Their firmware page did mention about Alexa motion detection announcement, but not all cameras have this feature so you might need to check out each camera. I think they are slowly integrating more and more cameras with this feature.
For actual person detection annoucement like Wyze, then I think only Tapo C125 and C225 have this feature for now.
@grapefruityoda - Thank you. Tried doing a quick search but missed it.
What are the chances an actual wyze employee could respond here to explain why they believe it was appropriate to just delete the âincorrectâ information on their website, that could have lead users to believe that free person detection was included with the v4, and not offer any explanation. The problem wasnât only the âincorrectâ information but it seemed like they were intentionally avoiding clarifying the situation with a vague product description. And the threads before this one that received no real answer.
Free on device person detection on the v4 would cost wyze nothing and might even save a little by reducing motion events. But I guess they believe giving this feature for free might reduce cam plus subscriptions, and you canât have that.
Should we point out all the misinformation on the wyze site, such as sensor on/off functions, or will wyze be cleaning the site to eliminate wrong information.
Apparently not yet, anyway.
I think you are presuming others thoughts. How do you know it misled a lot of people? There are a half-dozen ppl in this thread responding. Hardly an avalanche of public-outcry for poor wording on the website. Nothing on reddit either.
How often do you think Microsoft/Apple/Google have to change the documentation on their websites because it stated something that was technically incorrect? Is there some place where they announce the changes/edits to their website? There isnât. It does no good. Even if they did explain themselves, people wouldnât be happy. You canât win with consumers sometimes. So companies donât bother. There will always be complainers.
Iâm playing devilâs advocate because it seems to me you feel entitled to be given an explanation. Are all companies required to explain themselves at any time a message they put out is confusing? Or do they just correct it and go about their business?
I think the latter. This is not an issue. If you think it is an egregious issue, then post your cameraâs for sale in the reddit forum. There will be PLENTY of takers. I think you are screaming into the void here.
I guess I donât need a wyze employee or management to respond we have you. And yes companies that actually care about their users do explain themselves, and more importantly, own their mistakes.
Wyze started off saying âwe are a different kind of companyâ and offered more free features than anyone else. I accept their explanation that what they were doing was financially unsustainable. But they now are going the opposite way, as other companies begin to offer more, wyze appears to want to offer less. Venture capital has a price.
You mention Microsoft/Apple/Google - Wyze is not in that class. But Google for example has extended warranties (and even gone beyond) on many products because a flaw was found. Wyze ignores the problem, cancels the product and says sorry warranty over, or as they did - hereâs $2 off your next purchase for a bricked sensor under warranty. Wyze didnât start out this way.
Because 100âs of people arenât here talking about this doesnât mean it isnât wrong and wyze shouldnât treat it as important. And as I have said before wyze has a habit of proudly announcing things but just dead silence when problems arise.
I donât want to leave the wyze eco-system, it has lots to offer, I just want wyze to try to remember what they were and what they promised. So if i am âscreaming into the voidâ, so be it.
By the way I guess you havenât been reading the wyze reddit forum much if you think people are going to jump to buy my used products for more than postage.
Again⌠this is your perception. Let me know when the villagers assemble because of this website language that you perceive to be deceitful.
#TheVoid
Damn your right. Wyze is perfect. I see the light, I drank the kool-aid. I will never again question anything they do.
Now that Wyze is perfect. We are done here.
To summarize this thread, Wyzeâs website said the V4 had free on device person detection. The product description was vague enough that some people werenât sure. It does not - period. To remedy the situation wyze simply removed the information on the website, without comment or clarification.
The thread went off track talking about alternative cameras that offered it. And finally it dissolved into a back and forth of whether this was wyze intentionally being misleading and not caring about its users vs no big deal and standard operating policy for companies.
Either way it doesnât matter because the V4 does not and will never have free person detection.
Wild. I watched the videos about the on device recognition that didnât need to hit the cloud. I ordered. I received it and theyâve removed that feature since then. Sounds like a bait and switch lawsuit.
What and odd stance to do with so many ways for someone to be able to show what the product was supposed to offer and then a direct move by the company to remove.
What videos said the on-device AI was included for free? Do you have any links?
Some of the same stuff shown as the pro 3.
Heck itâs still included hereâŚ
So itâs not as powerful as the cam plus and cam protect features. But itâs there. And was all through the advertising.
What else would it serve anyone if the more powerful version was included with the paid options?
Included is included and that is how this was presented at first, until as someone else pointed out it might eat into those paid subscriptions with the more powerful ai.
That video itself never said anything about Edge AI at all, let alone that it is free.
However, the text of that Support article does mention Edge AI. Wyze should certainly do a better job of clarifying that all AI capabilities for the V4 are part of the subscription, and not enabled without a subscription like the FLPro or V3Pro. Saying it is âincludedâ and implying it is included in the same way the V3Pro has it âincludedâ is definitely leading people to think it works free without a subscription.
It seems either they may have debated back and forth on whether to make it free or not (hence all the seeming contradictions), or one or more employees simply misunderstood the difference and was confused. Either way, they did not communicate this very well.
And I disagree with their ultimate decision to paywall it. I definitely think they should figure out a way to make it free.
