[Wyze Cam] Is actually not a security camera as stated in the TOS found here
I am sure it is something they thought of and opted not to do at that point in time, they have not ruled it out and with RTSP has given people a way to do it.
3 Likes
It’s a security camera. You cannot change the nature of a product by TOS boilerplate. That’s just silly.
Smart camera. It doesn’t have all the requirements to be a security camera.
1 Like
Different market segment, these are consumer-grade (almost, toy) cameras and not hardened enterprise cameras. This is a security camera:
Note the price difference.
Actually, that is also not called a security camera. The price difference is the 30x (!) optical zoom (mouth waters, lol). That’s like a telescope but my 22x cost me something like $2,500.
I’ve worked with those cameras. The company actually advertises them as such.
You can’t even take a hammer to them. That clear casing is tough.
Where? The product link at the company doesn’t mention it. “Optical zoom” vs “Digital zoom” is what I believe the price difference is:
Not the ads, the guides that come with the product.
And there are several cameras in that pod, usually 4, so you can see 4 quadrants at any time.
Image quality is just one cost difference. Reliability is another. I already stated one aspect, you can’t just hit it with a hammer to disable it. It will take multiple blows, and in that time, it would have sent an alarm and a clip to the local police and sounded a siren.
Cool. reliability, security alerts to authorities, and sirens are some of the highest factors. Can you scan your original guides that came with the product that highlight that? Would be useful in showing the difference.
Sorry, That was a long time ago. In fact, I don’t recall them selling on Amazon. Their main customers are VARs and integrators. They provide (actually, sell) APIs, that’s it.
just because people choose to use it for security purposes does not make it a security camera.
if you use a open ended wrench to hit another object, it does not make it a hammer. in psychology this is called functional fixedness.
item are intended to be used in one way, in this case, our cameras are a smart camera and in not way INTENDED for security purposes. 
people can use them in whatever way they want though, you can use them as a paperweight if you wanted, and although they would serve that purpose, possibly quite well, it still does not make them an intended paperweight. 
and thus not actually a paperweight.
we all know what people can/ might use them for, but alas, they are not actually security cameras because by definition they do not have that intended purpose. Back to functional fixedness. 
I love these kind of discussions because I have studied human development and cognitive psychology. this is also where an argument for the sapir- whorf / linguistic relativity theorem might be useful lol that basically states that the structure of a language and use of certain terms can change a users perception of the subject being discussed. case in point, using the term security within this thread to change the perception of what the intended purpose of these cameras truly are.
sorry to go on a nerd ditribe, its all in good fun…
Ill pick up the science I dropped and head toward the door lol.
3 Likes
After testing a Wyzecam V2 for a few days, I have to agree with you. It’s not adequate as a security camera. I don’t really understand why it was made so lame in performance but the software/firmware is very nice, fancy even. It just doesn’t have enough throughput.
It’s surprising to spend this much effort on nice software and features, and the performance just isn’t there. It either needs more CPU or the software is just not at all optimized. Probably both. It’s possible that my quarrel is with the vision for the company. They found a very inexpensive platform and made a network camera on it, but they just ought to have gone with more performance, even if it cost a little more. I paid $25 for the ones I bought to test, and I hoped they would deliver. If they were $40 and worked adequately that would have been much preferable to what they produced.
Do any of the other models perform better? Does the pan model have more CPU?
1 Like
they are pretty much the same from what I understand. but give it time. they have beefed up the features of the camera quite a bit in a short time, I could see them boosting the hardware in the future as well. I mean, overall it’s inevitable…just a matter of when
Oh, sure the chips this is based on will eventually become unavailable.
Like USB 1.0 chips are, if you had a product that depended on those you either had to make an engineering change or get a commitment from your supplier. I have been involved in some of those last, but they are brief.
I am just surprised the performance is so poor.
Funny you should use that as the example, I work in a heavy duty truck shop, and while that scenario is not used often, many a screwdriver get used as chisels and pry bars
1 Like
Same in a train maintenance depot, surprising the amount of screwdrivers that have had the tip snapped off due to people using them as pry bars
still compared to some other brands of domestic security cameras I still find these are more fitting to the role, mainly needs a better playback system (SD card)
If it could scroll like nest that would be brilliant
1 Like
They just don’t have enough throughput. I connected to my wifi, pointed the camera at me, and motions I made with my hand or a word I speak is delayed 5 seconds. Not good enough, not nearly adequate. So sad.
Mine are delayed by most 1.5 seconds, I was actually impressed, it was faster than my old ones
1 Like
same here, very fast compared to my old cameras.