Sonos contributing to electronic waste

I don’t particularly disagree, but there’s an old adage ‘look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves’…. And in terms of Sonos kit, which is presumably the subject under discussion here, it’s a very big deal...

I don't believe that the adage applies in this case, these pennies don't automatically lead/add up to pounds; and most complaints about the Sonos exchange program are based on personal financial impacts as opposed to environmental ones, even where those are claimed to be the purpose of this thread.

And I completely fail to see how the trade up program in itself is adding to waste when one can choose to not take the option. So why is it a big deal, by itself?

Now if you were to then say that Sonos contributes to waste by not making products that can last for decades with after sales repair service as/when needed, yes, but that takes us back to Sonos having to operate in the use and throw lifestyle at price points that its markets support - for both getting over boredom by needing constant meaningless change, and for not wanting to pay the price of life time support, even if it could overcome the “boredom” of the same box doing the same thing in their life for decades.

And most people will have a problem with getting off the upgrade path that bricks Sonos devices from time to time because these people will change smartphones often like every other phone user does and unwittingly get back onto the upgrade path for Sonos kit as well.

Those that have the necessary discipline and the tech savvy have successfully gotten on to the path of getting the full hardware service life from their Sonos components, and will not have any personal concerns about this trade up or the need for it.

Perhaps the thread should be titled “ Sonos is making it very easy for us to contribute to electronic waste”.

I did not say or mean that, as I thought you would know very well.

I am referring to talking about the environmental evils of the Sonos trade up scheme while at the same time living a life supported by enormous personal - however unseen that may be - fossil fuel/energy consumption. Acting on both on a personal level is necessary to avoid being labelled a hypocrite, even if one can't influence things on a more than personal, let alone global, level.

Do you think it's fair that the viral tweet guy and journos are labelling Sonos as hypocritical because Sonos claims that sustainability is "non-negotiable" but are promoting bricking working units instead of reusing? 

It isn't fair; not because I believe what Sonos, now formally a for profit corporate, says about sustainability, but because I don't see how their “promoting” bricking of working units is hostile to the environment. 

I have some old Sonos kit - Connect/Connect Amps. Paying 70% of the cost of new equivalents to get the same functionality - for the most part - makes no sense to me. So I would ignore the offer at no cost to the environment via electronic waste.

I think it is interesting that the Connect is on the list of things to be bricked by the recycle program while at the same time is still being sold on the Sonos site. It is no wonder that this program has some public perception issues.

Sonos has always been for profit, they've never been a non profit afaik.... But I think I get what you are implying

I thought it was only the zp80/90 version? 

Is there a difference between the ZP90 and the Connect apart from branding? Does the Connect have more memory to help make it future proof against the contraints that are expected to affect the ability for Sonos to continiue supporting the ZP90 at some point?