CES 2016: First Alert Announces HomeKit-Connected Safe, Thermostat and Environment Monitor

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
49,654
10,974



First Alert's first HomeKit-enabled product, the Onelink Smoke Alarm, was released in November. At this year's Consumer Electronics Show, First Alert is showing off several additional HomeKit-connected products, including an environment monitor, a thermostat, and the first HomeKit safe.

The OneLink by First Alert Wi-Fi Safe is a small in-home safe meant to house small valuables. It connects to a HomeKit setup via Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, allowing Siri voice commands or the accompanying iPhone app to open the safe when directed. The safe runs on batteries and includes a built-in accelerometer that is able to send an alert to the iPhone if someone attempts to move or open it.


First Alert's Onelink Environment Monitor monitors the temperature and humidity in a room, plus it includes sensors that are able to detect both high and low levels of carbon monoxide. A multi-color LED ring on the outside of the Monitor lets users see the status of the environment at a glance, changing colors to reflect shifting temperatures. Alerts are also sent to an iOS device.


The Onelink by First Alert Wi-Fi Thermostat joins several other HomeKit-enabled thermostats that are available on the market. Like other thermostats, it connects to a home's Wi-Fi connection to allow the temperature to be controlled using Siri voice commands or the Onelink Home app.

Additional information on First Alert's HomeKit-enabled products, including pricing details and release dates, will be available later in 2016.

Article Link: CES 2016: First Alert Announces HomeKit-Connected Safe, Thermostat and Environment Monitor
 

Beerstalker

macrumors 6502
Jun 14, 2011
481
174
Peoria, IL
Between the smoke alarm, and now thermostat, I am beginning to think about ditching my Nest Protect and Honeywell WiFi thermostat. I wish they had a water sensor too.
 

macosxuser01

macrumors 6502a
Jan 10, 2006
602
141
Sacramento, CA
I have a Activity sensor on my safe so anytime if it opens my security system will send me a push notification through Alarm.com app. But that safe is pretty cool though
 

rcooked

macrumors regular
Feb 3, 2015
176
226
Seems like a large potential market Apple is missing out on here. There are a lot of household items that "suck" they could connect with IOT and tie right into HomeKit.

Maybe, this will happen. Just seems like these items should be launching.
 

nightcap965

macrumors 6502a
Feb 11, 2004
677
679
Cape Cod
Mmm, hack-able safes. Nice.
Excuse me? Since when is a home safe *not* hackable? Unless you're a Bond villain, any home safe of similar size can be picked up and carried away. The purpose of this kind of home safe is to secure valuables away from children and untrusted guests, and protect them in the event of a flood or small fire. It's a more convenient place to store important papers (passport, deeds and titles, etc.) than a safe deposit box at the bank. It's not intended to keep your gold bullion from the nefarious forces of Auric Goldfinger.
 

unplugme71

macrumors 68030
May 20, 2011
2,818
750
Earth
I'm waiting for a HomeKit enabled toilet. I hate flushing.
[doublepost=1452189502][/doublepost]
Between the smoke alarm, and now thermostat, I am beginning to think about ditching my Nest Protect and Honeywell WiFi thermostat. I wish they had a water sensor too.
I never bought into NEST. I wanted to until I heard Google buy them. I feel the product isn't going where it should have with Google on the backend. I love my ecobee3 HK with multi room sensors. I use first alert smoke/co2. You only need one. Unless you want to know specifically which room is on fire like it matters. I hear that alarm and I'm out of the house. The alert is useful when I'm not home.
 

Exile714

macrumors 6502a
Jan 14, 2015
683
1,092
Excuse me? Since when is a home safe *not* hackable? Unless you're a Bond villain, any home safe of similar size can be picked up and carried away. The purpose of this kind of home safe is to secure valuables away from children and untrusted guests, and protect them in the event of a flood or small fire. It's a more convenient place to store important papers (passport, deeds and titles, etc.) than a safe deposit box at the bank. It's not intended to keep your gold bullion from the nefarious forces of Auric Goldfinger.
It's connected to the internet, right? Maybe it's visible on your WiFi. Could make your home more targetable. I don't know, I'm not really that concerned about it, but it seems a contrivance to say a safe needs an Internet connection especially for something as trivial as unlocking with your phone or getting an alert that it's been jiggled.
 

rdlink

macrumors 68040
Nov 10, 2007
3,226
2,434
Out of the Reach of the FBI
Mmm, hack-able safes. Nice.
Excuse me? Since when is a home safe *not* hackable? Unless you're a Bond villain, any home safe of similar size can be picked up and carried away. The purpose of this kind of home safe is to secure valuables away from children and untrusted guests, and protect them in the event of a flood or small fire. It's a more convenient place to store important papers (passport, deeds and titles, etc.) than a safe deposit box at the bank. It's not intended to keep your gold bullion from the nefarious forces of Auric Goldfinger.
"Hackable" when it comes to IOT technology is code for "I don't have a use for this, and I don't think anyone else should. So I will try to belittle it by saying it's insecure, when I have absolutely no idea whether it is or not." Something being "connected to the internet" does not automatically make it unsafe or hackable. Do people who make these inane comments even know how secure HomeKit is? And are all of these people living inside of chain link cubicles in a warehouse in a bad part of town like Gene Hackman? Geez.

It boggles my mind why someone who sees no benefit or use for a particular device can't just say, "I'm not interested in this.," preferably to themselves, and move along.
 

thermodynamic

Suspended
May 3, 2009
1,340
1,192
USA
It would be nice if that safe was powered by a wall outlet and used the batteries for backup purposes.
That's exactly what I expected!
Seems like common sense. Then again, the word "hidden market" comes to mind, or lots of other things.

