I don’t understand your statement here. There are 100’s of devices that “just DO NOT work” with ZHA because no one has yet written the unique translation of the devices attributes and methods for ZHA.
If you mean that the device will connect to the ZHA network, but offer zero function, well…
Devices that properly follow the zigbee protocol (as far as it goes) should not need any quirks written to function in ZHA.
My Sonoff S40 plug and I think most of the Sonoff battery devices I had(but I threw them out a while ago), Third Reality Plug with Energy Monitoring, even some Tuya PIR sensors - all worked in ZHA without any custom quirk or driver from the day they were released.
But as Tinkerer said, there’s not many such devices in the grand scheme of things. Still, it is one area ZHA does better than z2m. NOTHING works in z2m until a converter is written.
@jerrm Seems a bit pedantic to argue where ZHA or Zigbee2mqtt supports a device, in some definition of ‘core’ system or via some type of add on driver subsystem. If ‘quirks’ or ‘herdsman converters’ were not necessary then why are they there?
I’m far from an expert on the zigbee standards, however it appears to be that it was written in a way to allow for extension beyond the ‘standard’, good bad or whatever.
“Still, it is one area ZHA does better than z2m”, I struggle with telling something like this to a new person in zigbee home automation as something helpful.
To each his own.
It is a fact, ZHA supports many devices without any quirk needed.
Most devices? No, but many.
It’s one of the reasons I keep ZHA around in addition to z2m. There have been several times I have been able to use a new device out of the box with ZHA while waiting for z2m to be updated.
If comparing pros and cons of each, it is a checkmark for the ZHA column. Z2M still wins that comparison overall IMO. If I only had one, it would be z2m, but it’s easy to keep both.