I have CamPlus lite with Safari and Camplus unlimited with Chrome and Firefox lol.
1 Like
I have 2 Cam Plus subscriptions. When I try to toggle my other camera’s to Cam Plus Lite to on it just goes toggles back to off? Do I need to do something else? It says if you already have Cam Plus on other cameras you automatically will have Cam Plus Lite the remaining Cams.
The link itself is a URL called “Wyze Home Monitoring Service” but it prompts for login. So different users may land in different places (probably the root for the Services site).
@Nomkindo
If you subscribe to Cam Plus there is no cooldown
If you subscribe to Cam Plus Lite, there is 12 second cloud videos with a 5-minute cooldown
If you do not subscribe to anything you will get thumbnails and a 5-minute cooldown and any videos would have to come from the SD card
2 Likes
After disabling my Safari native content blocker it works fine. Afterwards, I re-enabled my content blocker and it still works on safari. Weird…
This is a sign for us to start looking and testing other cameras 
,they’re tacking a dangerous path. Now we wont have 12 seconds cloud video storage, a promise feature when you buy a camera.
Uh, sure you will? As long as you opt in to the new misspelled "Lite* tier and choose a $0 or higher contribution.
I was thinking this at first too, my friend, but after looking it up (just for fun), I think “Lite” is actually a good appropriately used real word, and I changed my mind and actually prefer it this way now for this particular use case.
Open the dropdown for the history, evolution of, definition and rationale for using the word "Lite"...despite my initial impulse objections
According to Merriam Webster it has been an actual word since all the way back in Old English, meaning “little” (appropriate here since it is like little cam plus) and then later in Middle English to mean to wait, expect and then later “to rely, trust” (which is interesting since it has a “wait period” or cooldown…and the theory of it is to make it so people can have more reliable relevant notifications instead of anything with motion), so it already has some intended appropriate implications that are not implied at all using the word “light”…and then in the 1900’s lite started to be used again as an adjective for commercial products (starting with beverages) to indicate that they are simpler in some way from the original version and it’s now quite commonly used colloquially to refer to anything, food, technology, construction, cosmetology, basically anything, to indicate this sense of having less of something than the original version (so again, appropriate here).
Even if it was slang or colloquial jargon (which it is apparently no longer limited to), how a person uses a word becomes part of the meaning of a word. Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely HATE admitting this as, for example, it drives me CRAZY how the word “literally” has been hijacked to mean the complete opposite of what it is supposed to mean, so that now people can use the word “literally” to mean “figuratively” and there no longer exists a word that solely means the traditional definition of “literally” anymore, which is a complete travesty for human communication…even dictionaries have all updated the definition of literally to include “figuratively” as one of it’s appropriate definitions, which is just pure heresy IMO, and going to harm English communication…which will then likely infect other cultures’ languages and communication the same way…
Having said that, most dictionaries also admit that whether we like it or not, “Lite” is a real word, and has been for centuries and that it is now correct to use it to mean things like the dictionary dot com definition:
From that definition, it seems fairly appropriate…CPLite has less stuff in it than Original Cam Plus, including less cost (cost is undesirable in general), and it is definitely less extreme or advanced than original Cam Plus. I think that is what they intended to convey, so it seems like an accurate representation in that sense, especially considering one of the examples used was about a lite version of an app.
Upset users, detractors or pessimists also have reasons to like the spelling as some definitions include things like:
diminished or lacking in substance or seriousness
being an innocuous or unthreatening version —often used postpositively
To which upset people can joke that it is something diminished or lacking in seriousness or whatever other word play they want to imply.
I don’t particularly like that colloquial use changes words to mean something completely different…but I can’t say that using “Lite” is a misspelling anymore (or really ever has been since it even predates society’s recent obsession with it)…but it is probably more correct than everyone using “literally” when they really mean figuratively or as an emphasis placeholder nowadays…
I think it’s funny that Definition 3 says that when it is used as a noun it means “light” and is definition 36 for “light”…
Ah semantics…sometimes I love them, but sometimes I hate them. In this case, contrary to my initial impulse, I now think Wyze made a really good choice in using the term “Lite” at least for their symbolic intent…and had they used the word “light” they’d also be derided for not using “lite” so it would be Catch-22 either way in some ways, and I kind of like the symbolic and implied history of the “Lite” version of it now.
