2.4 GHz Zigbee originated in industrial scenarios, initially designed for stable point-to-point communication between devices. With a limited number of nodes and heavy algorithms, it experiences significant delays when scaled up. When forcibly adapted to smart homes, even with numerous patches, it still has four fundamental flaws: 1. Capacity ceiling: The network becomes congested as the number of nodes increases. 2. Complex topology: Network configuration, routing, and relaying rely entirely on manual planning, leading to low efficiency. 3. Inability to connect directly to smartphones: An additional gateway is required, resulting in high user education costs and preventing it from being marketed as a ‘regular home appliance.’ 4. High costs: Zigbee chips are significantly more expensive than Bluetooth chips of the same level. These four points are sufficient to marginalize it in the consumer market. Zigbee primarily operates in a bridging mode, establishing a point-to-point handshake before bridging to lower-level devices, which is inefficient. Although it supports three communication methods: unicast, multicast, and broadcast, its efficiency is actually lower than that of the sigmesh flooding protocol. As for the old argument that ‘Bluetooth is less stable than Zigbee,’ it simply reflects a failure to effectively utilize Bluetooth’s broadcasting and mesh adaptive routing capabilities.