The Sonos Brexit and pragmatic ways past it

@Eddie the Eagle : If the stock keeps falling one of the big tech guys may see opportunities in replacing what looks like inept management even now. One can only stay optimistic and trust that they will also see the merit in keeping the installed base as satisfied as is feasible as a foundation stone for keeping sales and business growing under new management.

Seeing once again this perfect Echo sync that drives via Line In the Sonos sync across two Sonos systems, raises the question I have asked before - how does Echo achieve this trick? I have a suspicion that it isn't done at a local level at all like Sonos does; somewhere in the Alexa cloud, the Echo group is registered as such - as evidenced to an extent by the fact that Echo groups, unlike Sonos ones, survive power cycling. The music streams then are synced in the cloud and sent at the exact same time to each Echo device in the group. That the music also plays in sync at distant destinations after passing through a bunch of devices en-route demonstrates how well this works. If that is indeed the way this works. And if so, there may not be any Sonos patent infringement by Amazon. And given that Amazon may provide Sonos with a solution to this significant issue of integrating split systems, Sonos may not even want to approach any sleeping dogs there, even if there are any such.

@chickentender : that cool trick of looping the Connect using the tape out/monitor in jacks, where available, isn't one that many discover. Those that have extensively used tape decks and amps know about it, but that is a dwindling presence here.

Come on over to the good ole USA.  Politics is our ever tangling soap opera.  Although ratings have said that more of us are watching the day time soaps than the wailings and knashings of Washington.

@User533936 - Just for clarity, when you refer to “hdmi splitter” are you talking about an HDMI-to-Composite/RCA breakout converter (shown top)? If paired with an RCA-to-StereoMini (shown below) sending that to the 3.5mm stereo line-in of a Sonos Play5 and similar. Or for pairing, running just a mono cable from the respective L/R RCAs out of the adapter?
(That’s the kind of crap I used to have to do for guerilla webcasting setups using all manner of hardware in bizarre configurations. Fun stuff. :) ) 

There you have lost me. One chromecast audio can deliver a stereo signal via a multi jack identical at both ends to one 5 unit that can then deliver stereo music when paired with another 5. For it to do this for Connect, it just needs separate left and right jacks at the Connect end. Turn this kind of jack around and use it with the splitter to use the Chromecast video with a 5 unit. With Connect, the cable will have two jacks at both ends.

Isn’t a matter of sincerity to me. I was talking about the main “clarification” thread and the firestorm there. As Majik mentioned, there are some in there seemingly concerned more about fire-fanning than about solving problems and getting good information. They’re free to. I meant that some more forthcoming  detail from Sonos sooner than later could go a long way in dousing the flame.
… or perhaps not. 

I see two other benefits to the Link.  The more prominent reason is that the you don’t need to have the dot, more importantly, the Alexa microphones, directly wired to your AV system.  As an example, you can have a dot sitting on the table next to your couch, instead of the TV/AV stand across the room..where you might need to shout to be heard.  It provides a necessary wireless separation between the microphone and speaker.  True, you could probably accomplish the same thing with using 2 dots that are properly setup with groups, but it’s not as elegant.

The other aspect, and I’m not exactly sure this is in place, but you could use the link to switch inputs (between streaming and line-in) rather than having to use your AV receiver to switch remotes.  It could be that like the playbar and other Sonos products, the devices can automatically switch to the line in sources when audio is detected.  That’s a minor convenience overall I think, but one that tends to go along way in simplifying everyday use.  

Which leads to one of the biggest issues leading to my lack of trust with the company now.  I agree that two echo dots may end up being a good solution with the echo acting only as a mechanism for syncing legacy and new.  If the solution is so simple, why won't Sonos come up with a cheap bridge device to sync between these.  It wouldn't then require line in devices to do this.  Perhaps Amazon does this in the cloud and sonos does not have the resources.  If yes, state that but don't imply it can't be done.  Once again we have customers proving that the belief that this is strictly a technical issue are wrong. 

Again I believe this is a company that wants to change its business model.  Fair enough, I don't own the company.  But don't pretend it is purely a technical issue.  Both Roon and echo solutions seem able to fix the final issue that is really bothering customers, syncing legacy and modern systems.  My guess is Google devices could do the same.  And these will be the solutions customers will turn to if sonos don't come up with their own solution.  I think that Sonos leadership just has to understand that most people will not just throw away their legacy products to help sonos raise their revenue and make a serious internal effort to maintain full functionality in all devices.   Essentially demonstrate that they are still leaders in this technology.

I’m going to give this a watch. Sounds like he’s on our page. :)

Yup, separate the (relatively) durable functionality (big screen, speaker, refrigeration! etc ) from the rapidly changing Internet-facing functionality.

Since the durable stuff is expensive to build while the non-durable (disposable) stuff is cheap to build, this approach works logically and financially.

