The future of Ubiquiti - it does not seem they will go down a slippery slope and do bad for their customers

[Arjun]

@wittaj
We know that Ubiquiti lacks in some areas, but they have been advancing steadily and fastidiously with multiple product releases every quarter. I highly doubt they will ever charge a subscription fee for accessing features on their products - they are not Ring, Nest, or any of these other companies which are not privacy-driven. Their recent announcement of surveillance products look refined, polished, and just work out of the box.
The only aspect that remains to be seen is further customization on their cameras such as shutter speed / exposure - if they ever enable the feature in their software, it may be a step in the right direction and open the door to migrating away from the Chinese counterparts
Ubiquiti was not obligated to support third-party ONVIF cameras; they were not obligated to even enable motion and audio for ONVIF cameras.
The newest release of UniFi Protect seems very promising. Now if only they can further work on their hardware - their future is going to be strong.

 

[The Automation Guy]

They are really beginning to hit their stride IMHO. For example, they are releasing two new "pro" grade networking switches that are specifically designed for use in AV (audio visual) situations. There are a ton of audio and video protocols being used by various AV manufactures and switch manufactures like Netgear have realized that there is a real need for products specifically designed for AV use. "Clocking" is extremely important when sending audio and video and these switches support these extra clocking protocols as well as come with "presets" for a lot of these different protocols to make setting up the switch much easier than trying to manually set each and every important parameter by hand. Ubiquity seems to be jumping on this bandwagon as well. Competition is always a good thing for the industry.

 

[bp2008]

I am curious what is the difference between a regular network switch and one that is optimized for "AV" streaming. Because generally speaking a regular wired ethernet switch will have only a few microseconds of latency and 0% packet loss at virtually all times (unless the stuff you plug into that switch is garbage).

Where is there room to improve? What could this possibly do for a surveillance video use case, which already uses streaming protocols and buffers robust enough to handle high latency internet streaming with packet loss?

Edit: Apparently Ubiquiti's new "Enterprise Audio/Video" switches are targeted at totally different projects, the kind you might find in a stadium or broadcast TV studio. The kind of audio/video equipment that costs orders of magnitude more than a UniFi Video deployment.

 

[Arjun]

I am curious what is the difference between a regular network switch and one that is optimized for "AV" streaming. Because generally speaking a regular wired ethernet switch will have only a few microseconds of latency and 0% packet loss at virtually all times (unless the stuff you plug into that switch is garbage).

Where is there room to improve? What could this possibly do for a surveillance video use case, which already uses streaming protocols and buffers robust enough to handle high latency internet streaming with packet loss?

Edit: Apparently Ubiquiti's new "Enterprise Audio/Video" switches are targeted at totally different projects, the kind you might find in a stadium or broadcast TV studio. The kind of audio/video equipment that costs orders of magnitude more than a UniFi Video deployment.

I honestly think this is targeted as you said, for stadium or broadcast TV studio to ensure virtually zero latency.