Does Matter Deepens Vendor Lock-In?
In the world of the smart home, the latest Matter protocol news often presents a sleek, heavily marketed promise of a simplified, locally controlled future. This vision, created by a coalition of tech giants, is that Matter is the unifying standard where all devices work together seamlessly. It’s a compelling and convenient picture of reality, curated by the very architects of Big Tech. It is, in the language of The Matrix, the Blue Pill.
But there is a more complex reality to consider—the Red Pill. While Matter is presented as a tool of liberation promising interoperability, its real-world application reveals a different story. The path to genuine, sovereign local control is not a future promise of Matter; it is a present reality already established by proven protocols like Zigbee and Z-Wave and smart hubs such as Home Assistant. These platforms offer deep control over devices, data, and home logic today, without the required oversight of corporate servers.
Deconstructing the Construct
Matter’s core promise is one of effortless interoperability: “look for the logo and it will just work,” freeing consumers from complex compatibility charts. In practice, performance has been inconsistent. An officially Matter-certified device can still fail to work with a major platform if that platform has not implemented its specific device profile. This gap between promise and reality has led to real-world frustration. As one homeowner posted online:
“I bought a new Matter-certified air purifier because the box had all the logos… I found out Apple hasn’t added support for air purifiers… What’s the point of the logo if it’s a lie?” (XDA Developers, 2023).
This points to a fundamental weakness in the structure of the Connectivity Standards Alliance (CSA), Matter’s governing body. The CSA permits corporations to selectively support device types according to their product roadmaps. This approach risks perpetuating the very fragmentation Matter was meant to eliminate (IoT For All, 2025).
Matter’s most celebrated feature, Multi-Admin, allows a single device to be controlled by multiple systems. However, it has been described by users as “functionally broken.” A frustrated user on Reddit detailed the experience:
“Multi-admin is completely broken… If I manage to connect a device to more than one platform, invariably, it soon shows offline in one or another platform and, in some cases, completely disappears from it altogether” (Reddit, 2024b).
Beyond connection stability, this process can create what users call a metadata black hole. When a device is shared, its essential information is often not transferred. A device named “Living Room Floor Lamp” might appear in a second app as a generic “On/Off Light” in an unassigned room. For a home with dozens of devices, the prospect of reconfiguring every single one is a monumental problem. This omission appears to be a strategic business decision. By not standardizing metadata sharing, it becomes more difficult for users to migrate from one ecosystem to another, which can strengthen vendor lock-in (Reddit, 2024b).
A System of Strategic Choices
The persistent challenges in the Matter protocol suggest a pattern of strategic omissions and architectural decisions that serve the business models of its creators.
The standard is updated on a predictable bi-annual schedule, and with each release, the cycle begins anew. The latest Matter protocol news highlights the Matter 1.4 update, which added support for appliances like refrigerators and ovens. Yet, these incremental updates do little to fix the protocol’s underlying structural issues. This approach from the Connectivity Standards Alliance expands device compatibility on paper, but often reduces sophisticated hardware to its most basic functions, a point we will return to.
Telling evidence is the absence of entire product categories. Years after its launch, Matter still lacks support for security cameras, video doorbells, and alarm systems. The official reason given is “technical complexity,” an unconvincing claim for an IP-based protocol. A more direct explanation is economic protectionism. Standardizing local video streaming would directly threaten the multi-billion-dollar revenue from cloud services like Amazon’s Ring Protect and Google’s Nest Aware (Z-Wave Alliance, 2023).
This approach of managed capabilities also applies to supported devices. For instance, Matter 1.2 added robotic vacuums, but the specification only includes basic on/off functions. Advanced features like room mapping remain accessible only through the manufacturer’s proprietary app. A skeptical Reddit user captured this intentional limitation, noting that Matter devices often only allow basic “on-off” control, while for anything more advanced, “you need the proprietary app” (Reddit, 2024a).
This reveals Matter’s current function: it provides a baseline of control sufficient to earn the logo on the box, while more valuable, data-rich features are often held back. This ensures users remain engaged with the manufacturer’s proprietary app and cloud services.
