Bosch!
I ran into the same situation. I specifically told the salesperson I didn't want wifi, and they told me it's only if you want it to operate from your phone.
I was done installing it and got rid of the packaging by the time I read that it needs to use their website for some functions.
Beside the fact that I doubt the store would take it back after using it for a week or two and havi go no packaging, I had no time nor energy to remove it and return it.
I tried to contact Bosch who keep redirecting me to some other I ternal department and eventually stop responding.
Do NOT buy a Bosch diswashe, even though you pay full price upfront you cannot use all the functions without creating an account on their website and have them run those functions for you.
I had sort of the opposite situation. I needed a new washer and all the top rated ones according to Consumer Reports included WiFi. I asked at Home Depot if the one I was thinking of getting, an LG WM3400CW, required me to actually use the WiFi and they said no.
I used it for a few weeks without ever even trying to set up WiFi and everything was fine.
Then I found at that when you set up an LG washer for WiFi you can get reports in the app of water and energy use. I'd actually like that, so decided to give it WiFi access.
I then found out that the WM3400CW does in fact not have WiFi. I think it might be the only current LG washing machine that does not have WiFi.
I suspect that Consumer Reports got confused because it does have LG's "Smart Diagnosis" feature, which gives you diagnostic reports in the LG app.
The way "Smart Diagnosis" in the app works with the WM3400CW is that the washing machine sends the data to the app acoustically. Press the button sequence to start a diagnosis on the washing machine and it sounds very similar to an old analog modem. The app listens to that with your phone's microphone.
Wouldn't it be great if a universal standard existed for devices sending their diagnosis via audio?
If there is a microcontroller and a beeper in there anyway, at only the extra cost of internal memory? Instead of a modem-type modulation and a speaker, make use of the bare minimum piezo beepers and send something that is universally understood? All of that without FCC, no extra hardware cost, no backchannel und thus little security considerations?
Yea - I know. Works much better to upsell "wifi enabled" and I'm happy that the appliances only beep rarely.
That reminds me of another thing I wish was a universal standard for major appliances.
I’d like to see them all have a USB port. If you plug in a thumb drive the appliance should create a directory named with the appliance manufacturer and model and serial number. In that directory it should place a copy of its manual and other documents that normally come with it.
...or just have device side usb port that shows up as a mass storage device?
That would be pretty inconvenient for appliances in places that are hard to reach with a computer, but definitely an improvement over the status quo.
An appliance could just have blutooth so it can connect to an app on your phone. With the machine not having a direct internet connection, the app can collect diagnostics, metrics and do software updates. Require you to press a button in the machine to pair it to your phone.
99% of the functionality with 0 annoyance and ~0 security/privacy risks.
But that still requires installing their app on a mobile device, and that app will still have invasive access to data and internet, etc. If we have to have an "app" I'd much rather it be a built-in web server (despite the inevitable security decay) that serves up a local-only web interface. Best scenario though is to just give me hardware controls and a simple display :-)
Apps require permissions and they can't just sniff the network willy nilly. Any IoT device on your network has way more access to privacy-related things than apps.
Why ?! Audio diagnostic is passive and (I suppose/hope) associated with a button (?).
Can we stop putting obligatory (hackable) active network devices everywhere ?
For basic diagnostics that is enough, but if you want to do more data-intensive stuff (including software updates) you need something more.
Yes! I've been thinking about bluetooth and a standard protocol and generic app. You'd get basic gui functionality for any compliant device, showing whatever device specific stuff the manufacturer wants.
Kinda of like a bluetooth X-terminal, but way way simpler. Think tkinter over bluetooth, probably sans canvas.
A bunch of people will say to just use wifi, make the device a Hotspot, and use your web browser. That's not a bad idea, but tiny devices aren't going to run web servers dishing out multi megabits frameworks.
> I've been thinking about bluetooth and a standard protocol and generic app.
A long time ago I developed a project called "Handbag[0] for Android"[1] based around a similar concept--it targeted the short-lived "Android Open Accessory Protocol" initially over USB & later also over network/WiFi.
(My project notes from the time mentioned a long-term goal of also supporting Bluetooth but that never eventuated...)
Handbag made use of a "generic" Android app for UI display/interaction and an Arduino library that communicated with the app over a binary protocol.
The app would display various UI widgets such as labels/progress bars to display feedback from the accessory and text inputs/buttons to accept input forwarded to the accessory.
While the project did not take the world by storm, I was reminded when digging up these links that at least one person called the concept genius[2]. :)
----
[0] Because it let you "accessorize your Android phone or tablet". :D
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20130205135845/http://handbagdev...
[2] https://www.doctormonk.com/2011/11/handbag-android-and-ardui...
If you afford a bluetooth chip you can definitely definitely afford a CPU that can push 2-5mb HTML files through it in reasonable time (you can pre-gzip it) and some flash storage (which you probably already need if you are any kind of metrics over time).
It could be hard to encode JSON messages dynamically for the actual data to show in the web application, but you _can_ use other protocols from a browser too (CBOR is quite popular for this).
>> If you afford a bluetooth chip you can definitely definitely afford a CPU that can push 2-5mb HTML files through it in reasonable time
Maybe not. I'm using a micro controller with specific peripherals and ADC requirements for a high speed control system. This has less RAM and flash that you can probably get away with for a web server. We'd have to add a bluetooth radio chip, but I hear those go for well under $1. There are all kinds of embedded devices that have few resources but could be expanded with cheap Bluetooth connectivity. I realize this is changing quickly, but there will always be very small devices.
Yes running a full blown web server with HTTP support requires a bigger CPU and RAM, but don't need a lot of RAM or CPU to stream an HTLM file through blutooth from flash storage. Serving data over blutooth for that HTML application would need some custom stuff (because it would go over blutooth and JSON-encoding for messages would probably require too many resources). My point is that it is definitely possible to serve a HTML file over blutooth, render it in a app through an WebView and have the app communicate to the device over blutooth without putting a beefy CPU in there.
The product I worked on the bluetooth chip was more expensive than the CPU if memory serves me right and we did something similar. But I am not a board designer or procurement expert.
Or flashing led and use mobile phone camera to scan it.
Back in the days infrared connection was a thing. I remember connecting my Compaq iPAQ PDA to Nokia phone.
Wonder if the modern cellphone cameras are fast enough to act as receiver and if this supported one way communication.
> Or flashing led and use mobile phone camera to scan it
Miele uses flashing LED as some sort of serial communication.
How about a wifi feature that is useful on a LAN and doesn't need 'the cloud'? The annoying part of wifi appliances is that network connectivity almost always means phoning home to some server on WAN. Home routers or a separate box on LAN ought to have functionality to be the bridge between appliances and client devices instead. That's a standard I'd rather see.
Because most people don't have anything on the LAN that can integrate with the appliance, and with just a phone app and the appliance, you're limited in computing power, background activity and storage (you can't store all usage data on the machine itself, and you can't rely on the phone always being on the same wifi to collect the data and store it).
"you can't store all usage data on the machine itself"
I can buy 128M flash for $2/10k
> Yea - I know. Works much better to upsell "wifi enabled"
A good marketer could give a catchy name to sell the advantages of that system too. Top of my head I can think of "near-fi", but certainly could be done better.
"Spyware and asbestos free"
Spyware, and asbestos free!
