Using cam w/o it connecting to wyze servers

Has anyone been able to figure out ir get an answer from Wyze how or if the cam could be used without it be in contact with wyze servers?

I want to be able to view the live feed or saved footage on the SD card through my phone. However I dont want Wyze having access to the cam or saving any footage.

Ideally I would like to do this either when I’m on the same wifi network or not. In a sense I want to eliminate the company from the process.

Ie: my phone using app connecting to my router (wifi or internet conection) connecting to cam. Bypassing Wyze servers.

Simular to a web cam but with all the Wyze cam features. FYI not interested in getting alerts, cloud storage or person detection. Only care about seeing live stream or review recordings on SD card.


I believe you still have to link the camera to your account even with RTSP.

I’m going to assume two things.

  1. You’re not familiar with the way capitalism works in America
  2. You’re not very business savvy.

Wyze produces the cameras at a net loss in order to increase their market penetration.
Their business model allows for them to make up for loss revenue via add-on services.
For them to allow us or guide us on how to use these wi-fi cameras WITHOUT connecting to their servers would be the equivalent of Corporate Sanctioned Suicide on their part.
They have share holders to answer to.
Did you know that Microsoft produced the original X-Box at a net loss?
They made up for it via video game sales.


I’m going to assume you’re not familiar with Wyze. They don’t sell anything at a loss (intentionally). They didn’t even start having any paid services until well after they had cranked out thousands of cameras. Their cameras work great without any paid subscription at all, by their design. They do have very tight profit margins on the cameras.


Mr. Customer, thank you for your input. [Mod Edit]

MOD NOTE: Post edited to conform to the Community Guidelines.

You really can’t handle being spectacularly wrong. Try again. Oh yes, and welcome to the community.

1 Like

OP, have you looked at TinyCAM? Google that, it’s on my todo list.

I own a lot of Wyze devices. AND love them. I have some on order as we speak. I have sold “many” to family, friends and others. I plan to pay “when” time comes, so long as within reason/budget.

FACT: If Wyze goes under, most will own a bunch of devices with no use. OR, if they sell the company we can blame it on the new buyer :wink: Sounding like Elevation now…

I also bought mask and other items thanks to their helping at the time (maybe a profit there too). Nothing wrong with that.

BUT, I also agree with elevation 100% as well.

Why censor (unless it was rude in some way) what they said? So much for free speech. I guess I expected more from such a talented group of people.


Only way I know of to use the cameras without Wyze App or servers is the Dafang hack which replaces the firmware. Here is a link to the site:


You make a great point I NEVER though of. if the company goes under(which I pray never happens) or gets sold i will have about 18 camera shaped paperweights…

See also

1 Like

I’m not sure anyone should be speculating about their business model. They could very well be selling hardware at a loss given that they have taken venture capital.

VC money generally does not chase one-off hardware sales. They are looking for a big exit. That means lots of paid subscribers, lots of data that can be turned into a revenue stream, or both. For example, Google did not buy Nest to get their per-device profit margin.

Back to the question – how could Wyze pull off what you are asking for? They could sell you an in-home server that would act as a router to your devices – and could have some or all of the smarts the cloud has for the detection stuff.

Allowing access from outside your private network is its own kind of problem. In almost any scenario, that requires a service that is accessible from the Internet. You could open a port on your home network to allow direct access to devices, but that is probably less secure than anything Wyze is doing with your data. You could also have your cameras upload to your own server in the cloud or a shared host.

I would be willing to pay for a private version of the Wyze product if it came with some kind of regular, third-party auditing or there was an easy way for me to conduct an audit myself.

1 Like

I wasn’t speculating. I read it somewhere. :slight_smile: Quoting a Wyze rep stating their profit margin and that they do NOT lose money on their hardware sales. If I were merely speculating I would have said so.

Profit margins were mentioned in a AMA video. They said the V3 was only like 3%.

