Seeing the responses here, I feel like I’m not alone.
The entire notion of “Let the buyer beware” as an excuse for deceptive marketing is just rotten. “Go look it up before you feel deceived” and similar messages from those who would make excuses for marketing.
This is not my first experience with Wyze cameras nor is it my first day with computers. I am also very familiar with marketing mumbo jumbo meant to gently mislead while walking the fine line of outright untruth.
In the 90s, for example, I saw lots of marketing around printers and “600 dpi equivalent”, as just one example. You see it in TVs as well. I’ve seen ads for “a genuine Blue Nose medallion from the Royal Canadian Mint”. They sell it for 20 bucks plus shipping and they send you a dime. Yes, the Canadian dime shows the Blue Nose schooner. “People just assumed” goes the excuse. So I’m not going to entertain for one nanosecond this argument that I should somehow become an expert in wifi technologies so as to fact-check the Wyze boxes. The onus is on Wyze to be clear in their packaging and marketing.
Now I know full well in an R & D setting that perhaps it’s convenient to use the same microcontroller chips that support wifi without exploring some that might support the 5 GHz bands. I know they have it for the doorbell. So it’s a money thing would be my guess.
I have real world problems with an inability to consistently reach my Wyze cameras through a couple of walls, even within 20 feet of my router. Oh, it shows a strong signal while setting up the device, then comes actually trying to use it. Maybe 1 time out of 5, I get the video in a reasonable time. Other times, I can wait and wait and wait.
So, when a camera comes out promising improvements to their wifi, I’m interested. Oh, wifi 6. Well, they were unclear. They said “no 5 GHz” but did not specify “2.4 GHz only” which would have been more accurate and I would not have made any assumption by missing the 6E and not 6 business.
So I’m not unaware. But I feel misled.
In practice, I’ve tried cam v2 and a v3 and now a v4 in the same corner with the same “works sometimes” performance. I’m really not sure whether the purchase of the 4 was even worth it.
So YEAH I am complaining about the Wifi 6 claim and this entire thread seems to be saying similar things.
Wyze marketing people might have made an innocent mistake, hoping that consumers would just “get it” or “inform themselves” or they might have done it on purpose so as to sell through their new cameras with the thought “they’ll end up liking it and keeping it”.
If Wyze is actually sincere, I’d like to see a change to their marketing that make 2.4 GHz only very clear. It’s a simple change that doesn’t require re-engineering the camera.
Otherwise, my confidence and faith in their marketing will have taken quite a hit.
I do know that I HAD their router pros and they were a dismal disappointment to me. I would have expected their own router to work better with their own devices, but that can easily be me with unreasonable expectations.
At the end of the day, I have a real problem with deceptive marketing and hearing people make excuses like “you should have known better” does not help. Wyze is the vendor and the onus ought to be on the vendor to be clear about their claims.
But, like in the bad-old-days … and I remember it in the 1970s most clearly “Caveat Emptor”
Let the buyer beware.
That’s my takeaway here.
And YES, I feel very deceived, with good reason.