S1 App - "The OS on this device is no longer supported"

The difference is that Sonos control the ‘very old software’ on their own boxes, and have undertaken to fix security issues as best they can. The mobile operating systems in question are unsupported by their suppliers; in the case of Android 7 the last release was 18 months back.

And why are they stuck with very old software on their boxes? Is that my fault, as a customer? I guess if I’m paying £399 for a Port, I should be very grateful that they will fix problems that they have total control over “as best they can”?

So, they won’t upgrade Windows Sharing from a decade-old version of SMB, but they want to make my 3 ½ year old phone useless in terms of controlling their product.

No double standards there, I guess.

Windows Sharing utilizes an HTTP Server which comes with the PC or Mac controller. SMBv1 is still required for NAS Linux systems,though.

The discussions about the memory limitations of the older devices -- and their implications for kernel/SMB support -- were had, over and over again, at the time of the S1-to-S2 transition announcement. I’m not going to revisit that subject.

Which make of 3.5 yr old phone is it, where the manufacturer didn’t even offer an upgrade to Android 8? That OS was released around the time of the phone’s sale.

While I recently researched the purchase of my current Android phone I noticed that there were numerous less expensive models that were shipped with Android 5-7 and I was not confident that they could be updated. My previous phone was locked to a carrier and the carrier stopped updating years ago and I was trapped at Android 5. The carrier was also reluctant to issue updates while the old phone was still supported. Now I have a factory unlocked phone and I can update directly from the manufacturer. At least I’m now receiving regular phone updates, but I don’t how long this will continue.

The final blow to the old phone was the carrier’s notice that it will drop my phone from the cell network because of its soon to be obsolete wireless technology.

In the case of Apple, unless the developer updates their App to the latest Apple standards, the App will be dropped form the App store. In many cases the latest App version will not run on older iOS devices that are no longer supported by Apple.

As we type I’m migrating from an old W7 machine to a newly built W10 machine. I expect to donate the phone and PC to charity. While the old desktop would not be so great for video editing and I would not want to update to W10, it’s more than adequate for web, email, and conferencing. The phone might be viable in a 3rd world area.

You’re getting hung up on details and missing the bigger picture.

My current (now obsolete) mobile phone is a fantastic piece of engineering - huge, bright screen, dual SIM slots, multi-channel GPS receiver, mobile data and WiFi hotspot capable, dual cameras with LED flash, motion sensors, octo-core processor, huge amounts of memory plus a memory card slot, etc, etc.

I want to keep it - not because I can’t afford to replace it (I can) but because it’s a colossal waste of something that does everything I need it to. I don’t need a roll-out double-width screen or a camera that takes 100 Megapixel photos.

So how do we stop the established norm that you have to junk your phone every 3 years?

By speaking up and saying that it’s a colossal waste. Every app developer that cripples all previous releases up to Android 8 when Android 11 comes out is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

That’s all very nice, but it’s a phone which was apparently sold around the time that Android 7 was being superseded by Android 8 and yet the manufacturer (or operator) evidently never saw fit to distribute an OS upgrade. Again, what make is it?

You’re getting tied up in detail again.

It doesn’t matter what make and model it is. The problem exists whatever make and model it is. We are accepting a system that is designed to make us throw away our phones every 3 years - though many people will do it much quicker than that.

It’s a horrible waste of resources, and it will get worse as the whole of the world moves onto mobile phones - many countries having never established their own wired network, because it is cheaper just to use mobile phones and throw them away every few years.

If I feel that it’s a horrible waste, why should I not speak up and object when an application developer deliberately changes an app so that it will not work properly any longer on my phone?

What do I want? I want the application developer to try harder. I want him to explain to me that the performance may decline slightly, and there may be security issues that he will try his best to mitigate, but that he won’t just stop it working because he can.

I want the person who develops the apps for a £399 device (of which I have four) to try harder to do things that make most sense, rather than things that will make most profit.

It is indeed, but you won’t change Sonos business practices.

Your best bet is to get your system to a stable state and then lock your system down from updates, and then Sonos can’t mess about with your older kit again  - but that only works as long as you never want to add new kit.

I don’t think the big picture is being missed, it’s just that the details are important to understand if you’re going to started throwing out blame for why new software doesn’t work on old operating systems.  As stated several times, Sonos removes support of functions when the OS is no longer supported.  Other apps may not do this if they feel there is less of a security threat by leaving the apps alone.

Regarding the question of how to get Google and the rest to support OSs for longer, that’s not going to happen as long as people are willing to get new phones for the latest features and OS.  The reality is that new sales drive support of the existing system, and without those sales, the company won’t be able to support the older systems for free as long as they currently do.  Not without maintenance fees. 

As well, it’s worth noting that the new operating system and hardware features, improvements in tech, don’t happen if people aren’t dumping their old stuff and  buying the latest and greatest.  I think of it more of a catch-22 situation.  There are absolutely sometimes where I’m completely happy with what I have and am not interested in improvements.  Other times, I want new product tech to come out even faster than it does now.  I don’t think there is way to do both very well with connected, infrastructure dependent technology.