("Sugar, Free Donuts" - The Simpsons)
D'oh! I realize now, I should have wrote it as:
Spyware and asbestos, free!
This reminds me that Fischer & washing machines have an Easter egg where they can use that beeper to play God Defend New Zealand.
Or just codes that you can look up. Most washers have a small LCD screen capable of displaying two digits.
> Wouldn't it be great if a universal standard existed for devices sending their diagnosis via audio?
LG must have some internal standard for this feature. If they would just publish it and then that could be the standard.
Edit: to the downvotetards, if you worked in actual engineering like I do, then you would understand that this is how most standards naturally materialize. Someone does one thing particularly well, it becomes the standard.
No, that might be the beginning of the standard, because once it's published you realize they don't have a version number or vendor ID or any way to add fields other than the ones they hard coded or whatnot. But it's a start and it would be great if they did it!
This sounds like great use of technology if you ask me. The only thing I'd complain about is that data would not be E2E encrypted :)
In terms of a threat-risk analysis, the need of a physical microphone nearby i imagine more than makes up for the risk of an adversary knowing your water quality and electrical consumption as measured by your washer in almost everyones lives atleast..
It also indicates when you are home or out, and likely an estimate of how many people live there. It could collect more data.
Those pieces of data are combined with others, to form a full picture. This device doesn't need to collect it all itself.
Survellance of private citizens is arguably the foundation of the very dangerous problems in societies around the world, taking away freedom, health, peace, and for most, prosperity. When do you stop it?
If someone can get a bug into my home I'm pretty sure they already know how many people live there and whether we're home..
Ad if someone is bugging my home I think the data transfer from my dishwasher is quite literally the least of my worries.
> It also indicates when you are home or out
Yeah, being able to record sounds that the washer makes would probably also enable you to analyze things people say and extract much more information than 'how many people live there' and 'are they home or not'.
But fortunately for us, you need to actually press a physical button to make the machine sing the diagnostics..
I think you might have missed OPs point being about acoustically sending data rather than using bluetooth/WiFi.
If someone is close enough to your home to listen to your washing machine (or more likely, inside) they can probably hear/see you more directly.
> I think you might have missed OPs point being about acoustically sending data rather than using bluetooth/WiFi
I did! Thanks.
the use of customer-central water usage data piques my interest. there's a huge market for selling water and waste data to advertisers and other companies interested in consumer data. This is one of my friend's startups, smartpipes, which is a type of smart sewage pipe - these smart washers remind me of smartpipe (which supports dishwasher waste!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJklHwoYgBQ
Why can't it be E2E encrypted? If you can encode data on sound waves, surely you can encode encrypted data on sound waves.
Seems to me like the overhead it would add would way outweigh the benefit for the use case. I wouldn't want to wait an extra 10 seconds for the audio to finish transmitting every time just to prevent nonexistent spies in my kitchen from listening in.
The data/time overhead would be negligible. Engineering overhead to implement it on the other hand, perhaps not.
> The data/time overhead would be negligible.
Doubling or tripling the amount of data sent would be negligible over a wire, but an audio protocol won't be as snappy. Then there's the matter of trust/decryption. How are those keys being kept safe? What happens if I lose access?
You can encrypt data and keep the exact same original byte size.
If you're using symmetric encryption, sure. And then every dishwasher has the same symmetric key, guaranteeing it'll leak.
Everything uses symmetric encryption, including asymmetric encryption. Using symmetric encryption doesn't mean you'd use the same key for every dishwasher, you'd obviously just pair the devices and generate a new key, like everything does nowadays. Also, my dishwasher doesn't use any sort of encryption, and it still leaks.
> The way "Smart Diagnosis" in the app works with the WM3400CW is that the washing machine sends the data to the app acoustically.
My LG microwave has this too; it wasn't a selling point for me, but I thought it was a nice compromise by their engineers and product team.
That sounds perfect. This needs to go on a list for the next time I need to replace a dishwasher.
Smart diagnostic sounds good but make it available via Bluetooth or make the dishwasher run a webserver on the local lan.
Having to go through their site and their auth means they ultimately control the appliance I paid full price for.
> The way "Smart Diagnosis" in the app works with the WM3400CW is that the washing machine sends the data to the app acoustically. Press the button sequence to start a diagnosis on the washing machine and it sounds very similar to an old analog modem. The app listens to that with your phone's microphone.
This sounds far, far better to me - and just goes to show it's not necessary for everything to be connected to the Internet...
Why not just use Bluetooth? I'd be suspicious if the Dishwasher app requested permission to access the phone's microphone
You can implement an audio modem with much dumber hardware and it would be cheaper and less vulnerable to nonsense, especially if all you're sending is a few bytes. Then you also don't need to do FCC certification. Seriously bitbanging an audio modem to broadcast error codes from a $0.20 BOM microcontroller and a little buzzer speaker would be a fun project to give to a summer intern. (If anyone wants to believe a highly falsified resume and would believe I'm 15 years younger, I'd be happy to join your company for the summer :D <sadly not really> )
If your hardware has a clock >32Khz, you need FCC certification. It doesn't matter if it deliberately uses radio or not, last I checked.
For energy usage, a metering plug on the same outlet you use is very cheap. For water, just take the bendy pipe and put it onto a big container and see how much water it uses. It shouldn't change much so you do it once. Wifi and the whole cloud for this seems weird.
Acoustically? That's pretty neat and seems a lot less invasive, while still being useful.
I will high-jack this top-rated comment to link to a comment further below.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43469297
This comment has a link to [0], explaining, in plain text:
However, perhaps inline with the German attitudes towards privacy, the BSH "HomeConnect" appliances have a no-cloud mode built into their app without any hacks required to disconnect them from the internet. They do require a one-time connection to perform key exchange of a long-live authorization key, but from then on the appliances can be operated entirely disconnected from the network.
[0] https://trmm.net/homeconnect/ > They do require a one-time connection to perform key exchange of a long-live authorization key
What does my offline dishwasher need a long-lived authorization key for?
I assume only if you're setting it up to work "offline" with the app. Issuing a key pair to the hardware and the app from their ecosystem's trusted authority does seem like a secure way to do it.
Why can't the dishwasher or phone generate that key though?
I’ll assume they use this to “register” your product so they know when the warranty actually started.
Maybe it has some embargoed technology and needs to make sure it's not in China or something.
IANAL but I'm pretty sure the issue is distribution, so as long as they don't sell their dishwasher in China it isn't their problem. If someone buys and resells it in China then the reseller is in trouble. (Obviously it is a bit more complicated if they should know about this reselling but it shouldn't require online activation.)
Cool. I’d still prefer a “no wifi” or even “no app” mode, and control everything via hardware buttons.
Hardware offline UX gives me hope that my data would not be sold or that I wouldn’t have to pay for an extra subscription or watch ads. Perhaps it’s correlation.
Still, “no cloud” is a step in the right direction; I’ll take it.
Jeff mentions it in the post:
> Another third option is somebody has reverse engineered this protocol and built HCPY, a Home Connect Python library.
> But here's the problem: I already spent like four hours getting this dishwasher installed in my kitchen. I don't want to spend another four hours configuring my own web UI for it—which still requires at least a one-time connection through Home Connect!—and maintaining that as a service on my local network, relying on an unauthorized third party library using reverse-engineering to get at the private dishwasher API!
