junking legacy equipment.

But you can still mix old and new computers and os:es on a network and keep updating the new ones. I’m pretty sure Sonos could offer this too. If I can stream movies (pictures and sound) from my very old iPad to my very new AppleTV then I’m pretty sure an updated modern Sonos component could stream audio data to an old Connect.

But that’s not good value for money, from a Sonos perspective.

No need to junk anything

https://en.community.sonos.com/announcements-228985/end-of-software-updates-for-legacy-products-6835470/index44.html#post16394082

How about: Carry on using it for the things it was still good for, safe in the knowledge that your XP machine wouldn’t be prevented from having updates. You could even interface the new and the old together over a network! Imagine a world where Sonos had such futuristic technology.

So your system is Squeezbox or?

Are these produced still?

No, they aren’t produced still.  castella is our resident Squeezebox fan.  He still uses the Open Source Squeeze software long after the Squeeze entity ceased operations.  Best to just ignore him.  As bad as this announcement is, it’s no reason to switch to that nonsense.  

I think this is pretty accurate statement.  The assumption is that a Sonos system could continue to operate, as it currently does with a mix of old and new devices.  I think it’s pretty safe to say that the networking requirements between a ‘386 and XP are not the same.  Certainly, a ‘386 or XP never had play audio in sync across devices the way Sonos does.  The network communication did not have that timing requirement which logical would mean capabilities between the devices were not going to as important.  I think it’s safe to say that the phrase ‘a chain is only as strong as it’s weakest link’ applies much more to Sonos than it does to a network of computers that do not need to be processing in sync in order to achieve their individual tasks.

Again, Sonos has been operating with the constraint that old and new units work together in the same system.  I think it’s logical to assume that there is a change coming, most likely a change in greater stability or a new/improved feature.  It seems that Sonos felt they needed to make this change despite the predictable reaction from legacy customers.

Streaming to a single device is different than streaming to several devices that play in sync.  Your very old ipad likely has a very large buffer so that it can get ahead of the stream, so to speak, and have less chance of a need to pause the content displayed to you because there was pause in downloading content to your device.  With several devices in sync, it gets much more complex   And of course, sometimes the devices don’t play in sync, but play separate content.  Sometimes that content is radio /live where a large buffer is a problem even if the device has the capability for more.  In the case of home theatre speakers, the buffer and network speed needs to be small enough to that viewers can’t see a delay between video and audio.

So could Sonos provide some sort of add on supplement product to legacy devices to bring them up to speed on modern hardware requirements?  I don’t know.  Assuming they can, I don’t think that means that they necessarily should.  Such a device would need to be developed, tested and manufactured and would only be useful to a relatively small market (those that have legacy products).  The smaller market means that the cost per device would likely go up (cost to Sonos, not actual price).  In the end, the cost for this device might not be much different than the cost of a modern replacement device (espeically after 30% discount), which will further lower the market size for the device.  And even if they did create this, chances are that a big portion of legacy customers will still be upset.  They will not want to pay more money to retain what they have or for features they don’t think they need.  They will decide to stop being a Sonos customer anyway.

I don’t think Sonos views this a win in any way.  I think it’s a lose for Sonos legacy customers and a lose for Sonos itself.  I don’t think this was a rash decision, but something debated, and dreaded, for quite sometime.    Whether it’s the right decision or not, I think it was a decision they felt they had to make in order to continue as a business going forward.  Could be because of rising competition, could because they felt they need to innovate and provide new features or stagnate or die.  Again, whether they were right or wrong, don’t know, we will probably have a good idea or year or so or now.

Of course, that likely doesn’t matter to any customer who just wanted Sonos to continue providing support for their legacy products for a longer period of time, or perhaps indefinitely, and either believe Sonos could stay in business with that strategy or don’t really care whether Sonos stays in business.

This is RIDICULOUS.  I’m so frustrated, I don’t know even where to start.  I want to scream from every chat room, “DON’T BUY SONOS!!!”.

This is a huge strike two.  First, the shift to subscription-only streaming, cutting down the freedom and choice of how I use my Sonos system.  And now this…  

30% is a slap in the face.  Try an 80% credit.  Paying even 20% for new hardware to replace components purchased 6-7 years ago; to do exactly the same thing as it’s doing today.  This is a CRIME!

Sonos, you should be ashamed of yourself.  Stand behind your product.  If you’re hardware cannot support your updated software, you should replace the hardware FOR FREE!

I’m not sure what my next step will be.  I just received “the e-mail” this morning.  But I tell you, I am not impressed.  SHAME ON YOU, Sonos.

I’m absolutely fuming you no longer supporting the old products to which I have spent thousands of pounds on!!!! Are you now say they wouldn’t work at all after the next updates

The crime of which you speak is blackmail and extortion. SHAME,SHAME,SHAME on sonos.

We’ll then I can give you the Airport Express (not sure how old but at least 7 years) which is capable of playing in sync with other devices nowdays. That was a $100 piece of hardware and Apple fixed the networking stuff with a firmware upgrade.

Superior hardware? Superior programmers? More interested in customer value?
None of these possible explanations speaks in favour of Sonos from a consumer perspective.

And of course Sonos views this as a win. Otherwise they wouldn’t do it. I’m pretty sure they have a bussiness plan.