my home or be 100% in control over its defenses. Notifications, fine, outside cameras, maybe, but no internal feed is ever going to leave my place unless a member of the family permits it.
Oh, and no alarm system of mine is ever going to be solely dependent on a single Internet provider - I
A better product is.. (Score:2)
We will be releasing a new product in two months time that will allow you to monitor your home before they break. You receive SMSes with links to video trigger from sensors outside of your house and then you can set off flood lights, alarms, send SMSes, E-mails, gateway to other systems of your own etc etc. It encodes the video to WebM (I expect it's the first security product to do that) so you can save the events and all this is under your own control, not an external company. It's highly configurable an
Re: (Score:1)
I've heard about products that do that. Of course you can't let them in. Out product doesn't do that.
Actually, you could with our one. You could let them in because you could control a solenoid with the generic output control (Phidget 8/8/8 board). However, you wouldn't be able to talk to them. If you don't mind strangers wandering around in your house then it can do it for you :-)
Re: (Score:1)
Can you share more info about your solution? I checked the website but it is lacking info.
I see you are running a SheevaPlug - Linux? And what is being used as a middleware? OSGi?
Just curious on the implementation.
Cheers,
Re: (Score:1)
It is a Sheevaplug under the covers, but it's not designed to be user customisable product as in the users can login and do things in the OS. It's not using OSGi. It's a standalone appliance (Black box). However, we have designed it to be very flexible. There are several different types of inputs that a user can provide to the box as events
* X10 events from wireless PIRs
* HTTP events as in a user can define button groups and button titles and then we
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks Kim - seems quite a good concept - I can even see the possibilities of future expansion on other Home Automation areas besides security.
As an OSGi / Smart Home / Home Automation developer I'm quite interest on the implementation details of these solutions, so thanks for taking the time replying.
I'll keep an eye on your site for future updates.
Re: (Score:1)
Your welcome. We developed it initially to solve specific security problems. But it is indeed very generic and includes some simple to use but none the less quite flexible state control so as to keep it's potential applications flexible. We'll see what kind of things users are interested in.
We will try and generate as much news as possible when we launch, so hopefully you will notice :-) As we will be amongst the very first consumer hardware products to support WebM this shouldn't be too much trouble.
Cheers
Re: (Score:2)
Note to Self (Score:2)
This isn't new (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I believe it has only been in test markets up til now. This looks like they are beginning to roll this out.
Re: (Score:1)
creepy... (Score:1)
don't like the idea of video feeds in my home that are centralized to any company. If I ever set up video feeds, I'd want to host them on my own server/router and login to view.
Is this a Slashdot article or an ad? (Score:2)
This looks like transcribed verbiage right off the sales brochure. At least in the past the Slashdot folk have rewritten the ad to be a bit more oblique. What's next? \/1agr/\ by Comcast ads in Slashdot?
In any case, anyone who would trust their security with Comcast is a fool, just as is anyone who uses their internet service.