I am running the latest current version (8.17.8) for macOS which in some respects works fine (on MacMini M2Pro with macOS 15.1 Sequoia), although it is very slow to start up, but the main issue is that it always crashes on quitting the app. Any chance of a new version to fix this? I assume you are getting a report every time this happens so your developers must be able to work out what is causing it.

And this is STILL an Intel code version - when will an Apple Silicon version be released? It is FOUR YEARS now since the M1 was introduced which is surely enough time to port the application across to be native on Apple Silicon chips. The iOS app is obviously compiled for Apple Silicon - why not the macOS application as well? This is the ONLY application of the vast number I use on my Mac that is not Apple Silicon native.

I am running the latest current version (8.17.8) for macOS which in some respects works fine (on MacMini M2Pro with macOS 15.1 Sequoia), although it is very slow to start up, but the main issue is that it always crashes on quitting the app. Any chance of a new version to fix this? I assume you are getting a report every time this happens so your developers must be able to work out what is causing it.

And this is STILL an Intel code version - when will an Apple Silicon version be released? It is FOUR YEARS now since the M1 was introduced which is surely enough time to port the application across to be native on Apple Silicon chips. The iOS app is obviously compiled for Apple Silicon - why not the macOS application as well? This is the ONLY application of the vast number I use on my Mac that is not Apple Silicon native.

user_846994761957606 I had the same problem - this board has a ridiculous limitation on how often you can post (only once every 24 HOURS!) which is undoubtedly more inconvenient for legitimate posters than serving any purpose to stop illegitimate ones.

@wisemanjaw This is obviously an important issue in these modern scary times. It seems to me that we have to take quite a bit on trust. There are three scenarios I have come up with:

1. Do not connect your cameras and other connected devices to the internet - set up a VLAN for them which cannot get to the internet. Or alternatively block every individual device in the router (based on its MAC address) if it has that functionality.
2. Allow the devices to connect to the internet in which case you can access them from anywhere using their UIDs, which is undoubtedly very convenient. Ensure that the username and password are BOTH changed from the default settings and the default "admin" user is disabled. The safety of this scenario depends on trusting that Reolink do not surreptitiously upload the username and password you have set to their "DDNS" or relay system and then make use of them. Hopefully this is not the case.
3. Do not change the default settings for username and password (much harder for this to happen now for newer devices that the EU has mandated that this should happen automatically when the camera is first set up) and then your cameras are less secure but this still depends on someone finding out the UID. This could however be achieved through randomly trying UIDs, although hard to target any individual this way.

It is pretty certain that the access to 129.146.110.167 would be for the purposes of registering the IP address which corresponds to the UID.

@joseph_1979 That's not correct, I'm afraid.

The issue is that in countries which don't have as much light in the winter (such as the UK) the standard panel does not generate enough power to keep the camera charged all the time, particularly through the whole night in the darkest part of the year. I have used a panel which has twice the output of the standard panel successfully, and although it may be, as you say, that the maximum charging current is limited, the larger panel will generate that maximum current very much more of the time.

This is the same as having more solar panels on a house solar PV system than an inverter is rated for - as an example if you have 10kWp of solar panels but only a 6kW inverter, you will not get 10kW out of it, but you will get 6kW very much more of the time.

So oversizing the solar panel on a camera is definitely worth doing when the amount of light is limited.

The new app works really well on my Mac mini M2. I am very impressed at how quickly it launches and starts showing all the feeds - wish the desktop app were anything like as good as this is.

The only issue is that I did manage somehow to get the window to rotate as if it was running on a phone and I had rotated it. The way I got it back to the correct orientation was to choose the smaller window size in Settings... for the app, then when it relaunched it was the correct orientation again.

Why can't you buy the HomeHub by itself? I have a site with a Doorbell PoE which is crying out for a HomeHub, and once there is a HomeHub there it will be easy to add further cameras to it.

@joseph_1979 I have installed Wireshark on the Synology box but unfortunately I cannot work out how to capture the FTP traffic.

@joseph_1979 Yes, FW is at version v3.0.0.3215_2401262241

I have seen a couple of transfers be successful now, but it is totally random. It will work sometimes but then stop working with exactly the same settings. I do think there must be a bug in the FTP function which is causing the transactions to fail some of the time but not all the time.

Having to wait 30 minutes between posts is seriously doing my head in! I cannot wait any longer right now - I have other things to do so I will not be able to come straight back to you.

@joseph_1979 There is no PC involved - just the doorbell camera straight to the Synology box over the internet. I get an error "450 Unkown error" when I use the Test function from the camera. Also of interest is that the camera has no problem creating date-organised folders on the FTP server (ie 2024 with 03 inside it and 06 inside that). The .txt file inside the last folder is zero bytes, though. The FTP log records the creation of the folders, and the user logging in successfully for the FTP transfer, but there is no record of the text file being written.

I have tried disabling SSL (ie switching off FTPS) but it makes no difference.

I have also tried changing the transport mode as there are suggestions this might help elsewhere on the web, but no joy. I am beginning to think that the FTP function is simply broken. It is frustrating because the folders get created OK, so this is working, but it just does not seem possible to transfer a file.

Just tried to post this and was denied because it has not been 1800 seconds since my last post - half an hour! Why are there such ridiculous constraints on using this board - it is almost unusable. Maybe that is the idea?

@joseph_1979 The user on the Synology box for the FTP transfers has full read/write access to the share, permission to use the FTP application, and no quota limiting it.

I can't write any more here without triggering the unsuitable content filter - why, I have absolutely no clue.