That's an improvement, but the requirement to use an app is still a serious problem, even if it never phones home. Everything should be able to be done on the appliance itself. Installing an app should never be a requirement.
I disagree. Moving stuff to an API with full local control is a UI decision. Moving it to the cloud is a privacy and obsolescence decision. Huge difference.
Using an app has inherent security implications (it's very, very hard to trust apps). However, I agree that in terms of security, using an app with local control is better than something cloud-connected.
My primary issue with requiring the use of an app is that apps are a pain in the ass. Allow the use of an app as an option, sure, but the appliances should be able to be fully used with the controls on the appliance itself as well. Requiring the use of an app is a dealbreaker for me, but for usability reasons more than security reasons.
...how long is "long-live" ?
We've all been there. It works, until the shareholders decide differently, and you can no longer use your dishwasher without connecting / agreeing to the terms.
The shareholder of Bosch is, with 94% of the shares, the Robert Bosch Foundation. Look it up to see what they do.
“ In no-cloud mode the only way to interact with the devices is through their app, and an app isn’t always the most convenient way to interact with devices in the home.”
Note that it is "the only way to interact remotely". That is, no cloud mode disables interaction with e.g. Home Assistant but not interaction with the buttons.
> I specifically told the salesperson I didn't want wifi, and they told me it's only if you want it to operate from your phone.
Don't know where you are but in most countries that would be a valid reason to return it at any time you found it out. They lied to get your money, willfully is almost never a requirement.
Yeah, misrepresentation is basic contract law stuff that would be generally valid in the US too, but:
1. there's probably no evidence of it
2. the workers at the store will deny it
3. the workers at the store likely have no grasp of contract law and will insist on whatever their store policy is
4. hiring a lawyer to return a dishwasher is a waste of time for most anyone knowledgable enough to know that this is a valid legal issue
Most retailers just have a standard return policy, it's a good idea to choose where you purchase a major appliance where you know the return policy.
For Costco it's 90 days for a major appliance, you don't have to justify yourself as to why. Some stores have terrible return policies, some have good enough policies.
I've seen snap together flooring, the kind that does not require nails, returned to Costco full of nails. I thought that was incredibly wrong but they took it back
Yeah, good return policies make things easy, for sure. But retailers with bad policies still have to fulfill their legal requirements even if their policy conflicts.
I will never buy anything Bosch again after reading this thread. What other reason could Bosch have for hiding this functionality behind a website and user account if not to monetize it down the line or worse, bring more of the functionality behind a paywall. We already saw what happened with HP charging to print and even the recent Chromecast outage where something that should be handled locally is pinging back to Google and then working.
> pinging back to Google and then working
I still have a bricked Android phone from nonsense like that. If you:
1. Factory reset the phone while not logged in to the last Google account on the phone
2. Have the Google account invalidated (e.g., using an identity verification app on a temp noogler account, ...)
You'll never be able to access the phone again. The "factory reset" maintains some internal state despite a scary message on the screen promising everything is deleted and asking if that's really what you want, and it'll require the last working password.
Alright ... annoying, buggy (the fact that there are two factory resets and one doesn't reset the device is a problem; either fix or delete the broken one, or make the scary message scarier), but fine in my case.
It checks that password against Google's servers though instead of the local hash, and it doesn't even matter if you know the password; the fact that the account is inactive prevents you from accessing the phone.
That's an anti theft feature. Intended to make the phone useless to a thief. It doesn't work very well, thieves manage to get around it somehow (not so much with Apple's version) so it ends up annoying the users more than it does deter thieves.
Apple is really really difficult about getting these unlocked. The carriers can't do it, you have to show them proof of purchase and have an enterprise support contract. With Google the carriers can just do it usually.
I managed a fleet of mobiles at work for a while, this is how I know. It often happened that colleagues returned a phone without unlocking it.
> thieves manage to get around it somehow
There are vulnerabilities. Some years ago when this was a new feature I got an android phone to use for development for someone. I just generated a new google account on it and promptly forgot the new email and pass.
Time to return it: surprise, it wanted the previous account to log in after a factory reset. I ended up keeping it and paying for it.
A few months later, after a weekend of googling, I found instructions on how to bypass it by using some vulnerability in the browser invoked in the initial set up, got to a browser window with an address bar, used it to download and install some apk with an older version of some system service, and used that to bypass the lockdown.
Of course, it's probably much harder than that now. But it's doable.
It is a very good thing that Apple is tough about it, given the high value of the devices, and how people carry them around in public. I very much want my devices to be useless to thieves.
It's still not clear how this requires Apple to do anything or why it should have anything to do with any cloud service.
The IMEI is burned into the phone. They should definitely make it hard to change the IMEI; but they do. If the phone is stolen then the IMEI gets reported as stolen and anyone who tries to activate the phone with a wireless carrier gets caught.
Why does Apple or Google need to inconvenience people who forget their passwords or encounter the conglomerate's bugs?
Stolen Imeis aren't always exchanged between carriers, much less internationally.
Even if that wasn't the case, as long as there were at least a few decently-sized countries not plugged into the system, that's where the thieves would sell all their devices.
Stolen Apple devices are still usable for parts (which is why parts pairing is not always a bad thing), and you can sometimes phish the Apple ID credentials from the victim, which is why stealing those devices is still profitable enough.
> Even if that wasn't the case, as long as there were at least a few decently-sized countries not plugged into the system, that's where the thieves would sell all their devices.
It still limits the market where they can be sold, because even there the customer doesn't actually want a stolen device. What if that country starts blocking them, or they want to travel anywhere that does? They could even get arrested.
It also requires the thieves to have a network to transport them there, vs. individual petty thieves who would otherwise be selling them locally.
> Stolen Apple devices are still usable for parts (which is why parts pairing is not always a bad thing)
Parts pairing is still a scam. They could check the part against a stolen device list without refusing to pair with parts from third party OEMs or first party non-stolen parts from other regional markets.
> Stolen Imeis aren't always exchanged between carriers, much less internationally.
Yes these often end up in Eastern Europe where the carriers don't really care about that stuff. And most people can't pay full price for top end phones so there's much more market for this stuff.
Even on legit corporations with tens of thousands of iPhones, Apple still gives you a lot of hassle if you want to get one unlocked. Just so this won't be used as a loophole.
> and you can sometimes phish the Apple ID credentials from the victim, which is why stealing those devices is still profitable enough.
Yep, I always see "is this text legit?" posts with clear phishing URLs in iOS help groups on Facebook, posted by people who had their iPhones stolen and think it's Apple Support attempting to get it back.
IMEI blacklisting is not worldwide. The phone can still be used in other countries. Also, rogue carrier employees are selling IMEI blacklist removal as a side gig on the black market.
Isn't this the same problem either way? The enterprising criminal can take a low level job at Apple rather than a low level job at a carrier, which is presumably one of the reasons it hasn't actually worked.
And if the problem is that each country is using a different IMEI blacklist then that seems like an obvious thing to fix. There are already treaties and agreements which is how the global phone network operates to begin with, or you could have US law enforcement set up a system to submit the IMEI to each of the individual blacklists.
I trust apple to have more intelligent audit controls on their employees than the average carrier.
And the calculation for the carrier is different. There's a inherent incentive on unblocking a phone for the carrier, as this means a billable contract. For Apple there's a inherent incentive in being known as having devices hard to unblock and thus, presumably less attractive for thieves.