1 Like

Just my observation, but I’m not entirely sure you know just how capitalism really works in America. You see, the normal markup is astronomical for most products you purchase. 1500% or more. For example, buy something from Lowe’s Home Improvement lately? Well, that random item, that they claim has a “tiny margin” actually does not. It has a huge margin. Everything in that store has a huge margin. HOW else does any company afford spending hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising and marketing? Dividends to shareholders? Legions of ultra-high salaried executives? Millions of dollars on equipment and real estate? You see, if you buy ANYTHING that is advertised on TV, radio, cableTV, or even Google… you are PAYING that huge markup. The whole “net loss” concept is a myth. “Loss Leaders” are a myth. NO company puts anything out there at a loss. EVER. Especially when you consider the logistics and supply chain mechanisms that ensure they are making an item available at the most efficient manner possible, in an effort to maximize profit. And if you insist that “loss items” are a real thing, when you bundle them with just one other item that has a 1,500% markup, then it wasn’t really a loss now was it? Perhaps in the far past, capitalism had true “net loss” items. But NOT in the last 2 decades. Sorry, that XBox that MS claimed was a loss… was never a loss. They sold it a maybe 1-5% profit but no loss. I suppose that’s a loss to any company when the normal markup is so high, but it’s not a factual loss. It actually costs around $80 to make an iPhone 12, pricing out source parts, then $60 for labor giving a grand total of $140 to create an iPhone 12… These wyze cams @ $20 probably cost them $1.33 apiece. Which is the price you get when you commit to buying hundreds of thousands of something. It’s called a “volume discount” and it’s what every company uses now for every product. (And yes, I worked as an exec at the world’s #1 home improvement chain for 20 years in supply chain planning so I actually knew the secret of how much they paid for every single item in their stores. That markup is no exaggeration.)


Now hold on, that is true but not for the reason you are infering to. The only, and I mean THE ONLY reason RTSP is requested at all is because WYZE refuses to provide a PC/Mac viewing either through website or app. From what I was told by forum moderator WYZE is only mobile/tablet based company and doesn’t have plans to do any software for PC/Mac. The community ended up splitting between 'wait for ‘computer software’ and ‘give RTSP we’ll make it work’. Which gave a way out of having to answer for no computer viewing that actually works good. But you will find conversations for years on the problems of making rtsp work. The whole no c viewing was one of the major reasons why I stopped buying wyze along with all the problems each new product has and continues to have.

1 Like

I didn’t write it. It’s a link to Gwendolyn’s post.

I can’t leave this out there without presenting a more comprehensive commentary about product cost and pricing. I was involved in planning and delivering manufacturing cost, including manufacturing value add overhead and materials procurement, and my compensation was based in part on the earnings per share of a Fortune 500 company. I also worked with “below the line” cost when assigned to product development, and I eventually became able to discuss and argue most any P&L entry with the corporate cost accountants. I am an engineer who retired as a senior operations manager with international scope. Cost was just one element that had to be understood as we developed five year business strategies and annual tactical plans.

In fact many of the statements made here serve only to confuse in that terms like “loss” and “cost” are not sufficiently defined. It seems that what I know as “base manufacturing cost” is presented as “cost”, and the difference between that and sale price are termed “markup”, and mostly in exaggerated fashion. It’s been awhile and I can’t remember the material differences between base manufacturing cost and cost of goods sold, but I’m thinking they’re pretty much the same, At this level, cost captured includes what is paid to suppliers for materials and subassemblies, depreciation on capital for manufacturing, manufacturing engineering and quality support, packaging, transportation to distribution point, factory facility expense, and direct labor, along with every other dollar needed to keep the factory running or otherwise acquire salable product. I can’t think of an instance where williampierce1 is wrong in that I know of no product in our business ever sold at less than this base manufacturing cost, but it could have happened.

