Arlo Video Doorbell launches with large field of view, but no HomeKit

Arlo Video Doorbell

Smart home purveyor Arlo has announced the new Arlo Video Doorbell with a wide vertical field of view — but unfortunately no HomeKit integration.

The new video doorbell camera is here to take on the likes of Ring and August. It has a simple black/white design with the camera on top above a large doorbell button.

Along with a wide horizontal field of view, it also has a large vertical field of view to give a more complete picture of the owner's porch. It records as a 1:1 aspect ratio instead of the standard 16:9.

It has built-in motion sensing, accepts video calls, and can relay pre-recorded messages to visitors. It has support for night vision as well as HDR and can zoom in on a video while a call is live.

The doorbell also has a siren integrated that can sound whenever someone attempts to forcibly remove the Arlo Video Doorbell from the door.

When pressed on HomeKit support, Arlo says they have no announcement to make at this time.

It will be available to preorder later this week and will retail for $149.99.

Follow AppleInsider on Google News

10 Comments

gatorguy

said about 4 years ago

At first glance I thought a Nest Hello was accidently used for the picture

mike1

said about 4 years ago

Battery or must it be hardwired?

Edit: Found on their site that it must be hardwired. Bummer.

EsquireCats

said about 4 years ago

I'll just add my 2c as I use Arlo Pro cameras, and generally speaking if you're using their doorbell, then you might be committed to using their other cameras to, or at least have to deal with the issues below when reviewing video footage.

1. Arlo's motion sensing is poor, even on the most sensitive setting. I can come home, unlock and enter the house without it even noticing me. (The camera isn't that far away either.) Most of the time the action has happened before arlo has even started recording.
2. Arlo's video serving service is slow, even when I know exactly the time I'm looking for, I am always left waiting, often the video thumbnails don't even load. It's utterly helpless if you're trying to track down something like damage to your property when you're not sure when it may have happened (or if the Arlo even managed to record it.)
3. Arlo's video viewer is wet garbage, you can't flick through a video to find a relevant section. The only option is to download it to the phone, then review it in a separate app once it's full downloaded. (Not very helpful if you're not sure exactly when the event happened.)
4. The video quality itself is poor. Even on the highest setting.
5. The battery life is garbage, and the plug in options such as the solar panel are insufficient. Their own usb cord and adapter frequently throw errors in the app (and thus can't be kept plugged in to keep the camera charged.)

Did I mention no HomeKit support? I can see why they fail certification. It's a shit-show of amateur hardware and software.

neilm

said about 4 years ago

My inner gadget freak wants a video doorbell.

But I've viewed a number of posted videos from them, and what they mostly do is confirm that some unidentifiable person has indeed stolen your Amazon package, or taken the bike you left unsecured on the porch — things you already knew. Yes, if you see a gang of armed home invaders outside your door that would be useful, but is that a likely risk? Or if the neighbor is letting his dog poop in your yard then I guess there's that.

But it seems to me that if you have an actual case for video surveillance, then you need a real surveillance setup with proper video cameras that are mounted out of reach of a strip of black electrical tape. And a wide angle lens isn't ideal, since while the field of view becomes larger, the size of what you see becomes smaller and indistinct. I'd want to see identifiable faces, license plates, etc.

4K resolution would help, since then you might be able to enlarge the video to see something useful. This "article" about the Arlo video doorbell, which seems to be no more than a paraphrased press release, doesn't even state what the camera resolution is. In fact it doesn't state much of anything at all.

Are these things anything more than a mild convenience device, so that while you're in the kitchen you can see that the pizza guy is at the front door?

gatorguy

said about 4 years ago

neilm said:

My inner gadget freak wants a video doorbell.

But I've viewed a number of posted videos from them, and what they mostly do is confirm that some unidentifiable person has indeed stolen your Amazon package, or taken the bike you left unsecured on the porch — things you already knew. Yes, if you see a gang of armed home invaders outside your door that would be useful, but is that a likely risk? Or if the neighbor is letting his dog poop in your yard then I guess there's that.

But it seems to me that if you have an actual case for video surveillance, then you need a real surveillance setup with proper video cameras that are mounted out of reach of a strip of black electrical tape. And a wide angle lens isn't ideal, since while the field of view becomes larger, the size of what you see becomes smaller and indistinct. I'd want to see identifiable faces, license plates, etc.

4K resolution would help, since then you might be able to enlarge the video to see something useful. This "article" about the Arlo video doorbell, which seems to be no more than a paraphrased press release, doesn't even state what the camera resolution is. In fact it doesn't state much of anything at all.

Are these things anything more than a mild convenience device, so that while you're in the kitchen you can see that the pizza guy is at the front door?

Au contraire...
I just had an issue last week where a recently released felon walked down our woods-lined street to my home and walked up to the porch. My Nest Hello sent me an alert for an "unfamiliar face" before he even rang the doorbell to see if anyone answered. A few seconds later when he stuck his finger under his shirt to ring the bell I knew then he was trouble.

Immediate call to 911 rather than responding to the ring. He was looking down the street to see if anyone was out and about and walked to the back of the house while the police indicated they were only a couple minutes out. They arrived in time to scare him into the woods where they lost him, but my video from the Hello was so perfectly clear and from several angles one of the officer's recognized him straightaway from a previous arrest. They'll be watching for him.