I hadnât really thought much about Wyzeâs official videos, but I can totally see why someone would think that Cam v4 includes âfreeâ person detection when part of the âIntroducing Wyze Cam v4â video clearly shows a âPerson Detectedâ notification accompanied by the text âSmart detections and notificationsâ. Thereâs no disclaimer in the video itself or in its description that this feature requires a Cam Plus subscription, so I think itâs reasonable for a viewer to infer that Person Detection is part of the base product itself.[1]
Edge AI Person Detection is included with Wyze Cam v4 and Wyze Cam v3 Pro, powered by the camerasâ on-board chip, rather than relying on the cloud.
This statement from the âIntroducing Wyze Cam v4â Help Center article does seem to present a problem. âEdge AI Person Detection is included with Wyze Cam v4â says that itâs already there, and ârather than relying on the cloudâ indicates that no Cam Plus subscription is required: Edge AI Person Detection is ârather thanââor instead ofââthe cloudâ. It seems like a rather unambiguous way to say that no subscription (for cloud services) is needed, despite what Wyze has said (and later cleaned up) elsewhere.
Weâre definitely in agreement there. That would certainly be one way to clean up this mess of confusion and customers feeling misled.
I mentioned in another topic that Iâd watched a review video that said Cam v4 does not have on-board person detection and that I didnât entirely trust that information because itâs not part of Wyzeâs official messaging and because there were other accuracy issues with the video. âŠď¸
I remember that thread when you were asking Wyze about this. They were giving you a very vague answer. You clarified it couple more times to them to be more clear, but they were too busy selectively answering other peopleâs question. Then when you tried to clarify again even stating that personâs position, there was silence. In fact they never appeared in that thread again lol.
At that time I already knew they didnât want to answer it because it was obvious.
That seems like an apt summation. I think I was being clear and direct with the questions I was asking.
While I agree there is obviously some confusion and some people feeling misled, my reason for them finding a way to offer it free is less about peopleâs assumptions and more about the standard of offering local person detection free like seems to be normal in the industry if a device has local/edge AI, and because one of their founding values was to:
set off on a mission to change that. To make great technology accessible to everyone.
Edge AI is great tech that can be reasonably made accessible to everyone, particularly when so many other companies have started doing so.
To me, peopleâs subjective assumptions, interpretations, or misunderstandings fall to second place to the above rationales. You should have a very good reason to not uphold your founding missions when they are easily and reasonably doable.
I donât think anyone would get anywhere on âthreateningâ Wyze to make this free. I could explain many of the easy legal defenses that would get this thrown out before it goes anywhere, but there is no real point. Itâs a dead end IMO to threaten.
Now reminding and guilting them on not upholding their missionâŚI think that is MUCH more likely to hold sway than threatening, attacking, and complaining, which often just cause resistance and becoming more defensive and adamant. Threats rarely to never work on anyone for almost anything unless they absolutely have to.
Just my 2 cents.
I get what youâre saying, and I think weâre on the same track as far as what the end outcome for this issue should be: enabling Edge AI Person Detection on Cam v4 without the need for a subscription. Iâm not on board with your belief about assumptions, though, because Iâve stated all along (in this topic and others) that I believe Wyzeâs messaging about this feature and this camera model has been muddled and mixed at best, potentially very misleading (whether intentional or not) at worst. Iâve been carefully trying to avoid assumptions, which is why Iâve quoted Wyzeâs official messaging so frequently and asked so many questions in attempts to get some genuine clarification.
Obviously, I take no responsibility for the approach or statements of other users, though I can certainly agree with a lot of the sentiment.
I havenât done that (and I realize that youâre writing in generalities and not saying that I have), and I roll my eyes every time I see someone (particularly a brand new Forum member) post about class action lawsuits, being completely done with Wyze, and/or throwing all their Wyze devices in the trash. (Heck! Iâd take those and put 'em to good use! [Plus, I genuinely hate to see stuff go unnecessarily into a landfill, but thatâs another issue.]) I realize that a lot of these people are just venting, and I think itâs probably better to vent than to let the ire percolate and pressurize, but there are probably more constructive ways to do that.
I think weâre also in agreement about their mission and founding values. Like I recently wrote in another topic, I re-read those again not long ago, and this whole deal with the Cam v4 messaging clean-up (and, like you wrote, making the technology available to the masses, especially when this sort of thing seems to be at least approaching an industry standard) seems like it clashes with those, and I think it would serve all Wyze team members well to reacquaint themselves with the companyâs mission and stated values.
Or change your mission and be clear about that. Sometimes that happens with companies, too. They have to adapt to their changing business conditions, so it seems reasonable that a mission might change, and I think itâs also reasonable for customers to expect clear communication about the companyâs mission if and when it does change, but I donât think thatâs whatâs happened here.
Heck, my opinion isnât even worth that much! 
Haha, you mean like how Googleâs Mission statement used to be âDonât be evilâ but once they decided they didnât want to live up to that standard anymore, they changed it to be:
âto organize the worldâs information and make it universally accessible and usefulâ
But no more promising ânot to be evilâ as long as they are still organizing information and making it accessible and useful? 
I agree with this as a universal value. In Wyzeâs case, it falls under their âBe Friends with Usersâ value (which Iâll quote below).
For anyone wondering about our discussion of Wyzeâs values and how it relates to the topic, you can see Wyzeâs published values starting here:
Related to this topic specifically, I agree they could and could have done a better job at making this clear. There are few places where I think Wyze has significantly dropped the ball, but I think this V4 edge detection is one of the few instances on my small list.