Re:Google Forcing Nest Cameras’ Visual Indicator Light To Be On
by exclusiv on Wednesday August 14, 2019 @11:27PM
(#20702343)
I wouldn't trust it as a baby cam - the Nest or anything that relies on wifi. If you do, probably a good idea to add a cheap audio monitor as well.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Google Forcing Nest Cameras’ Visual Indicator Light To Be On
by stickfigure on Thursday August 15, 2019 @12:39AM
(#20702638)
Why not? I've been using one for two years now. It works fine, and allows me to 'roam' a bit farther than a simple RF transmitter.
Re:Google Forcing Nest Cameras’ Visual Indicator Light To Be On
by gnicholas on Thursday August 15, 2019 @03:11AM
(#20703227)
I tried a Nest but went back to an IP camera because the Nest can't be monitored off a local feed — it has to go to the cloud first. Most of the time when I'm looking at the baby monitor I'm at home. Requiring me to send it to the cloud before seeing it on my local device is bad for two reasons:
1: If the internet goes out, I can't even monitor locally. With IP cameras, it doesn't matter if the internet goes out.
2: Since the camera is always transmitting to the cloud, I don't want to use a very high-resolution option, which would eat up too much upstream bandwidth. What I really want is to have moderate-quality footage going to the cloud and high-def footage whenever I go to check it in real time. With an IP camera, it's only transmitting when I'm actually connected to the feed.