Paul Wieland is a restless computer scientist. A few years ago he wanted to try control your garage door with your smartphone. There were interesting commercial options such as the MyQ platform, but what he wanted was to be able to open and close it while having access to home Wi-Fi, without depending on the servers of MyQ or any other company.
In 2022 he managed to develop the first prototype of his solution, which he called RAGDO (Rage Against the Garage Door Opener, or Rage Against the Garage Door Opener). Users could use home automation platforms such as HomeKit or Home Assistant easily and for free without depending on third-party servers.
Depending on third parties is usually a bad idea
It was just then that Chamberlain Group, the company responsible for MyQ—a service with 14 million users—decided to cut off access to third-party solutions. The connections people had set up to use their MyQ port with home automation apps from Apple or Google they stopped working. Additionally, Chamberlain began promoting subscription services with external partners, thus breaking the user experience for existing customers.
A RAGDO device installed on the garage opener. Source: Ratcloud LLC.
These changes were highly criticized by thousands of users who saw how their hardware products lost functionality, although the basic door opening seemed to continue working in the free version of MyQ. At that time, sales of RAGDO – which offered a great solution to the problem – skyrocketed. From believing he would sell 100, Wieland found that he was selling tens of thousands of his devices.
This expert commented in The New York Times How RAGDO’s success is due to a widespread frustration: companies sell Internet-connected hardware, but once they get a large enough user base, they modify or use it to “squeeze” customers with forced subscriptions that tend to take control away from users.
It’s something we’ve seen numerous times in the recent past. Google announced in April that its first-generation Nest smart thermostats they would become “dumb” thermostatsand the controversy with absurd subscriptions is famous for example in the field of cars: BMW charges extra for heated seats and Mercedes for offering a larger turning radius for the wheels of some of its models or, simply, to run more.
The truth is that in an ideal world you should be able to do whatever you want with the digital products you buy, but that doesn’t apply in the US. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which was created in the late 1990s, had the goal of fighting content piracy but also made it illegal to try to overcome the digital barriers that companies create to prevent their applications from being used illegally. A quarter of a century later that law remains controversial.
Garage controls are the new walled gardens
The problems that Wieland and the users of this type of systems have suffered in the US are not very different from those that we suffer in Spain, for example. Garage doors have been able to be opened with a remote control for decades, but this market has become a complex framework of standards and closed and proprietary solutions.
While at first the controls were simple and were based on a transmitter and a receiver, the problems of that simplicity—anyone could open or close any door—led to the appearance of several iterations, such as controls with DIP switches with which it was possible to configure fixed combinations different from those of other garages, but which were also easy to end up copying.
Currently the most common thing is to have control solutions with “rolling codes” or variable/evolving codes, which ensure that each signal transmitted by the remote is unique and cannot be used for unauthorized access. Security has certainly increased, but this method made numerous companies They will create their own variants of rolling codes for two reasons: one public and reasonable (to protect its users, there are no widely accepted universal standards) and another hidden (to protect the business and generate income).
These designs make garage door openers, which are relatively cheap and simple to build, typically expensive for end users. The controls are not compatible between manufacturers even if they use rolling codes, because each one uses its own frequencies and modulations and proprietary code generation protocols.
In some cases it is feasible to clone them with “universal remote controls”, and in fact there is a parallel industry in which locksmiths and specialized stores offer the cloning service, or we can purchase these remote controls and then program them ourselves. However, there are, for example, communities of owners in which the managers They are programmed from the switchboardnot from the remote, which prevents cloning the remote without an administrator registering the code on the receiver. The queries in various discussion forums They show that there are many doubts about what works and what doesn’t, and there are not many trivial solutions beyond buying the “official” remote control for each garage.
There are, of course, systems that offer the alternative of using mobile applications and Wi-Fi or BLE modules connected to the garage motor. MyQ is the best example of this, but the inertia of the sector and the garage door regulations themselves They do not provide these types of solutions. It may be that the progressive adoption of home automation interconnection like Matter sooner or later I managed to propose a valid alternative, but today we continue to depend on these solutions.
Image | Dushawn Jovic
In Xataka | “Garage squatters”: there are people parking their cars every day in parking spaces that are not theirs
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings