Prestigio LED bulbs controlled from an Android/iOS device via Bluetooth.
Each 7W bulb installed is consuming 24/7 extra 0.5 W for its wireless operation.
IMHO good for kids playing, not a real value added.

Your opinion on them?

Philips makes a similar system, but a bit more sophisticated. 7w LED (in an A-shape or other diffuse multi-directional) doesn't produce much light. Anyways I feel we are going to see more and more LED products featuring this "wireless control from a smartphone app" technology as thats where the future is headed. A friend of mine has a wireless thermostat in his house that he can control from a smartphone (even if he's 1000 miles away) down to .5 degree. All lighting (even commercial) will soon be no different

I do not understand the recent frenzy to have all control onto the phone. I understand manufacturers offering that - many people want to spent money on it, it is rather simple to implement technology (the IC's on the market have all integrated, they are offered even subsidized as a way to boost the sale of "smart phones") so they offer those creations.
Did really all of the reviewers lost their brain to think at least a minute, how would they really use it in a daily, routine life?
How they want to deal with flat battery in the phone, when they are claiming the "switches on the wall are just occupying space, they should go away"? I haven't seen any such review pointing on how any of those creations tackle that...

Exactly. Smart devices (the "smarter" - the worse) are prone to failures and chaotic behaviour. I can hear people cursing them (and just then buying another one...)
That's why I'm using rather a dumb phone (with all the packet data turned off) and a separate tablet PC where I don't mind an unexpectedly flat battery just because an app went nuts and started to make a 100% CPU load on all its cores, for example.

The only place where I could see a value added is street lighting in areas where it's being turned off in the late evening due to cutting energy costs (villages etc.). This way, some streets could be turned on/off automatically - by a phone in your pocket. But that means preferably LED lighting (or at least fluorescents) - not HIDs because of their slow start-up and wear by switching.

I wouldn't mind streetlights turning ON only in front of and shutting down just behind me, but I would really hate the need to have working phone with me for the (street)lights to work at all. So such phone based system wouldn't work.
Something different would be a detection software on the everywhere present security cameras: If that thing should be there (the cameras), it should then do some useful work...

I'm waiting some spectacular hacking of all of theese.
It Italy, if you want to tell someone that something is buggy, broken or similar, you tell that this thing have more holes than an Colander.
According to some tom's hw articles, internet of things devices have more holes than an colander.
Imagine some homemade android software, an hall/restaurant and an lsd addict person with a lot of spare time 

Good point! Despite sandboxing, patching in previous releases etc., Android platform is infamous for security problems of all kinds. It's indeed very easy to download ADK and a nice IDE of your choice - all for free - and start playing...
However I think that hacking these bulbs would be rather a game of a bored ten-year-old kid while his friend is secretly recording all that bedlam with her phone.
The LSD addict would rather need money (no money from hacking bulbs) so he'd rather focus on stripping https transfer and eavesdropping while people are shopping on the internet when sitting in that restaurant and waiting for their order.

Android platform is infamous for security problems of all kinds.

Every SW is full of many bugs. It is just the fate of all popular SW, it becomes target for hacking. Every malware uses some "hole" so live and spread. If some SW becomes very popular, you have plenty of devices with those "holes" perfectly aligned, so just rather primitive task to shoot through. And that invites so many attackers. If there are just few devices and then another platform with different holes, then yet another, your virus (trojan,...) should be able to pass all of them, pretty impossible task to write such virus. Even when all these platforms are by itself way less protected. So the malware authors then do not target such platforms, too much work for nearly no result...
So it is just the fact they are not the same on most devices, what makes the exotic platforms in reality rather safe and the common ones endangered, not their architecture.

It's indeed very easy to download ADK and a nice IDE of your choice - all for free - and start playing...

That is a must for any platform aiming for wide user base, as only that allows the desired customizing. It is common for Windows (.NET environment tools you may download for free and start playing,...), all Linuxes (GNU tool chain; there the fact each distribution is tweaked somehow makes their holes not that well aligned, plus it is not spread that widely),...
The iOS appear to be protected (try to add your custom app to your phone only), yet they are the victim of very frequent attacks as well (it gets against the hypothesis of the easy access to the development tools causing the wide spread of malware)

Yep, but keep in mind that Windows is still the platform primarily used in banks, governmental organizations etc. so despite all known security issues, it's pretty tightened by default (I mean NT 6.0 and above).
Android on the other hand, is the system designed for reading news, visiting facebook and playing games while you travel etc.
That's why security experts are highly concerned about BYOD trends and Android devices in company networks.