So, my TV was purchased to act as a dumb screen taking inputs from elsewhere. My focus on purchase was buying the TV with the best screen/visuals for the money, while ignoring the ‘smart’ functionality. Sure, I used the smart functionality initially a little, but quite quickly plugged into it a 3rd party streaming gizmo that was cheap enough to be disposable and replaced every few years.

If I was the person running Sonos I’d hopefully be learning a big lesson from this current episode around customers’ expectations that durable-looking goods should indeed endure. If they don’t endure, then in the future a bunch (maybe a *lot*) of those customers won’t buy quality, expensive durable-looking goods (Sonos) but will buy inexpensive disposable alternatives instead...

For example, a couple of weeks back Google sent me a free Nest Mini, normal cost $49, which works well enough. There’s a couple of locations where I have Play:1s used for low-level background radio for 99% of the time that could easily be replaced by something like a Nest Mini when the time comes. Not as nice as a Play:1, but for 99% of time good enough. And if they needed replacing after several years ownership because the techs become old-hat, then at $49 each it’s not the end of the world. It’s not just about the money: it simple seems ‘wrong’ to be lobbing a hefty speaker into the trash when the internals all work just fine.

In Sonos shoes I’d be trying to get ahead of the curve on this and (if necessary) re-architect the product lines to ensure that durable-looking purchases, such as weighty speakers, are able to endure. By that, I mean I’d be looking to mimic the ‘smart’ TV approach above: by all means sell speakers with built-in streaming tech, but ensure that once that on-board streaming tech becomes outdated that customers will be able to retain the speakers as networked speakers, by using ‘off-board’ streamers for example.

Separate the more durable, ‘stable’ functionality from the non-durable, rapidly changing stuff.

Folks here are looking at using cheap stuff like Echos and Chromecasts that can be plugged into (older) Sonos speakers or other devices possessing line-in sockets, but in Sonos’ shoes I’d be looking at addressing this customer need themselves by offering their own low-cost streaming devices that can be connected to Sonos speaker networks, ie. not physically plugged in, so not requiring line-in sockets. As has been mentioned numerous times here already, Amazon & Google’s pricing has indicated the absurdity of Sonos’s pricing for its Connect/Port type devices. NB an off-board Sonos streaming device of the type I imagine would need to be a fraction of that legacy pricing.

This ‘vision’ has Sonos positioning itself as a vendor of high quality, durable networked speaker systems that insulates you from fast-changing Internet-facing tech for as long as possible. This ‘insulation’ enables you to spend freely on high quality speakers secure in the knowledge they will endure, while knowing there’s a means (at reasonable future expense) of addressing the aspects of the system (such as Internet-facing, streamers, voice) that’ll date more rapidly and have a shorter lifespan.

Sonos would way it’s already followed this vision, and up to a point it has, and that’s allowed it to build a large customer base over the years, but clearly this current episode says that its customers have expectations that Sonos isn’t now meeting.

I don’t think Sonos’s backtracking this past week adds up to much yet, most likely a PR sticking plaster exercise, but we’ll see. My guess is that Sonos doesn’t do anything along the lines I’ve tried to outline above - changing product lines to recognise the need for a separation of durable and less-durable functionality - and just carries on with what it’s done previously. If so, I’d expect customers to become increasingly wary of adding to their Sonos systems, or embarking on new substantial purchases of Sonos kit, while at the lower end for Sonos to continue to face an onslaught from Amazon and Google (+Apple). Sonos to go ex-growth and the future most likely being a steady decline.

I think they have a shot at a different path but they need to act swiftly and boldly else the moment will pass.

And to clarity, I am only referring to comms over the last ten days, starting with the strange way the recycling change has been announced - not the January fiasco. The latter was just down to ineptitude.

All very disjointed, the last ten days comms.

Sorry for the possibly stupid question, but did I miss something?  There’s a fair amount of references here to a “Legacy Software Version”.  In a quick rescan of the official communiques I can find only references to a “Legacy Mode”.  My translation of that is that come May when “Legacy Mode” is implemented, those older hardware units affected will no longer receive software updates leaving them operating at whatever version they are running at that time.  There will be no change.  So if you’re running 10.6 (or whatever) on the day of the change you will still be running 10.6 from that point forward.  SONOS won’t be working on or releasing a “Legacy Software Version”, So in theory, if you unlock your 8.4 system, it will remain there and your CR100s will be unaffected. However with wiggle terms of bug fixes and security updates, I won't be unlocking my system ever.  I locked my system at 7.4 for my reasons and don’t want to change for anybody else’s reasons.

This is why I suggested SONOS give us access to all older versions of the firmware and controllers, as well as implementing a way to flash the units locally.  In that way I can buy a new Port and flash it to 7.4 and add it to my existing system to replace my 10 year old Connect.  Otherwise my installation will slowly self destruct as units suffer hardware failures.  And to further reiterate, this is all  with the understanding that SONOS will not support this implementation, I am on my own.  SONOS is only providing me with access to the needed software and a tool to flash the unit locallly.