> The enterprising criminal can take a low level job at Apple rather than a low level job at a carrier
To my knowledge, Apple has not had any insider compromise of activation lock.
This is why criminals try to phish the credentials from the victim instead.
Yes and even companies that can request it (I worked for one in this role) have to provide extensive documentation.
A phone must be purchased for us (with invoice with serial no) originally, or it must have been enrolled in our corporate MDM before getting locked. And for a while they didn't even accept the latter.
So even if you are at a third party you won't get away with sneaking these through. Which is good, a bit annoying sometimes though when some of our vendors didn't provide serial number invoices. We now require it but during the first years of anti-theft lock it was a bit of an issue and caused a lot of e-waste for us, sadly.
> To my knowledge, Apple has not had any insider compromise of activation lock.
First they would have to get caught.
> This is why criminals try to phish the credentials from the victim instead.
Either method would be effective and not every criminal would have access to an insider, or they would have to pay off the insider for each device and then still prefer to phish the customer if possible to avoid paying the bribe.
I want to know whether this actually deters thieves. Anecdotally, from what I heard, it seems that phone stealing is very much still a thing in areas with active pickpocketing.
It is not as bad as it used to be... Apple phones are only good for parts, which isn't much. I'd guess pickpockets typically can't tell what kind of phone you have before they take it, and Androids, being the exploitable mishmash of stuff they usually are, often can be unlocked.
In the US I am not worried about people taking my phone even in sketchy areas. I'm sure they'd much rather have my wallet or other valuables.
Even then, Apple also bind (an increasingly larger amount of) component IDs to the motherboard, so nowadays a stolen device can't (really) be used for parts either. (The display will not authenticate and Face ID & HDR won't work, in addition to a message showing that in Settings)
And to answer the obvious repair question -- yes, parts can be rebound to other motherboards etc., they just need iPhone Activation to pass first.
When five years ago thieves broke into my sons' class locker room, they stole all android phones and cash but didn't bother to take iphones. So yes it works or at least it did back then.
This isn't really consistent with the theft statistics, e.g. 68.6% of stolen phones are iPhones[1] (in the UK where they have ~44% market share). This is presumably because of higher resale value etc., but the premise that nobody cares to steal them anymore evidently hasn't panned out.
[1] https://www.loveitcoverit.com/news/changing-world/mobile-pho...
That could be because in many situations (crimes of opportunity) thieves don’t have the luxury of time to evaluate the model of a phone before they steal it. Google needs to step their shit up.
That isn't really consistent with the statistics either: If that was happening then the theft rate should approximate the penetration, but it's still higher for iPhones, implying that the thieves actually prefer them.
That makes sense if they e.g. have a higher resale value, but only if they have a higher resale value and the thieves are choosing them on purpose as a result.
I'm sorry that the reality in a locker room of a Norwegian high school is not consistent with British statistics.
Why would being in a different country change the effectiveness of the same system? The relevance of the country is that the theft rate has to be compared with the installed base for that type of phone, which is something that does vary by country.
It does because the thieves just want some cash to get a quick drug fix or whatever.
Even if they get $10 for a $1200 iPhone they are happy. And many components can still be salvaged and be worth more than that.
Yes, here in Barcelona which is pretty much pickpocket central, it's always funny to see the tourists going around with their big iPhone XL sticking way out of their back pocket.
At first I used to tell them (the way you would when someone goes around with their backpack wide open) but people were usually like 'mind your own business' so yeah. Better to let them find out the hard way then.
I get why the feature exists, but it's my humble opinion that a "brick your device" button shouldn't exist. Repeating myself, some alternatives with similar levels of antitheft whil being much more pleasant for the user:
- Don't enable that kind of reset functionality if that kind of antitheft is enabled
- Warn the user about the potential bricked device, and require an additional confirmation
- Don't require a ping to Google servers when you can verify account ownership just via a matched password hash
Antitheft is fine and dandy, but the implementation is bad.
That's Factory Reset Protection. You can turn it off in settings, if you don't want that security feature.
But yes, factory reset on Android phones only wipes the user data partition. Your phone has other things that don't necessarily get reset under a factory reset too, for instance: eSIMs (which is useful that it doesn't, in my experience)
"Factory reset" is a misnomer, a true factory reset would completely erase the internal storage and replace it with a clean copy of the OS.
If that phone is based on a Mediatek SoC, I believe a true reset is possible - look up SPFlashTool and read about this useful exploit:
https://tinyhack.com/2021/01/31/dissecting-a-mediatek-bootro...
Sounds like "Find My" on iPhones which is apparently meant as theft protection: as long as it's enabled the device will not accept activation with any other account even after a factory reset as long as the owner doesn't input their password and disable the feature.
A lot of buyers of used iPhones and Macbooks find that out the hard way, often because the owners don't even know about that. And actual thieves don't need to care about it as long as they find a buyer who doesn't know about it either.
Wow, I didn't know Android phones were susceptible to this. Apple did this to a phone I had but I assumed Google couldn't since there are so many manufacturers with varying setups.
My relatively new Bosch dishwasher has real buttons and an LED display. No wifi required
Looks like we got lucky. My unit is a couple years old and has physical buttons, a display, and no wifi. It's been discontinued. Looking at Bosch's site now, there are no models without wifi. The cheap ones (mine was in the "300 series") now lack a display, have touch buttons and require wifi.
I have button and LEDs, and it works fine without wifi for "basic functions", but for "advanced functions" like washer deep cleaning I would need to use their website.
I just bought one and yes, mine also comes with WiFi but it's 100% optional: all features are available in menus or physical buttons too. (Including the infamous rinse cycle the blog post mentions)
It's a European model ("SMV4HAX48E", I'm in EMEA) so it might differ by markets.
Same, my mum got a new Bosch Series 4 last year and it doesn't have wifi at all. Everything is on the control panel.
I think this is annoying, but given that the basic functionality works, it personally wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me. I don't normally do anything fancy with the settings on my dishwasher, I just want it to wash the dishes. I'd rather have a dishwasher that puts delay and eco mode behind an app, than some shitty dishwasher that doesn't clean the dishes well on the "normal" setting.
This reminds me of the EU regulations, which not only:
1. _require_ dishwashers to have an Eco mode, not locked behind anything, but also
2. _require_ Eco mode to be the default. If you buy a dishwasher in the EU and turn it on, and press "start", it'll be on Eco mode, the mode that uses the least water/power.
If you don't care about the dishwasher other than to turn it on, and it works for you, then everybody wins. If it doesn't wash as much as you'd like, or takes longer thank you'd like, you can still have all the other dishwasher modes (express, intensive, etc.).
The whole point of the regulation is to make the default mode the most energy efficient. I find it absolutely crazy that a German company, when given free rein in the USA, would actually paywall Eco mode. It's just mind-boggling.
The weird thing about eco modes is that they often don’t use less water or power. I live off grid, and just as a function of my setup I know exactly what consumes what. My Bosch dishwasher, on a normal 70C dish cycle, uses about 4.5L of water and 1.6kWh. On eco mode, it uses 8L of water, and 1.8kWh. Takes twice as long though.
Similar with my AEG washer - a 40 degree cotton wash uses marginally more water than a 40 degree eco wash, but less power - and is 25% quicker.