Seems like a large potential market Apple is missing out on here. There are a lot of household items that "suck" they could connect with IOT and tie right into HomeKit.

Maybe, this will happen. Just seems like these items should be launching.
Who's the target market? I can't believe the working class is so shiftless they can't walk 20 feet to turn off a light switch or to change the thermostat, especially since their phone has calendaring and alarm capabilities to help them remember to walk 20 feet to do it. But make a device that costs $300 and then blame people for spending beyond their means, yes?

Mmm, hack-able safes. Nice.
:)

It's connected to the internet, right? Maybe it's visible on your WiFi. Could make your home more targetable. I don't know, I'm not really that concerned about it, but it seems a contrivance to say a safe needs an Internet connection especially for something as trivial as unlocking with your phone or getting an alert that it's been jiggled.
Barrel scraping and to manipulate the customers - it's not always the stupid cliche about "no gun was pointed at one's head" to compel someone to act... and the gun is as much a metaphor as it could be a physical tool...

"Hackable" when it comes to IOT technology is code for "I don't have a use for this, and I don't think anyone else should. So I will try to belittle it by saying it's insecure, when I have absolutely no idea whether it is or not." Something being "connected to the internet" does not automatically make it unsafe or hackable. Do people who make these inane comments even know how secure HomeKit is? And are all of these people living inside of chain link cubicles in a warehouse in a bad part of town like Gene Hackman? Geez.

It boggles my mind why someone who sees no benefit or use for a particular device can't just say, "I'm not interested in this.," preferably to themselves, and move along.
For 90% of the population, sure, they don't know or care about security or anything. Most don't even care or understand what they give up when they post on Facebook or Google searches, or think it's nothing. But ask them what "tangential", "component" or "ingredient" is and they still can't figure it out...

Use? Or want? A TV monitor in a refrigerator costing $1000 more than a base model is stupid when a $2 thermometer will compensate just as well. Or having a diagram of what's inside the box so one doesn't need to open the door and gawk for 10 minutes, or to watch a movie while standing there instead of using the living room with a proper sized TV the way it's intended... a lot of this new technology is just barrel scraping with dog and pony shows to fool the rubes for a quick and dirty buck, and for the one time something tangential makes it of actual relevant then it's overplayed (especially when alternatives might exist that don't cost nearly as much to get into or to maintain...) There really are times where critical thinking skills might have some use, but when it comes to attempt to profit and "innovation" people already decided that scraping barrels and slyly tricking others is quicker. Ethics 101, which is ironic that for-profit colleges have to teach that...

Excuse me? Since when is a home safe *not* hackable? Unless you're a Bond villain, any home safe of similar size can be picked up and carried away. The purpose of this kind of home safe is to secure valuables away from children and untrusted guests, and protect them in the event of a flood or small fire. It's a more convenient place to store important papers (passport, deeds and titles, etc.) than a safe deposit box at the bank. It's not intended to keep your gold bullion from the nefarious forces of Auric Goldfinger.
So (especially the greedy, stealing) children and untrusted guests are a gaggle of Goldfingers. Got it. As you've just proven, it's about scale and scope. In most cases...

And it is true that most thieves prefer to get what's out in the open, but it's not science fantasy that all thieves are technologically dim.

Would you more likely going to go after Fort Knox that's highly visible, or a bunch of penny purses that are less likely to be noticed but can add up quickly too? Depending on the situation, either can be the more viable alternative... Or both...

Or what would compel one to steal to begin with? Is it just unbridled greed or are there other, deeper possibilities?

Then again, I suspect there are people who get all upset when a 10 year old or 80 year old is vetted at airport security because nobody of those ages could possibly be evil? (Or how nobody would plant things on them, or be trained because - at least for kids - terrorist groups WILL use them or any number of other possibilities but people would rather emote than think (even if the conclusion to said thought is incomplete or inaccurate or complete or accurate or a combination) - I like to blame the liberal media and Hollywood with their AFTRA, SAG and other unions, naturally... ) But if said 10 year old was not vetted and did make a boom-boom (and I don't mean a south park joke)...
 
Last edited:

rdlink

macrumors 68040
Nov 10, 2007
3,226
2,434
Out of the Reach of the FBI
Who's the target market? I can't believe the working class is so shiftless they can't walk 20 feet to turn off a light switch or to change the thermostat, especially since their phone has calendaring and alarm capabilities to help them remember to walk 20 feet to do it. But make a device that costs $300 and then blame people for spending beyond their means, yes?


For 90% of the population, sure, they don't know or care about security or anything. Most don't even care or understand what they give up when they post on Facebook or Google searches, or think it's nothing. But ask them what "tangential", "component" or "ingredient" is and they still can't figure it out...

Use? Or want? A TV monitor in a refrigerator costing $1000 more than a base model is stupid when a $2 thermometer will compensate just as well. Or having a diagram of what's inside the box so one doesn't need to open the door and gawk for 10 minutes, or to watch a movie while standing there instead of using the living room with a proper sized TV the way it's intended... a lot of this new technology is just barrel scraping with dog and pony shows to fool the rubes for a quick and dirty buck, and for the one time something tangential makes it of actual relevant then it's overplayed (especially when alternatives might exist that don't cost nearly as much to get into or to maintain...) There really are times where critical thinking skills might have some use, but when it comes to attempt to profit and "innovation" people already decided that scraping barrels and slyly tricking others is quicker. Ethics 101, which is ironic that for-profit colleges have to teach that...
Yet another long and convoluted way of saying, "I have no use for this, or imagination enough to understand how it might help me, so anyone who does is lazy or stupid."

We understand. We'll get off your lawn now.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.