What is going on with the "Free" Cam Plus Lite

I still don’t see exactly where you’re coming from. “Self hosting” has proven to be something that average users just don’t want to do! It doesn’t matter that it can be on Windows, with which you happen to be comfortable. It still means an always on central device in the home or else peer to peer smart devices. It will probably still rely on hosted store apps. For access outside the home it also means a remotely hosted component because most people, even some ardent “gamers” (stupid word) want absolutely nothing to do with port forwarding.

I think you’re asking for something that fits your skill level (understandable) and thinking it matches the general public’s skill level.

The kind of cameras you remember that used to be more prominent were simply webcams. They were standalone devices with internal web servers. In the days before NAT routers were common, many were accessible publicly. They didn’t magically solve ANY of the networking and management issues involved in self hosting.

1 Like

Hi Customer - I think that I found our disconnect. I am not trying to speak for the average user. I am a just a member of the smaller group of users who do know how and do want to do it. Sometimes because we think it’s fun, sometimes because we might have concerns over privacy, or security, or reliability.

Or perhaps longevity - I have a box full of X10 cameras for sale, all fully functional, at least they were when the X10 servers shut down and they became paper-weights. Turns out that requiring your customers to login to your non-existent servers to use their hardware/software doesn’t work all that well, at least not for the customer.

…which most of the people I know already have.

I’m not sure what you mean.

If you mean the ability to self-host would rely on an app from the app-store, I would say it’s possible that there may be a related phone-app that provides access to your feeds directly on your phone, but that would certainly not be a requirement for self-hosting.

On the other hand, if you mean the self-hosting software itself will probably require some sort of remote hosted-app or service, I say no way. IMO, “self-hosting” means not relying on any external servers or services. It should run exactly the same way with or without the internet present.

Remember we are talking about the smaller group of users ‘that do’, so port-forwarding probably isn’t going to ruffle anyone’s feathers. (And if the “gamers” you hang with are sketchy about digging into their router, they are certainly not the “ardent gamers” of which glorified stories are told to children at bedtime all across the inter-webs. They just like playing video games).

True enough. (Though I don’t think that’s what ‘webcam’ means).

Only if you had no basic understanding of networks, or how your cameras communicated, in which case you are absolutely correct, and you probably shouldn’t be messing with that kind of thing.

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” - Arthur C. Clarke.

I think you and I have had very different experiences setting up networks in general and self-hosting services in particular. What issues are you referring to? Configuring and securing your router and network? If you aren’t doing that already, please send me your IP. Setting up some software, maybe playing with some firmware settings? None of this is scary, and I assure you there is no magic involved. (Well maybe a little).

Lastly, I’m not trying to be a pr*ck and pick apart everyone’s posts. I am sorry if I’ve ruffled anyone’s feathers, that was not my intention. My only intention is to point out that “self-hosting” is both possible and necessary, and I congratulate Wyze for allowing the use of the alternate firmware to fulfil that need. (I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt and assuming they had a choice in the matter). I’m just asking for them to go a little bit further and supply the matching software so we don’t need 3rd party apps. I would be ever so grateful for a single-vendor solution.

They provided the RTSP firmware due to vocal minority user demand. The whole point was to get those users off their backs as they continued to develop their cloud “ecosystem”. I can’t imagine why they would then offer a server version mirroring their own cloud services when it would mean the loss of their income streams. And you won’t even tolerate it running on Linux? Why in the world would they spend the time and money developing such a thing?

The number of people in your position is vanishingly small. With RTSP people like you and me can roll our own solution using any number of off the shelf pieces. There are probably too many for Wyze to be able to pick a single solution that would please everyone.

I guess I’m just saying that if you want to self host, you can do so today. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Hi Customer - Thank you for that information. It does make me a little more optimistic about the alternate firmware knowing they at least laid hands on it, and it isn’t just some homebrew concoction (like something I would write). (But now I feel bad for getting all up on their backs about it!)

As for the rest of your post, I can’t disagree with any of your points, at least not from a position of strength.

And it seems you are absolutely correct - what I am asking for is available to us today. It may not be exactly what I was looking for, but beggars can’t be choosers. (I mean, we CAN be, but it usually doesn’t work out well for us).

Knowing the firmware came from (or at least through) Wyze, I feel better about plopping down the $70 or so for Blueiris. I’ll be sure to stop back by afterwards to let you all know how it went.