Honestly, it’s not clear what the economy is supposed to be. Intensity of demand? Except on each appliance the heater runs at the same rated wattage when it’s heating - just different patterns of usage on eco mode, more off and on.
That's a really weird thing. In the EU, not only is Eco mode mandatory, and must be the default mode, and you can't label any other mode "default" or "normal" to sway the consumer to use that instead... but it's also how the appliance's energy rating is calculated, and it's displayed prominently on every device sold. It would be madness for a company not to put their most efficient settings on Eco mode.
https://energy-efficient-products.ec.europa.eu/product-list/...
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:...
You can also see there that they're tracking the effects of their regulations and measuring how much less electricity and water is used. The regulations also set minimum standards for cleaning, drying and energy usage so you can't sell products that look efficient but require everything washed twice, nor can you even include a resource hog mod.
And it mandates the availability of spare parts for a certain number of years, and access to repair information, so you don't just junk the whole object.
I can only imagine "Eco" mode being worse than other modes in some place where there's not good market regulation.
I just checked my own dishwasher, and its Eco mode uses 9L of water and 0.83kWh per cycle. Other washing modes use 9-17L water and 0.9-1.5kWh per cycle... so it does conform to the regulations.
Just as an anecdote - that's not my experience, and I have a smart power plug to measure it too. On my Bosch Series 6 dishwasher, Eco Mode comes consistently in at 1.2kWh per cycle, while the intensive 70C cycle is around 1.6kWh. I have no way of measuring water usage though, but in terms of energy the ECO mode is really the most efficient.
Is 70c normal? Wont that mess up plastic items?
Yes, it's normal (should be above 65C, anyway). Yes, even "dishwasher-safe" plastic items often warp or discolor in a normal hot dishwashing cycle. I wouldn't put anything plastic or fragile in the dishwasher, but virtually everything in the kitchen is ceramic, glass, or stainless steel, so.
Why would a German company apply feel-good but ultimately counter-productive regulation to customers where they don't have to?
> counter-productive
The opposite, actually. Productive. Millions of litres of water and terawatts of power saved per year. End users collectively saving €1.3 billion on water and electricity costs in 2020 (in comparison to them having standard dishwashers from 1990 before any eco targets were set)
https://energy-efficient-products.ec.europa.eu/product-list/...
Not shown: water wasted from pre-washing dishes or having to run multiple cycles because the new eco-modes don't do the job properly. Also from manually washing dishes because the dishwasher is blocked for longer (and even longer once you add the extended drying time required due to the lower temperatures).
Shown: the regulations actually set minimum cleaning and drying requirements, for precisely that reason - the equipment has to do the job properly.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:...
It's almost as if they already thought this through when making the regulation.
Not shown: the EU cleaning requirements are inadequate in reality which is why dishwashers previously defaulted to higher-energy modes - because those modes are the ones that actually work reliably for users. It's almost like the regulations are ideologically motivated rather than having anything to do with reality.
That sounds annoying too. I want the default to be the one that does what I want it to do, clean a normal load of dishes, and do a good job at it. My dishwasher defaults to the last mode I set it to.
> I find it absolutely crazy that a German company, when given free rein in the USA, would actually paywall Eco mode. It's just mind-boggling.
... they didn't do that. There is no paywall.
Perhaps I misspoke, but needing a network connection, needing a smartphone, giving over your details, very likely getting marketing materials you didn't want via app notifications, or email, requiring to comply with terms of service, and at any time the company is free to rescind or change the offer, to me is "paywalling". You are paying out, giving them things of real value, over and above buying the device, and if you don't then they're blocking functionality.
All the functionality should be in the device itself, and require no sign-up or ongoing relationship with the company to use it.
It's annoying, but it's not a paywall.
> All the functionality should be in the device itself, and require no sign-up or ongoing relationship with the company to use it.
For a dishwasher yes, but I don't agree with that as a blanket statement. There are cloud connected devices that I really like. e.g. I like to run my Roomba on-demand after I leave my house, and I think that's an entirely reasonable use case.
Many other devices are useful away from home as well, which would all require internet connectivity. e.g. security systems, cameras, etc.
The internet doesn't need to be the cloud.
Security cameras are the classic example of widespread self hosted but internet-accessible.
Even the ones that have proprietary apps are often just alternative frontends to a web server running on the home network.
It does when the end user is being a NAT and a firewall and they don't know how to configure it. Legacy IPs cameras are notorious for being difficult-to-impossible for consumers to install, and when they managed to do so, they were often set up insecurely.
The typical MJPEG/ONVIF camera doesn't even remotely compete for the same customers as Ring/Nest/Blink.
> not a paywall
You pay with your data
Nobody uses the word that way. You give HN the ability to use all user-contributed data. Nobody would say HN is paywalled.
It's true that the companies wouldn't want you to use the word "pay", but that's what it is.
When you register at HN you know that they need some data to manage your user account, for the same reason cookie banners aren't needed if all of a site's cookies are required for it to function. A dishwasher doesn't need a wifi connection or data to clean dishes, and if it's not clearly advertised before purchase that's effectively a hidden cost.
Perhaps nobody uses the word like that so far, but if enough people did it probably would turn out better for the consumer.
It really is annoying. And if I have to switch modes I normally go for the 70C power wash instead of "normal" setting to make sure everything gets clean too.
> ... they didn't do that. There is no paywall.
Where I live internet access isn’t provided for free.
Where I live housing isn’t provided for free; are all dishwashers paywalled?
Y’all are doing acrobatics to twist the definition of a very common and clear word.
I mean, is Bosch the bad guy here or the salesperson? It sounds like they either lied or were incompetent.
I guess maybe both are bad. Yesterday I tried to configure a friend’s wifi router after the speed was suspiciously slow. It forced me to ask them for their Spectrum login info (the same info they use to pay the bills, not the wifi info) which nobody remembered and I gave up. Apparently this is required according to https://www.reddit.com/r/Spectrum/s/3sLnHuWgEF
So if we’re badmouthing companies that lock physical functionality behind a cloud, add Spectrum. Not that you’ll have much choice if they’re the only provider, but still.
The more I think about it, the more I agree with you. What if you have someone house sitting? You really need to download the Bosch app to their phone just to use the same dishwashing routine that you usually do? Blah.
Any alternatives to Bosch that don’t do this?
Cable company "Customer Premises Equipment" normally has provisioning capabilities built in, so that they can be controlled/reconfigured/reset from the upstream provider. You could probably call Spectrum and they can reset for you.
The reason they do all of this is exactly because of the scenario you ran into: people are always forgetting their logins -- and back when modems/routers didn't have remote provisioning, they spent a lot of time and money sending technicians out to physically reset people's equipment.
Mesh routers are requiring an app to configure them now. TPLink and Ubiquiti is a big violator of this. (Ubiquiti you can run a docker container as a controller... but still..)
How is Ubiquiti a violator of this? You can run their Java software on anything or buy a cloud key. I use an old HP thin client. There’s a good app and a well maintained webpage. If you enjoy pain, most gear has a cli.
I can’t think of a better way to offer the functionality in a way that works for so many customer segments.
He asked for no wifi, was sold a no wifi dishwasher and then later changed his mind and wanted wifi after installing it. Where's the misrepresentation?
No, the person above was led to believe that all of the dishwasher's features could be used offline, but that was not the case.
