I haven’t been to this forum in years but I’ve installed around 200 controllers. I launch the app today and see this add to pay $30 to add a vague premium feature that should already be part of the service. I see no mention of this in the forum or an email sent out to contractors about it. This is complete bs. If you’re ready to go out of business how about starting to charge a subscription fee. Stop making the app more confusing that it already is. You focus on the consumer market so keep it simple.
3 Likes
There was an email sent out today. I agree that the evapotranspiration should already consider this, I think this is more forward looking (proactive) and probably requires server side compute. Not sure, though. I really wish the Rachio hardware could do some of this onboard. Hoping for a Rachio 4 that can, even if it costs double 
I think this is more geared towards those with fixed schedules (and maybe flex monthly)…
My Flex Daily is dialed in pretty well, and only the absolute hottest, longest days of summer do I see any stress from a few non-native plants, but those plants just can’t handle several 110+ days, no matter the amount of water…they physically burn.
What part of it would you want to see done on the unit vs. the cloud and what do you feel the benefit would be?
+1 - I bought Rachio devices for smart watering. Smart includes knowing when it rains, to stop watering (which it does) and should include knowing when it’s really hot, to increase watering…which you want me to pay extra for?! It’s not the price, it’s the principle. It’s not a premium feature, it’s what it says it should do on the box. Lets find a smarter way to make more money…
4 Likes
I think it is clearly obvious that the evapotranspiration and general water balance sheet is not an edge calculation. A cloud server is involved in deciding future waterings (at least with the daily flex that I use). I’ve been told that the calculation behind it is pretty intensive and cannot be handled locally. In other words, your Rachio, even with local Tempest integrations, cannot perform any Flex schedule completely offline. I would like it to be self sufficient.
2 Likes
Agree. I launched the app this weekend and I was sad to see an upsell for a feature that probably should have been there from the start. Sometimes when you see this kind of thing it means there are new investors that demand a higher return or there is a lack of new ideas about where to take the product. I hope this is not the case, because this is probably not going to bring in a lot of new revenue.
1 Like
I figured that’s why there’s not an “End watering at” setting, but rather a “start watering at”, because the time between calculating and acting on it may have weather that changed the results? Not sure if that’s also a reason for no option to “notify me the night before watering”.
Anyhow, It seems like the unit has hours to calculate this, even a small processor could do it eventually. This is a critical design flaw with too many smart devices, that the OEM’s server is essential to basic function. Business ends or changes, and device is bricked.
1 Like
Yeah, I don’t know the details, but it might involve some models which would require a lot of RAM which then would be impossible to achieve at the edge. I’d be happy if the hardware supports that and more expensive, but you have a market to compete in and what Adrian is wiling to pay may not be what others are willing to pay too. 
The logistics of having two versions with different architectures is also expensive to handle. I am sure there are reasons and Rachio did not decide to self inflict costs upon themselves for no reason at all.
The last time I was concerned with RAM consumption was in my CS classes in college, and PC video games. I’d guess the reason for server side is updates to logic don’t require firmware upgrades.
Every company wants to sell a subscription. The VCs demand it. It is where the profits are.
1 Like