This dependency is part of a Great Unbundling, a significant shift in smart home architecture. In this model, the two core jobs of a hub are split. Locally controlled hubs like Home Assistant or Hubitat represent the traditional, bundled approach, operating as a self-contained brain for the home.
The new, unbundled model is different. Devices like the Google Nest Hub and Amazon Echo act as simple messengers, handling only device communication. The system’s brain, including automation rules and user data, is extracted from the home and centralized in the proprietary cloud servers of Google, Amazon, and Apple.
This unbundling is at the core of Matter’s current implementation. The protocol is marketed as enabling local control because commands happen on the local network. However, while the command to turn on a light is transmitted locally, the intelligence that formulates the command is often cloud-based. The latest updates may highlight offline features, but this does not change the foundational design, which is an architecture built to centralize control in the cloud (The Verge, 2024).
Even for users of local-first hubs like Home Assistant, the challenge is that advanced device features often remain exclusive to the manufacturer’s proprietary app. This can force a user to connect to the cloud for full functionality, chaining them into the manufacturer’s ecosystem.
Choosing a Proven Reality
The discussion around Matter obscures a simple truth: it is a developing solution to a problem that has already been solved. For those whose goal is true local control, the path was paved years ago by the sovereign protocols of Zigbee and Z-Wave. These technologies are mature, reliable, and private ecosystems not beholden to Big Tech. They simply work.
The real question is not if Matter will ever become what it claims, but whether it is needed at all for a truly private and locally controlled smart home. As it stands today, the answer is no.
The market reflects a conflict between two opposing philosophies. On one side are the tech giants competing to draw users into their cloud-dependent platforms. On the other are the leaders of local control, like Hubitat and Home Assistant. Of these, Home Assistant stands as the ultimate example of a sovereign smart home platform, built by a community and driven by open-source principles. A discerning user who values privacy, stability, and genuine ownership can build a truly free and connected home today, without waiting for a corporate-controlled future that may not arrive.
References
IoT For All. (2025). Why the Matter protocol hasn’t lived up to its promise. IoT For All. https://www.iotforall.com/why-the-matter-protocol-hasnt-lived-up-to-its-promise
Reddit. (2024a). Is matter bait? r/homeassistant. https://www.reddit.com/r/homeassistant/comments/1gai4gs/is_matter_bait/
Reddit. (2024b). Matter is the worst protocol… and honestly, they should give up. r/homeassistant. https://www.reddit.com/r/homeassistant/comments/1lfubmk/matter_is_the_worst_protocol_and_honestly_they/
Silicon Labs. (n.d.). Matter vs Z-Wave: What you need to know. Silicon Labs. https://www.silabs.com/blog/matter-vs-z-wave-what-you-need-to-know
Tech Edition. (2025). Samsung’s newest SmartThings hub drops Z-Wave support. https://www.techedt.com/samsungs-newest-smartthings-hub-drops-z-wave-support
The Verge. (2024). Google Home hubs can now work locally thanks to Matter. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2025/1/8/24338969/google-home-hubs-local-control-matter
XDA Developers. (2023). Matter’s broken promises: After spending time with Matter, I’m starting to doubt this is the future of smart homes. https://www.xda-developers.com/matter-doubting-future-of-smart-homes/
Z-Wave Alliance. (2023). Z-Wave continues to dominate the residential smart home and security system market. Z-Wave Alliance. https://z-wavealliance.org/news_p/z-wave-continues-to-dominate-the-residential-smart-home-and-security-system-market-while-z-wave-long-range-breaks-barriers-for-edge-of-property-applications-2/
Recent Matter Protocol News paints a picture of a unified smart home. But behind this polished facade lies a calculated strategy by Big Tech to deepen vendor lock-in, replacing old hardware walls with a more subtle, digital prison. Matter was meant to unify the smart home, but corporate self-interest has led to significant Matter protocol problems. This reality raises a critical question for consumers: Will Matter replace Zigbee? Given the standard’s current state, reliability is not its strong suit.
One Comment
Comments are closed.