Device name = * in ifttt applet


When creating an ifttt applet, I want the applet to be triggered by any of my Particle devices that may have published a specific event. While the Applet builder dialog says that a Device Name is optional, it only presents a pulldown menu of my devices and there’s no way to select “none” or “blank”, etc. Does anyone know how to make an Applet be triggered by any device on my account?



I have the same queston too, it is very painful having to setup individual applets for 100+ devices.

What I want to to be able to do:

Log “spark/status” for all my devices to a single spreadsheet in Google Drive using IFTTT. The only way of achieving this currently is to to create 2 x device status applets in IFTTT (1 for offline status change and 1 for online status change) for each of 100+ devices. This is way too painful.

I tried to implement this using the IFTTTT maker channel which doesn’t require a device but then became undone as the spark/status event does not publish device name, it only publishes the device id which is not very meaningful.

Thank you to anyone who can help!



You could try to have the IFTTT applet trigger event on a “parent” particle… have that particle in turn publish an event to which your 100+ devices are subscribed.


Although it’s a valid suggestion, I think they’re looking into doing it the other way around: subscribing (IFTTT) to an event, regardless of which device published it.
I agree that such functionality would indeed be useful.

I know it’s not the same in terms of no-hassle setup, but node-red is worthwhile looking into as well. It’s a lot more flexible than IFTTT, most likely quicker, and can do a lot more things :slight_smile:


well, it would work the other-way-round as well, yes?

off topic, but here is some Dutch humor for our Dutch friend:

The Netherlands Second


If you want to relay publishes from A LOT or devices through a single device “you’re gonna have a bad time” :wink: The publish rate limit might come into play and annoy you. Furthermore, it seems as though the device names are required as well, which would require further code changes, more data, etc.
Routing all traffic through an Electron would also raise the cost quite a bit.

In all honesty though, IFTTT is great, for many things, but mostly on a small DIT tinkering scale. I wouldn’t want to run it for anything serious since it seems somewhat slow, and occasionally unreliable. If you want to do some more serious analysis with your data, I wouldn’t want to rely on IFTTT. But that’s just my take on it, and still feel like a * subscription would be nice.

That was/is genius. Now I’m just hoping we won’t face any retalliation, since that would be a YUGE problem for our tiny country. We wouldn’t be able to _hand_le that :wink:


the NSA already knows you viewed the video, it may be too late already.