Apps, integrations, addons, plugins are all applications.
integrations, addons and plugins is somewhat defined by their name in relation to their function.
Apps is just short for applications and therefore cover both integrations, addons and plugins.
Yeah, I understand the real architecture a little bit.
But I’m talking about “abstraction for the users”. Someone gets a new phone, it has OS installed, user can install apps. Same for HA. Someone gets a new HA server, has/gets OS installed and… wants to install apps.
For layman the best analogy to “real os apps” are integrations, I’d argue. Those are the thingies that users install and interact with to have new stuff going on in HA.
I know that technically HA is a WebUI upon REST API upon some core engine being dockerized app in the real OS being some kind of Alpine Linux or something –> but that’s technicalities.
U want technical people or laymen? Adjust the vocabulary accordingly.
You aren’t installing anything, you are configuring them. They are already installed.
The button says “add integration”, not “install integration”
addons say “Install addon”
And to be honest, the UI is moving away Add integration terminology by saying add device or select brand. So integrations shouldn’t even be a part of this discussion.
I don’t have a “Configure integration” button, but I do have “Add integration” button.
Actually I’d prefer if under the hood it wasn’t all centralized like it is now (big monorepo of mixed HA “UI” a.k.a. “OS” and “apps” a.k.a. “integrations”), but that’s for a different discussion ofc xd
Anyway: imagine this being Apple – App Store could also “preinstall all the apps” and u’d just “add” (or as u call it “configure”) them. But there are gazzzilion apps. Maybe as HA gets bigger we’d actually “install” (download) integrations/apps, as well, but we’re again talking about technicallities and not my point → of being good abstractions for “layman people”.
So integrations shouldn’t even be a part of this discussion.
They are, as there can only by one thingy called “app” → and my point is that it shouldn’t be “addons” but “integrations” 
You aren’t reading what I’m writing, you’re just sticking to your guns like every conversation we have.
1 Like
If I wasn’t, I woudn’t quote you and directly respond to your arguments.
We’re just having different opinions – don’t expect me to change mine if u haven’t convinced me 
You completely skipped over the direction integrations are going to argue the sentence after.
That tells me you’re trying to argue your point because it’s your point, not because it’s the right path for everyone.
Nope? You edited your post, and the quote u’re trying to use as an argument of me not “reading what u’re writing” is the LAST sentence u actually added with an edit. But whatev. I’ll respond now:
OK, good to know. Does it change the overall “architecture terminology for laymen” argument? I kinda don’t think so. It’s cool we may add devices directly in the future I guess. U certainly know better how it will work, I don’t, so I can’t judge in this matter.
If my mind went bad on this one, I’m sorry.
I’m pretty sure your original post was only the first line when I was replying. Later it had more stuff. Did you delete your post and added a new one while I was still writing the reply? Or fast edits don’t count? If so, that would technically explain no edits.
If not, I don’t know… call me challenged and I’m sorry for being that.
EDIT: I just did a fast edit it isn’t shown ;p
EDIT2: I have now re-read our discussion. I now know what you meant by saying I’m “skipping” and “arguing the sentence after”.
If “fast edits” were visible, u’d see I have also edited that post. My edit added response to what you “fast edited”. And I didn’t respond to all of it, therefore skipping, you’re right. I guess we’re both trying to communicate “too fast” There is my fault as well, sorry, have a good day!
EDIT3: fast one, only the middle edit will be visible, sneaky ;p
EDIT4: actually 1 edit visible when 4 made xd
I really think many people here are too close to the issue to see the forest for the trees. I think if we want to make things easier to understand for new users (and that’s a big if, not everyone has that high on their agendas) , the whole difference between integrations and add-ons should disappear from the front end. Of course it is still very relevant for developers and advanced users and it should be well documented which parts are in a separate container etc. But in my view, to the average person the distinction is about as relevant as knowing whether HA is written in Python or C++. And the names? App and add-on and plug-in are already used for a thousand things that are not the same, so it doesn’t matter if you add another use for it. Integration is more specific to HA in the software world but it has many other meanings in math or colloquial use. Pick one and stick to it.
4 Likes
Reference to integrations should be hidden as much as possible, but addons or separate applications should not. We should really only care about our devices, and how they are configured and any software we run along side HA.
i.e. devices and apps
2 Likes
They’re all software, but they aren’t all applications. Applications to me are software that runs independently from other applications. I think most people will agree that applications are standalone, except for the OS it runs on.
Software that doesn’t need a host OS is firmware.
Drivers, OTOH, is to the OS as integrations are to HA. Can’t do anything with driver software by itself.
I maintain that “add-on apps” are the clearest to me. Apps (standalone software) that works in conjunction with HA (I know there are exceptions like the Terminal & SSH add-on, but even where it does have a hard dependency on HA, those are still started and stopped by itself, i.e. they’re separate applications).
1 Like
Why? For example, when someone wants to add Zigbee functionality to their instance, is it necessary for them to have to look in two different places?
No, they just try to add a zigbee device.
Right now when you select add integration you’re met with a dialog box that allows you to search brands. In all likelihood, with the device path HA is moving. We just need to swap that out for add device and people wouldn’t be the wiser.
Not sure what you mean “look in 2 places”.
ZHA is an integration, Z2M is an add-on. 2 addons, actually. I did not mean add a zigbee device. I meant add the functionality of Zigbee to their instance.
To you yes, but maybe not to others.
Just read the terminology section here.
It is also a mess and it seems that there are as many views on this as there are users.
Firmware I would define as a piece of code that is fixed in functionality when compiled.
That’s already plug and play, literally plug the zigbee adapter in and HA auto discovers it. No searching. Very much unrelated to this, unless the user wants Z2M which they will be adding as an addon. They don’t need to go anywhere else for that.
Just to make it all worse.
HACS is an integration that is installed through an addon. Talk about confusing the user!
1 Like
so all applications written in languages being compiled