Why touchscreens are better regarded than Apps.
Apps and touchscreens: Whilst the functional result (in terms of control) might be similar in many cases, there are plenty of differences otherwise: The most obvious distinguishing aspect being that touchscreens mount to / near the structure under their sphere of influence, whereas Apps can be installed to / on / in any smart device. There are some other differences also, have a look right here at what ElectronicHouse magazine has to say regarding these differences, and some pros and cons of both formats.
Here at 5thCorner we tend to install touchscreen controller as the default, then add an App controller as the adjunct/auxiliary controller if such a thing is available. Luckily almost every system worth having these days has a App controller option. There are a few reasons why we think it’s important to start with the touchscreen as the primary control: 1) It’s reasonable to assert that primary control over your home should flow from something that is an actual part of your home: ‘tangible-geo-tethering’ if you will. 2) Although there is a lot of action happening around wireless control, all the evidence points to the superiority of hardwired systems wherever possible: Structured cabling rules: For more information about this point click here. 3) It’s very difficult to lose your touchscreen if it’s firmly connected to your house, you’re phone or tablet on the other hand…………………when did you last hear someone complain they’d left their lounge-room wall at the coffee bar / gym? I know; facetious; but you get my drift right? The same can be said about cracked screens on portable devices: if the screen breaks badly enough, the device is rendered useless. If your only controller is app based that would be most inconvenient.
The good news is that touchscreens come in many shapes and sizes so they can match / enhance your decor. Again, here at 5thCorner, because we’re all frustrated designers, we strive to ensure these things look good when they go in.