Usually contracts say that the entire contract is contained within the four corners of the document and anything the salesman tells you isn’t a contract.
If there was a written contract, it might say that. I haven't always been asked to sign a written contract for appliances at retail. But even if it did, those types of contracts can not disclaim away any liability for the salesperson accurately representing the product. Verbal contracts are legally contracts whether or not the seller wants to be held liable for them.
If the contract doesn’t correspond to what the salesperson said, wouldn’t the company still be on the hook for false advertising and/or fraud?
Bought from a dealership. I don't think he lied, I think he just didn't know about "advanced functions".
I never got the "no need for wifi" in written form.
Bosch knows how to perfect asshole design.
On some of their ovens there is a secret key sequence (like game cheat) to get the buttons working again. Every 6 months you need to do this otherwise pay for a service call to do this. Or have a defunct oven.
But it is not public info they have released (but had been leaked on YT)
So they have software with a bug and a workaround they won't tell you about. Ideally they should recall these ovens and pay for a replacement install.
> Every 6 months you need to do this otherwise pay for a service call to do this.
Is this legal? It seems like an excellent case for a state attorney general to sue them. At least extract a settlement with promise to repair the software bug. My favorite is my Bosh wall oven that uses 85C rated capacitors with practically no voltage derating for the control board that sits directly at the top of the oven. After 4 years, they gave out causing the display to dim to the point of invisibility.
We’re talking about 50 cents of part savings on a $3000+ appliance here.
Replaced them myself easily, but most people will end up having to call for service and end up replacing the entire board for hundreds of dollars minimum.
Actually no - I forgot about my Bosch dishwasher that uses capacitive touch buttons. Great idea for something that is often touched with wet fingers…
Capacitive touch buttons are #1 on my hate list for "inventions". They have all the downsides of touchscreens with none of the upsides, and they're imitating a control device so perfect that it basically hasn't been changed since its invention (the button).
Agreed - I hate captouch buttons, and would rather have physical controls every time. But in case you're curious why they're so common:
1. They're cheaper than mechanical buttons.
2. They're more space-efficient inside of the product.
3. They are easy to waterproof.
4. They have no wear-out mechanism.
Thanks, I intuited (1) and (2) but I hadn't thought about (3) or (4). I think waterproof mechanisms are about the only time I've encountered them where I haven't immediately despised them for total lack of haptic feedback and lag time between button input and device function--although that probably has more to do with poor system design rather than the limits of the captouch button technology.
My guess is that I associate them with lag because any control interface that cut corners on buttons probably cut corners on everything else, too.
Arguably speaking, physical buttons and wet fingers seem to be a way worse combination.
Sidetrack, maybe a silly question: Under what circumstances are you touching your dishwasher with wet fingers? Plates are dry when they go in and dry when they come out if you have a decent dishwasher.
Capacitive buttons suck, but they are no worse in dishwashers than in any other appliance, in my usage at least
I like to rinse the plates off to remove larger food debris prior to putting them into the dishwasher. It’s not always necessary though.
I don't believe this. It's illegal in many countries. No way a large German (after Dieselgate they all are very cautious) company like Bosch would make such a stupid move. If they did they'd face countless lawsuits and a ban in many countries (first would be the USA).
Not saying it was intentional
The only thing I have ever heard about Bosch major appliances is that people hate them.
I don't know where you've heard this. As a European when I hear Bosch I think reliability and quality. I'd much rather buy a Bosch dishwasher/washing machine over any other brand, wifi or no wifi.
I love my Volkswagen which has plenty of Bosch parts in it.
I don't hear about Americans with Bosch appliances very often, but every time I've heard (I suppose until today) it was a very negative review. Maybe the American versions are different, or perhaps I've just run across a few dissatisfied people randomly.
Their washing machines and dryers are best in class IMO. At least in Europe they still have a reputation for quality.
> Bosch knows how to perfect asshole design.
This is actually pretty low on the asshole scale.
Consider: dishwashing-as-a-service subscription model. You get the dishwasher chemicals in the post - the dishwasher automatically requests the next lot when it feels like it - and there's cover for repairs; for this you can either pay a regular fee or make in-app purchases of WashCoin, which you then spend when you need to wash the dishes. Maybe add a gacha mode to the app to win bonus wash / rinse / self-clean cycles.
Stupid question but have you tried turning it off and on for a while?
It might be something simpler
In Australia you're not required to keep the packaging, and the company you bought it from must cover your shipping costs. This would constitute a Major Problem[1].
1. https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/problem-with-a-product-or-...
That is a really good system you have over there.
I suspect the company would just respond “the dishwasher is working fine the owner just refuses to enable features as per the manual”.
Take them to court then! Get a group action or just small claims it. Do a CC charge back. They really can't deliver garbage.
In 10 years that appliance may not connect to your wifi if the scheme has changed e.g. 2.4Ghz is dropped or something.
<absoluteTotalTangent>
I read Australia<snip>Major Problem, and I immediately had the Koxbox track pop into my head. Naturally, it's easiest to find it on YT[0]. I never did take the time to look up where the sample came from, not what the full audio would say. I just assumed that Australians dutifully ignored it when heard as much as 'murikans ignored the FBI warnings at the head of VHS tapes--later DVDs.
[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh7IW3Or590
</absoluteTotalTangent>
Is this just an american thing/model?
I have a Bosch Series 6 dishwasher here in Australia. It has physical buttons for all the stuff he mentions - Machine Care (self-cleaning), HalfLoad, Eco, and Delay start.
I did connect it to wifi which allows me to ... do the same stuff from their app. It's next to useless in my use pattern of "load the dishwasher, run the dishwasher". Literally all it adds is the ability to more easily set the machine to run later, which I don't care about.
I love Bosch stuff and will continue to buy it, certainly their series 6 and 8 stuff that's made in Germany - great quality and reliable IMHO.
Honestly it seems like there's just been a poor design decision here, to export the full set of controls to an app rather than on the machine, rather than some sort of fundamental sin. It certainly raises questions of what happens if/when they drop support, but another poster below mentions that the app works locally after initial cloud setup. Maybe just avoid this model...
The previous generation of Bosch dishwashers in the US were WiFi free. The current generation went through a round of cost cutting and added WiFi bullshit to everything. No idea what the state is of their appliances sold in other markets.
As far as I can tell Electrolux is the only manufacturer selling "dumb" laundry kit in the US these days… which is probably part of why everyone's favorite LG shills (Yale Appliance) does their best to ignore them.
Miele sells dumb dishwashers in the US.
I recently bought a Bosch and regret it for some of the same reasons as this article. I probably should have got the Miele but CR ratings were slightly higher for Bosch, the repair rates in different places were similar, and the cost was slightly less for the Bosch.
I'm ok with networked appliances but think every function should be operable at the minimum level of networking required to implement that function.
So, a specific washing or drying program shouldn't require any networking, so should function without any networking. Checking the status of a cycle on you phone can be done locally through something like Bluetooth, so it should operate with that and no wifi. Remote monitoring requires internet of some sort, so that's fine.
What makes me furious is requiring a phone app to run something like a delicate or rinse-only cycle.
The ones on the bosch US website do have different model numbers and a different look compared to Bosch UK/AU/DE, which is a little odd. But even then there are models similar to mine, which have Wifi but don't rely on it - https://www.bosch-home.com/us/en/mkt-product/dishwashers/fro...