Anyway, I decided to change my mind after I read the history and symbolism behind it. I had to admit to myself that I was wrong and that it now seems appropriate to use “Lite” for it. I kind of dig it now.
1 Like
Yeah, no. The ancient use, as you note, was a different word, the history page says this word began in the late 20th century, and the main Merriam entry very clearly indicates
No reason to succumb to insulting marketing gimmicks, even if they’re 50 years old. It’s a purposeful misspelling and I reserve the right to continue to let it bug me. 
1 Like
LOL Fair enough buddy, fair enough…as I will also continue to let “literally” being used as figuratively or emphasis to bug me 
Though I grabbed most of the history from Merriam’s own page here, so I think they meant the primary modern use began around 1962, otherwise they are contradicting themselves, since they indicate it is still based on the same word but takes on a new meaning just as it did from old English to Middle English and now to modern English…but it seems the same to me with Literally still being the same word, but taking on a new meaning (that I strongly dislike). But I agree, you reserve the right to continue to let it bug you.
1 Like
But that’s just it, their “little” equivalent wasn’t the same word at all. It just happened to have the same spelling. That’s why this is a completely different word that began as a silly marketing designation in 1962. I think the history page IS consistent with the main page at M-W.
The "literally* thing isn’t just annoying. It’s flatly wrong and there is no argument.
Edit: I was shooting my virtual mouth off without much backing but it seems Grammarly more or less agrees…
Cool down or Gwen Lite may impose the obligatory cooldown (literally.)
To be fair, I believe the above discussion is following the community guidelines
Sometimes we will disagree on topics. You may even think that the other person is outright wrong! That’s just part of being human talking to other humans. But when you respond, remember to criticize ideas, not people …Instead, provide reasoned counter-arguments that focus on the ideas instead of the person.
Keep posts relevant to Wyze…
Be civil…
Keep it clean…
Respect each other…
- It is directly related to the choice of the name of this Wyze service, its relevance, and meaning.
- We were discussing the IDEAS (not people or each other in that sense)
- We both respect each other, and have a long history of good discussions with each other (I am confident neither of us are offended by the discussion or felt the other was attacking them personally…I certainly am not offended in the least, and I like when Customer disagrees with me and backs himself up with some logic and sources. It makes for a good conversation.)
Nonetheless, I agree that this part of the conversation has exhausted itself, particularly to respect others who are following the thread just in case there are updates they would want to know about, and don’t care about things like the philosophical discussion on colloquial naming convention. But a couple of posts worth was somewhat fun.
Your play on your phrasing was rather clever too.
1 Like
I enjoyed it.
I received the eMail offering me the Cam Plus Lite option. When I click on the link in the eMail to go and subscribe to the option, I run into a brick wall. I can select the button for Cam Plus Lite but when I do and I select how much I want to pay, and get to the Review Your Order section, there is a blinking three dots to indicate that there is some processing going on but it never stops. Likewise, I am unable to click the “I agree to the Wyze terms of service” checkbox.
Bottom line, I can’t subscribe/opt-in, because the web site won’t allow me to.
I am on a Windows 10 PC with the latest version of the Brave browser. I also tried to subscribe via my Android phone and Brave browser and am seeing exactly the same behavior.
How do I get around this problem (and PLEASE, do not suggest I install Chrome, because that will NEVER happen).
This may have been asked and I missed it so I apologize if I’m repeating a question, but I have 3 cameras all with SD cards and continuous recording. If I don’t opt in to Cam Plus Lite will I still be able to jump to the SD card recording of motion or sound detection with the new update or will that only work if the SD card is set to record on activation as opposed to continuously? Thanks.
I’d be happy to pitch in for this on two conditions. First, that it actually works and second that it is a fixed monthly amount for my account and not per camera. That is because your cameras are cheaply made and fail often and I use more than what is really required to ensure there are ones that work properly.
Hi there I subbed to the lite version I have turned on the notifications for person detection but I am not getting any notifications
Cheers
Looks like you’re set…
1 Like
Chrome is your friend and would never hurt you.
Ok, with that out of the way, howzabout Firefox? I’ve had good luck with that one when trying to step around broken page functions.
Warning: It may not work. Do not install if the frustration from this result would outweigh any benefit it may provide.