Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd. - Support Forums and Community

Full Version: CQC and native Alexa (again)
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I have been looking around at different ways to use Alexa with CQC.

Initially, it was a Raspberry Pi with Fauxmo.  Fauxmo would emulate a Belkin Wemo device and then send out HTP Get requests which CQC would be trained to act upon.

I was looking around a bit more this morning and found that there is now a project that does the same thing on the ESP8266/ESP32 - FauxmoESP.

[url=https://randomnerdtutorials.com/alexa-echo-with-esp32-and-esp8266/][/url]When you delve into the examples and such there is a C, C++ header file used for this functionality.  As CQC uses C/C++ (from my understanding) it should [hopefuly] be possible to add this to CQC in some fashion, weather its a driver or an add-on option during install.

Is there any reason why CQC could not have this functionality built in directly so that the user can define the name and then attach that to a field instead of a URL as in say the Fauxmo examples?

Dean, I don't think you need to re-invent the wheel here - so much great work has already been done.  Other platforms such as Home assistant are offering Alexa integration like this and I think that you really need to do this with CQC.

PS
I was doing something like this with Tasmota/MQTT and alexa.  Tasomta allows Alexa control (Wemo/Philips emulation) and then the MQTT would publish and CQC would run a triggered event.  That gave me very simple control over any CQC field.
Dean,

I agree with Mykel 200%. CQC needs a well integrated and easy to use voice input capability. 

Bryan
No, that's for hardware devices apparently.
Do what is the level of effort for a well integrated and easy to use voice input capability for CQC? Or is there not enough demand to warrant the work required?
I get the demand, it'll just be a considerable dive in to get it done, so I've been loath to do it so far. And the old scheme still has to be supported presumably since those folks who had a system in place still get the old functionality. So I can't replace what's there, I'll have to create a whole new thing. Or, I guess just replace it and deal with any ire that creates.