You’re using zigbee to control Phillips hue lights?
Sounds like you think that’s strange?
I don’t use zigbee or hue. Just being curious
Ah right 
Hue devices are primarily Zigbee-based (most Zigbee implementations support them, if you don’t specifically need the Hue bridge). Newer devices have both Zigbee and BLE (but I don’t think there are open source implementations for the BLE part yet).
Tbh, I’ve never understood why people are so opposed to using the Hue bridge , given the fact it is rock solid, and offers so much functionality.
Especially compared to the horrific experience I suffered with the conbee 2 stick …
1 Like
When I researched it for my setup, I just felt the Bridge was just another piece of HW I didn’t need, since I didn’t really see any functionality it provided that I would utilize. I wanted more customization by doing it myself. I can always add it, but ZHA and Conbee was the best approach I could find to allow me to use the Hue bulbs in particular in my almost-entirely Z-wave configuration. So far it has worked great!
1 Like
Well, sure. I get that when you want simple commands to the bulbs. But if you see what the core Hue integration does in connection to the bridge, you’ll wonder how you ever did without it 
1 Like
Are there specific versions of the bulbs that work or don’t work with a zigbee network? It just seems odd to me that hue even allows this. But it’s something I’d purchase if it does work
Multiple reasons:
- I want to take advantage of my existing Zigbee mesh, so my 20+ hue bulbs mesh with my Aqara stuff, my Gledopto stuff and what else you throw at it. There are some offbrand things you can control with the Hue bridge, but it’s fairly limited.
- The Hue bridge only supports 50 devices, then you have to buy another bridge and create a parallel mesh network. This is just dumb.
- I want to manage things from HA, that means creating groups, scenes etc. Having a separate interface, kinda defeats the purpose of what I believe Home Assistant to be.
The big upside of using the bridge, is that it is beginner friendly for taking your first dips into home automation, and that is good for user adoption. And then of course there are some products like the sync box that requires the box.
1 Like
Philips Hue are zigbee. For working devices Zigbee2MQTT or Database of Zigbee devices compatible with ZHA, Tasmota, Zigbee2MQTT, deCONZ, ZiGate and ioBroker
well, let’s agree people all have their own reason to make choices. I for one never liked the aqara devices for being too fragile and unreliable.
And yes, having a large(r) Zigbee mesh could have its advantages.
I would not however classify the Hue polished interface, reliability and options galore to be solely beginner friendly. On the contrary.
But, I take it, you haven’t tasted those using a Zigbee stick
And I’d hate to see the efforts in HA to re-create the live scenes we have nowadays in the native Hue settings, which HA simply imports and doesn’t use any HA resource. Just like the groups and zones. No need to do anything in HA, its simply all there.
I simply don’t trust philips. I spent a lot of cash on a starter kit. At that stage lots of 3rd party devices worked with their hub. Then philips put a stop to that. Then they released a new hub and sidelined my older one. What will they take next?
I trust the devs of z2m, but as you say each to his own.
3 Likes
yes, you are right, using a non proprietary solution has many merits. That’s why I also bought a zigbee stick. Just in case. But in all honesty, and after 3 years of testing, tinkering and what have you, there’s no way that comes close to the current Hue experience… I didn’t even mention the option to import all in Google Home.
I might have been unlucky, but it feels so clunky to use that z2m interface (not even speaking of the Conbee interface) and backend logic. Maybe its because its way more acceptant of other brands, they cant be as polished.
But we can not blame Signify for being favorable to Signify…
Call me silly, but I also use the Ikea Gateway
Agreed. The reason I chose ZW over Zigbee in the beginning, despite it being slower, is the fact it was on a different frequency. I didn’t want to deal with WiFi saturation and interference. ZW is great and there are tons of cool devices for it.
@petro, yes, some Hue products require the Bridge to work, but your standard light bulb type lights which I chose for table lamps and torchieres are Zigbee standard and work fine with ZHA. The Philips site is pretty good at indicating which products require the bridge.
1 Like
I for one never liked the aqara devices for being too fragile and unreliable.
But that is just one brand, Signify has quite the restrictions in what you can use. As they naturally want you to stick with their products, even if they don’t even offer an alternative.
And yes, having a large(r) Zigbee mesh could have its advantages.
Goes without saying.
I would not however classify the Hue polished interface, reliability and options galore to be solely beginner friendly. On the contrary.
But, I take it, you haven’t tasted those using a Zigbee stick
Oh I do, I got one in my closet that I test out whenever Signify release new features, to see if it’s something worthwhile. I do like the dynamic scenes, and I have managed to recreate them in HA natively, but it’s not something that is being used in our household. But I’m interested to hear, what specific benefits do you think the bridge bring to the table besides the live scenes?
I don’t trust any of the big companies but I’m willing to try the product to see for myself
1 Like
Thanks. That’s what I was looking for.
Well, never mind I guess maybe you don’t really want to hear. Let’s just summarize the main advantage being the direct communication between Bridge and bulbs. No stress on the Ha processor (at all).
And these new scenes, you can’t have done that in core, simply because of that. It’s all directly on device (bulb).
Same for the hue groups/zones, which are even more efficient than Ha light groups .
And other functionality: hmm let me see, I set sensitivity, (light level and motion) , schedules etc etc.
Lastly, I am glad they keep their ecosystem clean, and promote their own products to be supported. What else would we expect from a Brand. Open it up to the many threats of badly programmed/behaving 3D party devices?
I understand the downside of a single brand (maybe even cloud, though this is all local) . Fully relate and respect the reservations we should have in that regard.
But I also have an open mind, and see the many benefits of that in the case of Hue. For now, the balance is 100% in their favor if you ask me.
Well, never mind I guess maybe you don’t really want to hear.
No I was actually curious, being honest here, apologies if you read it any other way.
direct communication between Bridge and bulbs. No stress on the Ha processor (at all).
Unless you toggle lighting from the dashboard, or automations based in HA I suppose?
Nevertheless I use a Raspberry Pi and there is no discernible difference in resource consumption.
new scenes
Do you mean akin to this?
There is no reason you can’t do that in HA natively. If you mean the dynamic scenes where the colours slowly change, I have been able to do that in HA as well.
Same for the hue groups/zones, which are even more efficient than Ha light groups .
Please elaborate, how it is more efficient than a ZHA set group.
sensitivity, (light level and motion) , schedules etc etc.
Which I can do in HA?
Lastly, I am glad they keep their ecosystem clean, and promote their own products to be supported. What else would we expect from a Brand. Open it up to the many threats of badly programmed/behaving 3D party devices?
Fair point, coming back to the beginner friendliness. Less things that can go wrong, but also more restrictions. It is definitely suited for a large group of users.