Seems like the "top control" range, which I can't even see in other countries, might be what's presenting the problem to the author.
IDGAF about appliances being dumb or smart, but I agree it's not a great thing if you have to use smart controls. Provide both and we're all good IMHO.
> The current generation went through a round of cost cutting and added WiFi bullshit to everything
I'm no dishwasher expert and I guess they did their homework but over a period of 10 years, how can be cheaper to remove the local functionality, add a wifi chip, redo the manuals, and pay for the datacenter costs?
Ah, I meant cost cutting elsewhere. For instance the Bosch dishwasher I have came with two utensil holders, no WiFi, and real buttons. The newer versions come with one utensil holder, fake buttons, and WiFi.
It's probably more that they add the online features because some users want them and then think if they already have that they can save some cents on buttons.
Also I seriously doubt the hosting costs are more than a rounding error for a multiple-hundred-dollar appliance.
> Also I seriously doubt the hosting costs are more than a rounding error for a multiple-hundred-dollar appliance.
Ok but...
> then think if they already have that they can save some cents on buttons.
Isn't this a rounding error as well, on a >500$ appliance?
How can we have at the same time dishwashers with no 7-segments display because it's too expensive and other brands with wifi on every model? It cannot be just for costs, there ought to be marketing reasons behind this.
So I have the same model. And night before last instead of starting. It bleeped and flashed a row of LED's. And that's it. It doesn't have an LED display to show error codes. Pulled it out, nothing seems wrong. But I have no idea what it's upset about.
> Literally all it adds is the ability to more easily set the machine to run later, which I don't care about.
Funny, that is a single physical button on my Siemens dishwasher.
Sure, there's one on my Bosch too. But I'm damned if I know how to set it to (for instance) turn on at 7am by using the buttons on the machine. There's probably a way involving multiple button presses. The app does that easily.
But as I said before - not really something I care about either way.
Oh yes. Got an e-bike with a Bosch controller. Have to click away the app advertisement every time before I can use the bike. And the app requires registration. I have the strong suspicion that as soon as I do that, the bike will only work with my phone and start locking out my family members from using it.
Other way around. They'll try to upsell you on a 5 euro feature that locks the bike to your phone and prevents family members (or thieves) from using it. Though since almost no ebikes do that, it doesn't work to reduce theft.
Not much point in the app unless you want to transfer routes to a map app on the head unit, though.
Like with some cars, they then get sold for parts or there is a hack to work around it. I just put a gps tracker in the battery to get insurance money since the cops will do nothing (but will if you go after you own bike to stop you from trespassing).
My bosch ebike controller is a very lousy timekeeper, and the only way to set the clock is with an app.
Totally different experience. Bosch dish washer 800 series - fantastic, clean and quiet. No need for wireless if i don’t want it and no blocked features.
Have other appliances - well made, sturdy and made to last. I wont say it was the cheapest option but i typically pay for a balance of quality, value and privacy.
Yes, but that's the $400-more-expensive model they mention in the article, with the 7 segment display. Which is a model at least 40% more expensive than the 500 series they bought.
Yup you are correct. I agree with article thats BS to gate keep functionality through cloud access requirements and boy am I happy that I bought the 800 series. That said I don't like contributing to the business model of paying for privacy - seems broken.
> That said I don't like contributing to the business model of paying for privacy - seems broken.
I fully agree.
But to be fair, in a other comment someone linked to a website [0] explaining that the app could be used without connection to internet. So in this case perhaps Bosch didn't have as much of a malicious intent as originally thought.
Quote from the link:
However, [..], the BSH "HomeConnect" appliances have a no-cloud mode built into their app without any hacks required to disconnect them from the internet. They do require a one-time connection to perform key exchange of a long-live authorization key, but from then on the appliances can be operated entirely disconnected from the network.
[0] https://trmm.net/homeconnect/#no-cloud-mode This type of comment is common, unfortunately. It amounts to "Don't use [thing] because of [anecdote]".
Bosch, in particular, is highly regarded. They also have a wide range. I bought an 800 series 2-3 years ago. I went online to see if anything had changed. You still find the same options: front controls, top controls, different finishes, etc. You can still absolutely buy a dishwasher with manual controls. They're excellent products.
Now my model seems to be before Wifi was added although I did buy an LG washer and dryer that has Wifi, which I did actually try and set up and failed. The code and stack in these things is truly awful. AFAICT I couldn't get it to work because my home network is segmented with 2 Wifi access points. Each of them broadcasts my Wifi network on the same SSID with the same credentials so devices use whichever one has the best signal. It doesn't always move routers so it's not as good as, say, a Ubiquiti network, but it's good enough.
Anyway, the washer/dryer listed my Wifi network 3 times and failed to connect to it for reasons I never established. The error message was a generic "authorization failed". I think it might've had something to do with DHCP. Possibly my address range or DNS servers. Weirdly, it would connect via a phone hotspot just fine. In the end I gave up.
But the point is that the washer/dryer work just fine without Wifi and although I don't have a Wifi-enabled Bosch dishwasher, I very much suspect they do too. Your comment says "it needs to use their website for some functions". What functions, exactly? Would that be notifications for when a load is done? If so, that makes perfect sense. But I bet the dishwasher worked just fine without Wifi.
In the linked article, it lists the 6 modes that will not work without the WiFi connection, including Eco mode, Rinse, Self clean, Delayed start, and Half mode.
I've run into amazing customer service when I've contacted companies in Germany about stuff. For example, a 1960s vintage pressure cooker (Sikkomat) handed down from my mom. I wrote the manufacturer, asking about how the secondary safety works, and they replied saying regrettably the manual is out of print, but here's a photocopy, enclosed.
So with Bosch, see if you can find a German address/feedback form. Don't worry, they'll understand English.
> by the time I read that it needs to use their website for some functions.
> you cannot use all the functions without creating an account on their website and have them run those functions for you.
Which functions?
This is a really confusing post without knowing what those functions are.
TFA made it pretty clear that rinse cycle, delayed start, and eco mode require the app.
On my model "deep cleaning" of the dishwasher, some other functions I think, but that I didn't care for.
I just had a similar issue with action cameras. My options are GoPro overheats and short battery life, DJI app banned in the store that I would not use regardless, insta360 / akaso which appear to both be the same shell companies and their camera can't even activate without an app despite the vendor promising otherwise. Returned and one starred all that junk. I would like to find a true stand-alone professional fully functional action camera with stabilization, long battery life and built by pros. Without exception I will not use anything that requires a phone or wifi and I don't care how big it is. Even if it's a 200,000 pound excavator, it will be on their doorstep if it requires a phone or wifi some are going this direction and one way or another they will be paying for shipping and my time.
The Sony RX0 II is a normal camera in an action cam form factor, no app required. Battery life is only about 30 minutes but you can swap batteries.
Bosch dishwasher here. Zero network connectivity of any kind and washes dishes better than any other non-industrial dishwasher I've ever used. 10/10, would recommend, will buy again.
According to Wirecutter, they pulled Bosch from their recommendations after all the old models were pulled and this new line of WiFi connected dishwashers replaced them in 2023.
You would really purchase something based on past experience with the company, not caring about looking into the current state of what they are producing?