2 Likes

Okay. :slight_smile:

To be clear:

  1. Wyze provides RTSP firmware for the V2 and V3 cameras as one-offs, with only rare updates and minimal support.

  2. I keep seeing conflicting reports as to whether they still rely on phoning home to Wyze servers / are able to operate off Internet.

  3. There are some alternate firmware projects - mainly Dafang Hacks - that are developed completely separate from anything Wyze endorses. As far as I understand this still supports only the V2.

  4. One big difference is that the 3rd party RTSP firmware turns them into plain IPcams (completely different interface, no Wyze app), whereas the Wyze branded RTSP firmware lets them stream RTSP while also making available most regular Wyzecam features including cloud support.

2 Likes

To RTSP users: Is the time correct? They may need to contact Wyze or another external server for time information more than anything else, although on ‘normal’ Wyze connections they definitely need to contact Wyze for user authorization to view the feed. Hopefully there is SOME security on RTSP as well.

But RTSP discussions have essentially hijacked the thread at this point, so try to stay on topic. :slight_smile:

Excellent and accurate point. Being one of the hijackers - I apologize, both to the readers in general, and the question-asker in particular. While I do enjoy sparing with MrEngineer, I do need to make a stronger effort to stay on-topic, and not just follow the wind.

Cheers

I’ll never buy a system that is tied into the cloud. That’s just a way so they can extort money from you whenever they want. I’m going back to the old CCTV system.

1 Like

I am very unhappy with wyze and them cutting off cloud storage services without subscription. As a customer, most of us purchased several wyze cameras with the knowledge that we had at least 14 days of cloud storage for free, and person detection was included until they didnt want to pay for that anymore and we got the boot. Now, we’re getting the boot again, because I simply WONT pay for 8 cameras to be on the cam plus. This company totally went sour on me and I will not purchase any more wyze cams, bulbs, switches or any of their devices again. Proof will be in the pudding, because most consumers will just look for other options once they realize they arent getting the same thing they had yesterday and wyze wants more money.

1 Like

You don’t have to. You can get CamPlus Lite for all cameras for $0 total if you ignore all the upselling.

1 Like

I think the notion that I now have to pay for a service I don’t want is ludicrous. You had a great product, and you have ruined it. I want to be notified if something trips a camera. I want to see the still image. I want to be able to log into my home and view the recording on an SD card. FOR FREE. That is what I signed up for, not being forced to PAY for the service.

Pitiful

2 Likes

I tried and the website does not work. Now, I don’t even get a sound notification because I didn’t/could not sign up.

Cam Plus Lite doesn’t affect sounds, or notifications. Also, it is still available for sign up. What problems are you experiencing specifically?

My notifications are not sounding. Resetting five cameras is a hassle.

You may want to contact Wyze Support:

Customer Support

There are many ways to contact Wyze. Their phone number is (206) 339-9646, or you can chat with an agent or create a ticket on the support site.

They’re open for support between 4 am-8 pm PT Monday through Friday, and 8 am-4 pm PT Saturday.

1 Like

What on earth are you talking about? An IoT device just needs another device to talk to. PERIOD. All it needs to do is send (and/or receive) data to a know address. It does not need to be a “cloud server”. It could be a device I OWN.

I understand why you did not read this whole thread - it’s long, so to catch you up, I explained that my comments were referring to the 99% of wyze users that do not know how to (or want to) setup port forwarding in their router to make a direct connection from outside the internet into a device in your home.

Also, in order to be able to use the “know(n) address” you mentioned, a user either needs a static IP (which 99.9% of home users do NOT have), or use a “cloud” service like DynDNS.org in order to have a “Known” address to send to.

1 Like

Yeah, Wyze now sucks but all these companies want to rip you off by forcing you into subscriptions (the old razor and blade strategy). I mean, it can’t be that hard to have all the videos saved to your hard drive or phone and a sd card, can it? It looks like they route everything through their servers (the cloud BS) for nothing more than to be able to force you into a subscription. As soon as a company comes out with a way to have a security camera system without routing everything through their servers and rather let you store it locally people will flock to that company! But will all the companies just want to fleece everyone because the subscription route is so lucrative? Hmmm.

Wyze already gives you the option to record to an SD card