I tried the Docker container. For me it was the following below that made me NOT use it
No Add-ons:
The most significant limitation is the lack of support for Home Assistant Add-ons. Add-ons are pre-packaged applications that extend Home Assistant’s functionality, such as Node-RED, Zigbee2MQTT, or various media servers. If you require these features, you would need to run them as separate Docker containers alongside Home Assistant and manage their integration manually.
Manual Management:
You are responsible for managing the Docker container yourself, including updates, backups, and network configuration. This differs from Home Assistant OS, which provides a more integrated and automated management experience.
Potential Complexity with Peripherals:
Depending on your setup and the peripherals you want to integrate (e.g., USB devices for Z-Wave or Zigbee), you might need to handle device passthrough and permissions within the Docker environment, which can add complexity.
Docker Hub Rate Limits:
Updating Home Assistant or other containers using Docker Hub can be impacted by rate limits, potentially causing update failures if your IP address exceeds the allowed fetches.
HA OS pulls add-on updates from dockerhub or GitHub GHCR just the same as if you ran the containers in docker, so if you did not run into rate limits using HA OS then you would not run into rate limits using docker directly either
Question to the mods/admins - Has this thread reached it’s end-of-life at this point? Everything has been discussed, and the only new posts are people re-hashing the earlier discussions or asking for edge case migration support that should probably be in new threads…
I am currently running the Supervised version of Home Assistant, which was actually quite easy to install and manage. I also tried running HA OS directly on my hardware, but I got pretty frustrated with the lack of control over the operating system—so that was a no-go for me. For my needs, the Supervised method has been a great compromise.
I really don’t want to use Home Assistant without add-ons and the one-click update experience, which means I’ll probably have to move to HA OS in a VM. Honestly, I don’t really like that solution.
I also think that the usage statistics you’re basing this decision on might be a bit skewed, because in my experience, more advanced users often disable analytics and opt-out of this kind of reporting.
This change makes me wonder if Home Assistant is still the right solution for me. At least we have some time to prepare before support ends.
No matter what, thank you to the whole team and to everyone who dedicates their time to making Home Assistant what it is today. Your work is truly appreciated.
This thread is quite long, but this point has been raised (and discussed) numerous times, and it would likely be beneficial to read previous discussion that further explain how this is not really representative of the situation.
I only use a few of Home Assistant’s many features (energy dashboard, global thermostat, Zigbee devices), so I’m not really looking for a one-to-one alternative. My setup hasn’t changed much in several years, and I’d really prefer not to spend time reworking it. But inevitably, I’ll have to make some changes—either move to a VM (which didn’t run well on my current hardware) or explore other options. Before using HA, I had even built my own recorder and interface.
I’m on armv7, but it’s running on a Raspberry Pi 4, so if I read the original post correctly, I should be able to update HA OS to the 64 bit version and then keep on running on the current HW?
What I haven’t been able to figure out is how.
Is there a simple way to upgrade the OS to the 64 bit version? Or will I have to make a backup, install the new OS on the SD card and then restore the backup after that?
Hope it’s not already answered, I really tried finding it, but it’s a bit hard with the length of this thread
someone can correct me if I am wrong but yes, I believe you will need to make a backup (and save your encryption key!) and then do a fresh install on the SD card. A separate option would be to purchase a new storage medium to use for the new OS
If you are going to stick with the Pi4, I definitely recommend using this as an excuse to go with a external USB SSD. I went with a 128GB model when it was 1st possible to boot a Pi from SSD which was 2-3 years ago I think.
The current installation uses 8% of my SD card, so don’t really see the need
Anyway, i am planning on setting up a brand new system once I am done renovating the house, so I am just trying to do the bare minimum to keep everything running until then.
If the SD is older than a year I’d also take the opportunity to replace it. SD (even extended write- just longer before it happens) will (not if, will) fail at some point in the future. HAs disk write pattern is exactly the wrong kind of disk use if you like keeping Sds long term… You know how much you’re using but not how HA has used it.
My grandfather told me ever buy an old cop car or taxi - fits the bill here. Those aren’t highway miles. That’s a year or more of DB writes on an SD. (That’s donuts in a parking lot every single day for about 6 sets of tires territory) I’d replace it. Even at 8%
You’re right, and I might have overreacted. My thought is that, in the short term, nothing changes. But my concern is more about the long-term trajectory. Once something is deprecated and no longer supported, the next logical step is often complete removal. If Core and Supervised are no longer documented or recommended, how long until we’re told there are “too few users” and that it’s no longer possible to install or update them at all.
