Product designers need to consider whether the benefits of Internet connectivity are worth the risks. Consumers expect that such data will be collected and handled with some degree of privacy and security, and the convenience of Internet-based data collation and access to data will only be accepted by the market if it doesn’t also come with unacceptable privacy concerns.

If your design incorporates Internet connectivity, does this connectivity contribute to a positive, easy user experience or does it potentially make the user experience more difficult? If your product or design requires the consumer to have an existing Wi-Fi or Ethernet network to provide Internet connectivity, for example, is this inconvenient for some consumers?

Even though most consumers already have Wi-Fi networks, is the product still worthwhile for consumers that don’t? What about if the Internet connection to the LAN, or a mobile or cellular Internet connection if that’s what you’re using, fails? Can your design still function usefully in an environment without Internet connectivity, or is it completely useless?

Can the device work in a transparent, convenient way for the end user in an environment where the Internet connectivity is unreliable and may be off-line sometimes? For example, can data be temporarily buffered in local memory while the device is off-line, and then transmitted to the Internet service later, reconnecting transparently without user intervention?

Adding Internet-of-Things connectivity to a design can introduce hardware complexity, and extra cost for your device. It can mean other increased costs such as server and hosting costs, the costs of wireless LAN or other network infrastructure, the cost of cellular network access if cellular modems are used, and potentially the significant costs associated with RF regulatory compliance, testing and approval for consumer products which are intentional RF radiators. Such regulatory requirements may be simplified or eliminated if the RF connectivity component of your design is eliminated.

Are these costs worth it for the benefits? Or are you simply over-engineering, and adding “Internet of Things” connectivity because it’s in vogue and it’s a trendy buzzword? Do these features provide value for money in the context of your particular product, or are they simply features for features’ sake?

Overcomplicated, over-engineered systems that try and pack too many features into a single design can potentially suffer from disadvantages such as increased hardware cost and size, decreased market uptake due to relatively high cost, relatively high power consumption, more difficult and complicated user interfaces, and greater challenges in trying to assure the reliability, security, low maintenance and support costs of your design.

Furthermore a larger, more complicated system inevitably has more points of potential hardware (or software) failure, more work to be done in debugging and quality assurance, and more potential points of security vulnerability.

All this may sound like the Internet-of-things is a negative point of difference for existing and potential products – however this couldn’t be further from the truth. You already know that connected devices are the way of the future. The key to success is in understanding the risks and benefits and effective management of both throughout development and beyond.