> You would really purchase something based on past experience with the company
Absolutely. Companies that make bullshit products very rarely get their act together, so why wouldn't brand loyalty be a thing when one encounters a quality product?
> after all the old models were pulled and this new line of WiFi connected dishwashers replaced them in 2023
That is news to me. If true my next dishwasher is going to be a Hobart from the used restaurant equipment shop up the way. Incidentally I just looked into it and Bosch claims that their HomeConnect enabled dishwashers function just fine with no internet connection, so there is that.
There is no customer loyalty, so with brand loyalty you're only ripping yourself off.
Only if brand quality actually declines. The idea that having found a good product one should then never purchase another product from the same manufacturer is bizarre.
> Bosch dishwasher here. Zero network connectivity of any kind
Absolutely bullshit. If you are a dishwasher without any network connectivity, how are you posting comments on the internet, Mr Bosch?
Which model are you using, for future reference?
It's an 8-9 year old 800 series dishwasher. So far it's outlived our previous two dishwashers combined lifetimes with zero issues.
Literally have a Bosch dishwasher that has none of this Wifi garbage. It is amazing and super low sound compared to the 10 year old one that self destructed and nearly wrecked my basement bedroom (and the electrical panel).
Strongly recommended, would buy it again - as long as they don't have any insane IoT garbage included.
Yeah with most appliances its... not smart to go for highest of their ranges. Way too many functionalities crammed into 1 device just to justify much higher price. All want to be online to do what... pester you with notifications and updates?
I love Bosch, all the stuff we have from them works perfectly many years after buying. Similar for Siemens. But for me - AEG, Whirlpool and Electrolux are the crappiest of the crappiest stuff I've experienced, those brands are banned at my home.
But there is the trick - go for highest offline-only range, which is normally in the middle or just above middle of the range. Best value for money. Plus I couldn't care less of some online features, don't need them, hate them, its just a ticking bomb regardless of manufacturer.
Same as recently discussed here Samsung HW-Q990D surround soundbar update bricking the devices for some. Why the heck would I ever want to update surround speakers which work perfectly fine now? Some sort of OCD out of hands? They never add anything important with such updates, and the general risk is not worth doing it. Plus avoiding not-another-stupid-app-in-phone syndrome.
Yeah with most appliances its... not smart to go for highest of their ranges.
Often the parts you actually care about are the same among most of the products in a range. When looking at Miele dishwashers recently they all had the same core dish washing mechanics, and all you got when moving to the highest end model was some superficial design changes, an app and that the door popped open once it was done.
That’s really unfortunate considering they are a top rated dishwasher with historically basic feature sets on their products. My Bosch doesn’t even have an LCD display on it.
This is likely a model number related issue. I have a Siemens, which, as I understand it, is a Bosch with different styling, since none of these brands actually make the appliances, they're just lending their brand to a separate manufacturer (which is still in Germany FWIW). It also has the "home connect" app.
I have none of these issues. I have a dedicated button for delayed start on the front of the dishwasher. Dedicated "machine care" button. Not sure what the "rinse cycle" is, so I don't know if it has it, but there's a special rinsing-related button on the front that does something that prolongs the cycle. It also has a dedicated "half load" button. It has buttons for every "useful" cycle, like "eco" which is automatically selected when I turn it on. It's also able to go to a menu of sorts where I can configure water hardness, the quantity of rinsing liquid I want (separately from the hardness setting) and some other things I forgot.
The machine was bought new a little less than two years ago and does have the wifi and bluetooth and whatnot. It's also the only appliance I know which supports 5 GHz wifi. The manual also tries to get you to install the app, but it's not needed.
Bosch and Siemens produce home appliances through B(osch)S(iemens)H Hausgeräte GmbH (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSH_Hausgeräte). They are not lending their brand to another manufacturer.
That's exactly what they are dong though, they just also each have partial ownership of that manufacturer.
Note that Bosh in this case is a brand of BSH Hausgeräte so if you have reason to boycott them you probably also want to boycott their other home appliance brands, including Siemens and more:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSH_Hausger%C3%A4te#Appliance_...
> Beside the fact that I doubt the store would take it back after using it for a week or two
Where do you live? Pretty sure that in the EU they’d have to take it back, for any reason, if it’s not been 14 days yet. Though the no packaging could pose an issue, yeah.
14 days no-question returns are only for online orders. In-store pickups have different (local) rules.
Was all set to purchase a Bosch and the local shopsaid their quality has plummeted in recent years, recommend a Meile for the same price. Was told they get far fewer repair requests with this brand.
That's a shame, we've bought two Bosch dishwashers (two different houses). The second one is 12 years old and still working. Had to replace the pump once, although that problem was almost certainly caused by sediment in our water lines.
I like that they've been quiet and reliable, the reliability affirmed by the repair person that replaced the pump.
Wirecutter (NYT) would agree: https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/the-best-dishwash...
Requisite archive.ph link: https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/the-best-dishwash...
If you can afford it, Miele is definitely the way to go. The premium is quite high but IME you're buying the product, not just the brand.
Genuinely, what about my dishwasher would I want to control from my phone? The only operations I do on it are turn it on (redundant because I need to load it first, which needs me to be there) and check if it's done, mostly redundant because it's not a time-sensitive operation.
Sounds not so much like a Bosch problem as a retailer problem. It was the retailer that lied to you about the machine.
Requiring internet for features that don't need the internet is a manufacturer problem, no matter what any retailer says or doesn't say.
I'll grant you that, but many other manufacturers are doing that too. I avoid buying those models. If it says "wifi", I avoid it like the plague.
I bought a Bosch dishwasher about a year ago and didn't experience any of this. Maybe it depends on the model?
These days, Bosch is wholly owned by Siemens. And their appliances are basically the same. Except Bosch is now their experimental branch, where they try out ideas for products. Only those that are successful become Siemens products. So uhm, just buy a Siemens dishwasher, it's unlikely to have an app requirement.
That's completely the other way around and soothsaying :) BSH is a separate entity created 60 years ago by both companies but now fully owned by Bosch.
Bosch and Siemens had a joint venture since like 1960's. Around a decade ago Siemens sold out their BSH part of the company to Bosch completely and Bosch still makes some equipment under that brand. Yet still Siemens exist and is completely independent company.
Such joint ventures were not unlikely events for companies in that space in Europe. Siemens had parts of the company separated more often. Nokia Siemens Networks is kind of big (they ditched the Siemens name a decade ago), Nokia Siemens had briefly been know for cell phones for instance, Fujitsu Siemens did IT Enterprise hardware and software, PDAs and similar (here Fujitsu also took over and ditched Siemens part of the name).
Your buying advice ain't better than the guy's that sold that dishwasher to Jeff.
I have clearly been misinformed then. Though it kind of made sense to me on the surface, because it was hard to fathom why Bosch would tarnish its reputation with such anti-consumer products, whilst leaving the Siemens brand with the less hostile variants.
and Balay, i'm currently looking to renovate my kitchen right now and you can buy the same appliance in any of the 3 brands (Bosch, Balay and Siemens).
It’s there other way around. Robert Bosch acquired the stake in Siemens. So Bosch owns Siemens.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140923104028/http://www.rttnew...
The article says Bosh bought Siemens' stake in BSH Hausgeräte (which does use the Siemens brand for some of it's home appliance models), not that Bosh acquired a stake in Siemens.