What the decision makers at Ring refuse to understand is that while the “app” is sufficient for mobile access to camera information, it is a terrible way to view the detail contained in important video recordings.
While the viewer on the page at Ring.com provides much better viewing options, it is obvious that the web viewer was constructed without much thought and it has serious limitations in addition to it’s maddening habit of constantly logging the user out without reason. Limits such as only three events being visible in the tiny scroll box under the image and others are extremely frustrating as well.
A month or so ago, I was contacted by a Ring rep asking for more information about Ring problems based on my review on amazon that focused on a number of really bad _app_ designs that completely offset the good quality of the hardware. When I responded that I didn’t want to put any more effort in communicating user issues to Ring because none of the issues that I and others had posted had ever been addressed, I was assured that my observations would be addressed…
…so, I spent several _DAYS_ documenting, assembling, composing, editing and submitting them to Ring…
…absolutely NONE of the issues that I had taken my time to carefully document and submit have been addressed.
What Ring did respond to, and seriously overreacted to, were news reports about Ring security issues THAT WERE DUE TO OWNERS FAILING TO SECURE THEIR LOGINS with the resulting additional security requirements (such as the ABSURD requirement for two factor authentication to SIMPLY DISCUSS USER PROBLEMS) …typical of bean counter driven companies administered by people who know nothing about the product itself other than profit and loss statistics.
Beverly Howard
And, fwiw, no Chelsea, your reply is not helpful to Ring Owners, especially when it’s obvious that Ring is not interested in owner feedback from any venue.