“Volume discount” comes about from “economy of scale” and is savings per unit realized when indirect manufacturing cost not directly volume dependent can be allocated over a larger number of units. The cost of the building, the maintenance tech, the quality manager, and the cover mold don’t change whether you make 100 pieces or 1000, so higher volume lets cost for these indirect resources to be assigned at a lower cost per unit, up to full capacity. Suppliers of salable product are expected to pass this savings along to volume buyers like retail chains. Yes, every company does it. I would have fired any of the purchasing agents who worked for me 30 years ago if they had not negotiated for it.

In any case, it’s unreasonable to treat what is spent beyond base manufacturing cost or COGS to get product to a customer as “huge margin”. Cost beyond “cost of goods sold” is said to reside “below the line” on a P&L, or profit and loss statement. Would there even be a business without executive management, advertising, product planning and development, advertising, and sales? Taxes? Compliance cost? Corporate counsel? Employee Relations? Accounting and other professional services? All are real cost that must be recovered before paying dividends to shareholders, which is the whole point.

A common healthy business might generate an annual operating income or “profit” of 5-10%, and the high end of that is very successful. Once ALL cost is captured, loss leaders ARE real, and sometimes entire divisions lose money to be carried by others…once again, if ALL costs are captured and depending on accounting methods. Such businesses are sometimes termed “razor blade businesses” after Gillette, who is known to sell razors under cost to make net profit from sale of razor blades, which are indeed sold for much more than base manufacturing cost. I worked in the printer business, so I’ll let you figure out how I know this stuff.

BTW, I see that Lowe’s earned $692 million on $22.3 billion in sales in 3Q for a profit margin a little over 3%. It was considered a good quarter, and without a perceptible huge margin.

The Wyze hardware looks like a great value to me based on my experience with 1 cam, right up until I got here and seem to be learning that it is inseparable from their servers. It seems entirely possible that this hostage taking is critical to their business model and that the hardware profitability is insufficient to sustain the business, which would be unfortunate. I agree with timothynott in having a desire to acquire a standalone system based on Wyze product independent of their servers. I, also, would pay more.

As it is, I’m thinking deal breaker for expansion beyond my one, particularly given no PC functionality. I don’t expect to ever get over how presumptuous it is of Apple and Amazon and Microsoft and Google to sell us products that become mainstream critical but that cannot be used without having them all up in our business. It suits me fine if all the non-monopolies who try this crap get boycotted and go belly-up…not wishing for you current Wyze customers to find yourselves holding a dozen paperweights.

Can anyone point me toward a system uninterested in my perpetual devotion…and Windows capable?


As long as the servers stay up and free so I can use what I bought, then I am OK.

BUT I would rather have my own network at some point and when I have time I will. I don’t want a bunch of paper-weights for sure. I do see TinyCam PRO and another RTSP firmware, so I am covered with some work on my side, but not everyone can hack up, write software and design hardware. Cash will not be needed for me for new hardware as I have many Pi’s and PCs in my home. And tabets, ESPs, AVR/PICS, etc, etc.

Just my two cent. BUT I have also sold probably a couple hundred of the cameras alone. I show and they buy, I help them since I told them about WYZE. I do not want to hear I sold them (talked them into; made no commission) and they later have paper-weights thanks to me.

But all a chance we have to take and hope WYZE stays the ideal company as they are to me (does not sell to the *opoly’s) . Other than firmware bugs/UPDATES that are a pain, but the price override that. I happy.

NOW I could have sold WAY MORE for WYZE if more than 50% of the time, in a demo to someone, I did not start with hold on I have to update the firmware. All the time…

OR my wife says roofers are here or I want to know if my son is home. HOLD on, update you MUST take (or I am missing something). I can’t see the roofer, my son. my house until it updates. Most of the time (I’m in my 60’s), by the time I get to the camera (during update) up I forget why I was firing it up LOL. If trying making a sale for WYZE now I’m standing there, looking to defend WYZE in that delay time against ring, blink, other stuff.

I’m sure I am not the only one impress with WYZE and showing the products. Hope they keep listening to what helped get where they are. Peace.


You can simply keep declining the updates (and checking the don’t ask me box). I’ve been doing that forever.

And of course TinyCam doesn’t prompt you for firmware updates.