A whole building operating system, built on web technologies, which weaves together every sensor, actuator and human-computer interface in a building into a seamless user experience.
This seems suitable for a dwelling, i.e. smart homes.
For a commercial space, centralization is a feature not a bug. Because monitoring is already a feature of security and managing building systems is someone's responsibility...workers don't ordinarily band together when the AC needs repair.
I'm not sure I understand your point. The idea of the hub is to consolidate (centralise) multi-vendor building management systems into a single unified interface, for the benefit of the people whose responsibility it is to manage building systems (i.e. Facilities Managers). https://krellian.com/hub/
The terminals (e.g. a touch screen control panel attached to a wall) are just fairly dumb clients which provide access to that user interface appropriate for a given user in a given room.
What part of this design did you interpret as being incompatible with that?
Getting expertise for an ad hoc system is more obscure than getting service from an established vendor.
So who are likely users? Obviously organizations that can devote software engineering resources towards building a system to monitor ad hoc sensor systems.
So the first cost has to have a cost advantage for building over buying. And the lifetime costs of in house application maintenance have to be better than vendor service.
To put it another way, when is it low hanging fruit for software engineering resources? Including developer moral (thinking of what developers might rather be doing) and the clout of a physical plant managers to redirect engineering resources.
My comment is social and economic not technical. It is about the C-suite’s problems.
I'm still not sure I've fully understood you, but I think you're probably making some assumptions about the business model around this and how it would be deployed, whereas the blog post was just about the technical architecture.
I agree that it's easier for businesses to buy in a solution than try to develop something in-house. The intention is certainly not that commercial users of this operating system would need to write their own code. It is just one part of a wider commercial solution.
Perhaps that's my fault for sharing this outside of the context of the problems it is intended to solve and the wider business model around it.
Regardless, I appreciate you taking the time to respond.
6 comments
[ 0.45 ms ] story [ 27.3 ms ] threadFor a commercial space, centralization is a feature not a bug. Because monitoring is already a feature of security and managing building systems is someone's responsibility...workers don't ordinarily band together when the AC needs repair.
The terminals (e.g. a touch screen control panel attached to a wall) are just fairly dumb clients which provide access to that user interface appropriate for a given user in a given room.
What part of this design did you interpret as being incompatible with that?
So who are likely users? Obviously organizations that can devote software engineering resources towards building a system to monitor ad hoc sensor systems.
So the first cost has to have a cost advantage for building over buying. And the lifetime costs of in house application maintenance have to be better than vendor service.
To put it another way, when is it low hanging fruit for software engineering resources? Including developer moral (thinking of what developers might rather be doing) and the clout of a physical plant managers to redirect engineering resources.
My comment is social and economic not technical. It is about the C-suite’s problems.
But I could be wrong.
I agree that it's easier for businesses to buy in a solution than try to develop something in-house. The intention is certainly not that commercial users of this operating system would need to write their own code. It is just one part of a wider commercial solution.
Perhaps that's my fault for sharing this outside of the context of the problems it is intended to solve and the wider business model around it.
Regardless, I appreciate you taking the time to respond.