As a longtime journalist, news junkie and editorial leader of CE Pro, it’s very hard to ignore some articles in the press that take aim squarely at our industry. A few days ago, I saw the headline “Smart Homes Are Terrible” on social media, and I couldn’t help but give it a click. I even signed up for The Atlantic’s free trial just so I could read it.
Anyways, this new one—from the CEO of a tech company of all things—was an opinion piece so we can’t exactly look at this with a critical journalism lens. Still, headlines like this rile me up.
Why Smart Homes are ‘Terrible’
Here are the author’s key complaints, which are really summed up as complexity and usability issues:
- Everyday controls feel overly complex. Basic tasks require learning unfamiliar interfaces across multiple apps and devices.
- Feedback and reliability are lacking. Touchscreens provide little confirmation, while lag and automation conflicts make systems feel unpredictable.
- Users lose control when things go wrong. When failures occur, troubleshooting is opaque, often requiring outside help.
I’ve seen a few of these industry takedown pieces within the last year from someone or a group of people who had a bad experience with a smart home system. There was one from last Spring that really left an impression on me. From The Hollywood Reporter, the article—citing only interior designers and luxury real estate professionals—said the ultra-wealthy are done with smart homes.
That one was original reporting and didn’t cite anyone from our industry, but it did mention one prominent manufacturer directly by name. Did anyone from our industry get the chance to set the record straight and talk about how the industry is solving ease of use issues and designing sleeker, design-forward products? Nope.
The Problems with These Types of Discussions on the Smart Home
These anecdotal examples of frustrating smart home systems are not fabricated, but they don’t tell the full story. I’m not questioning anyone’s honesty—quite the opposite. The experiences are real and valid, and they deserve serious consideration by the industry. I think they present a one-sided view of how and why these systems fail, without fully engaging with the realities of the industry.
But here’s the thing about this article. The author’s primary complaints are about a rental home he arranged for his parents. It’s a new construction filled with smart home systems, he writes.
The house wasn’t designed for him or his parents, wasn’t commissioned around their habits, and didn’t include the training or support that a professionally integrated smart home typically requires. Temporary occupants are dropped into a system with no context, documentation, or guidance, making even well-intended technology feel confusing and hostile.
We also don’t know about his parents’ tech literacy or their experience with smart home system. Complex home automation systems in a rental home (without proper client education) just sound like a disaster waiting to happen.
There are Real Negative Consequences, Though
Without commissioning and ongoing support, small issues in a rental smart home compound into daily frustrations, leaving problems unresolved because no one truly owns the system. The author’s critique reflects this edge case of poorly implemented automation, ultimately reinforcing an industry reality: smart homes succeed or fail based on design, usability, and long-term support rather than the technology itself.
However, the author’s frustration with smart homes isn’t isolated to this one incident with a rental home. He writes that in his own past home, he and his wife chose to install a range of automated systems including low-voltage controls, motorized blinds, and smart irrigation, but “regretted it almost immediately.” He explains that the systems required ongoing setup, were prone to glitches, and often demanded paid technician visits to keep them working, making them more time-consuming and frustrating than doing things manually.
Because of that experience, he says that in their current renovation, they’ve decided to abandon most automation in favor of traditional, analog controls which he describes as more reliable, understandable, and ultimately more “progressive” than complex smart systems.
The Big Takeaway for Integrators
The issues described largely stem from poor implementation rather than the technology itself. Smart homes fail when systems are installed as disconnected products without human-centered design, proper commissioning, or a strong infrastructure foundation. Without thoughtful interfaces, clear automation logic, and ongoing support, small problems compound and make everyday interactions feel slower, more confusing, and less reliable than traditional controls.
While I don’t think articles like this aren’t especially fair—especially since they throw an entire industry under the bus—I do think the industry needs to be aware of some of this negative sentiment. There are many talking industry heads that preach simplicity and human-centric design, but examples like this are proof that the industry still has some work to do.
At best, the custom integration industry has a public relations problem. At worst, we’re still grappling with nagging complexity issues. Personally, I think the issue lies somewhere in-between.
