The conversation

Lessons learnedExperience excerpt · English

As a happy customer, I picked nanit because it actually worked

As a happy customer, I picked nanit because it actually worked. We didn’t even use the “smart” features, but “you can turn on the app from anywhere you happen to be and expect the video feed to work” is unfortunately a bar that no competitor I tried could meet. The others were mostly made by non-software companies with outsourced apps that worked maybe 50% of the time. I wish we could have local-first and e2ee consumer software for this sort of thing, but given the choice of that or actually usable software, I am going to pick the latter.

Original discussionWe saved $500k per year by rolling our own "S3"251 source comments · at import
6

What was this responding to?

Parent context · original excerpt

VA

In HN style, I'm going to diverge from the content and rant about the company: Nanit needs this storage because they run cloud based baby cameras. Every Nanit user is uploading video and audio of their home/baby live to Nanit without any E2EE. It's a hot mic sending anything you say near it to the cloud. Their hardware essentially requires a subscription to use, even though it costs $200/camera. You must spend an additional $200 on a Nanit floor stand if you want sleep tracking. This is purely a software limitation since there's plenty of other ways to get an overhead camera mount. (I'm curious how they even detect if you're using the stand since it's just a USB-C cable. Maybe etags?) Of course Nanit is a popular and successful product that many parents swear by. It just pains me to see cloud based in-home audio/video storage being so normalized. Self-hosted video isn't that hard but no …

Full original

Community replies 0

No community replies yet. Add your perspective.

Replies from the source 6

Direct replies available in this import. Original-language excerpts.

VL

The vtech camera is working well enough for me for what it’s worth. But any such app solution generally implies transfer through the company’s servers.

Full original
VA

I self host my "baby monitor" with UniFi Protect on UCG-Max and a G6 Instant wireless camera. It's more work to setup, but pretty easy for a techie. It has the "turn on the app anywhere and it works" feature, and with a 2TB SSD I get a month+ of video storage. Because storage is local, it doesn't need to compress the video and I get a super clear 4K image. And I use Homebridge to expose the camera over Apple HomeKit which is a convenient and a more user friendly way to access it. And HomeKit also gives you out-of-home access with a hub. I love my setup, but I couldn't in good conscience recommend it to a non-techie friend, especially if they're sleep deprived from their infant. But I do miss the lack of any baby-specific features like sleep tracking. It has support for crying detection, but that's it.

Full original
VA

What competitor have you actually tried? My girlfriend’s parents have a few cheap TPlink solar powered CCTV and they work flawlessly since setup. I used to jerryrig an Android phone for Alfred and that too worked well. My impression is live feed is a solved problem.

Full original
BI

I have 2 free-roaming rabbits in one room of the house, we've been using Eufy camera to access live feed and found no issues with it, definitely would buy again. And the SD card recording allows us to seek a couple days into the past - it is pretty fun to watch the rabbits scramble to the automatic feeder at the set time.

Full original
GA

My £15 TP-Link camera that we use as a baby monitor works 100% of the time. I can use it completely locally too with nothing sent to their servers at all, or use it through the internet if I want to. Got 4+ years of continuous use and counting, with zero issues.

Full original
JR

> you can turn on the app from anywhere you happen to be and expect the video feed to work if i'm understanding "anywhere you happen to be" right: Real question -- I'm not a parent. What is your use case for wanting to monitor your baby remotely from a different location than your baby? Obviously someone is with them at the house or location with the baby! You don't trust em? Or just like seeing/hearing your baby when you are out? I see why a baby monitor in general is helpful so you can be in another room in the house and still keep an eye/ear on baby, but obv someone has to actually be in the location with the baby! (and the monitor at least needs to be on the wifi, right? So the monitor is in a place you have network access to, yes?)

Full original
Continue on Hacker News

Respect different perspectives. Share concrete experiences.

Sign in to post, reply, repost, and quote.