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


Userlevel 5
Badge +9

This has probably already been asked, but I tried putting "The OS on this device is no longer supported" into the search tool and nothing came back so I’ll ask anyway…

I still have a couple of old devices which I manage using the S1 app on my phone, which is an Android-based Moto G4, running Android 7 (kernel version 3.10.84).

When I start up the Sonos S1 app, I get a banner at the top saying "The OS on this device is no longer supported", and providing a link to a Sonos article that says that the S1 app requires Android 5, 6 or 7.

Any suggestions how to resolve this? I also have the S2 app installed on the phone, but even if I make sure that none of the S2 components are running (by rebooting the phone before running the S1 app) it still gives me the message.

It’s not an entirely trivial error report, because it stops me from doing most of the things that I want to do, such as adding a radio station - that is not allowed by the app if your phone is deemed to be “too old” - even if it isn't!


This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.

52 replies

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

Your information is stale. Android 8 is now the minimum.

When I first joined this forum a few months ago, I was surprised at how many annoyed and frustrated existing customers Sonos seems to have. But now I’m starting to understand why.

My phone is less than 4 years old and it works absolutely fine. Every app that I have installed on it still works, except the Sonos app, because Sonos have decided that they will cripple it by updating it to remove some of its functions.

The crazy thing about this is that they are annoying users that they don’t need to annoy. My system is just a few months old, controlled via two Android 10 tablets that I bought for the purpose. The only reason that I noticed this is that I wanted to answer a question from another forum member (with an older system) and the easiest way to do that was to use an S1 test system that I’ve had set up for just a few months. I failed because the app won’t let me add a new radio station via my 3 ½ year old phone.

Why does it worry and annoy me? Because it makes me think that in 3 years time, Sonos is going to make me throw away my two purpose-bought Android 10 tablets because Sonos will then cripple the app on those too.

Perhaps you can see my point?

 

I don’t have an issue with SONOS not supporting older OS or devices I understand that it becomes unmanageable. What I think stinks is that they:

  1. recommend updates to older devices/OS to improve performance or something similar;
  2. then, once updated tell you that it is no longer supported, obsolete or incompatible, and
  3. won’t let you revert to the older version that previously worked fine.

I can’t think of any other company that works in this manner. No wonder there are so many unhappy SONOS owners around.

Badge

Antifon is right.  I am having similar issues.

What was wrong with the windows app being able to manage the devices.  Sono’s have forced their customers down this path.  I purchased the system in 2012 and there was no indication that these features would be removed.  I could use windows or my smartphone to ‘control’ the system.

It just beggers belief.  We are not the only people with this issue and Sonos need to do something about this.

I don’t need security patches etc.  I purchased Sonos to stream MP3s from my NAS on an internal network.  I never expected to have the ability to manage my system to be removed or disabled.  Yes I get the ‘no longer supported’ but not being able to re-add existing speakers.

Its really poor and I’m pretty sure in breach of the consumer rights act.

It’s tempting to throw brickbats at Sonos, but let’s step back and consider the bigger picture.

These mobile devices have operating systems which are no longer supported. Sonos has in the past been criticised for lax security on its network-intensive products. It’s therefore unsurprising that they remove the more secure bits of the controller -- setup, etc -- from such unsupported platforms, rather than risk an unpatched hole opening up beneath them.

IMO the users’ ire would be better directed at the entities which have left the devices and operating systems unsupported in the first place. In whose commercial interests is such ‘forced obsolescence’? Not Sonos’ certainly. Could it perhaps be the mobile manufacturers who stand to benefit?

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

One of the problems here is that Sonos want it both ways. They won’t support anything more recent than SMB1 for Windows Shares because (apparently) the Linux kernel on their devices is so old, but they won’t allow their customers any version of Android older than the one before last.

Double standards, perhaps?

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

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.

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.

When I first joined this forum a few months ago, I was surprised at how many annoyed and frustrated existing customers Sonos seems to have.

As we never tire of pointing out, most customers -- of which there are millions -- don’t post about how happy they are. Those who come here are a tiny fraction of the user base.

It’s like a hospital: the fact that the bulk of its occupants are sick doesn’t provide an accurate picture of society at large.

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

Well yes, I understand what forums are like, because I’m on lots of them, but the tone does seem a little different here.

Perhaps you can’t see my point, but it is that we really have got to get away from a situation where we are forced (by app developers) to throw our phones/tablets away every three years.

If there is too much apathy among end-users about the incredible waste of resources that this involves then perhaps legislation will be the only way.

But then again, perhaps companies like Sony, Lenovo, Samsung, etc. have too much political power and that will be used to protect their profits...

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

Or we can step back even further, and consider the even bigger picture.

And that is that each mobile phone and tablet that we buy uses a lot of critical resources, and recycling of these devices is not well organised.

Now… I don’t mind if a company such as Sonos warns me that an older mobile phone or tablet may not have the resources to handle an app quite as quickly, and it may be less secure - but I can be warned about those things and can make a choice.

What I really object to is that Sonos has made an active decision to cripple the app on my 3 ½ year old phone. I no longer have any choice about using that device, even if I accept performance and security limitations. If I bought it for the purpose of controlling Sonos devices, I have no choice but to stop using it.

That is what I am objecting to.

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

It’s just not feasible or possible.

Other developers “somehow” manage to do it.

Thanks - I really don’t need your sympathy.

By the way - I recognise the air of polite (or in your case not so polite) condescension from some forum regulars. I see it in myself when I post on other forums, but I do try my best to control it.

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.

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

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’s a horrible waste of resources….

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.

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

Ok - another example. Let’s say I want to use my obsolete Android phone to access my bank account via one of the banking apps.

Surely that couldn’t be possible with such an ancient 3 ½ year old phone, could it? What bank could possibly accept that level of risk?

Let’s try HSBC - a very well known UK bank. Strange - they are happy with Android 5 onwards. How about Barclaycard? Android 5 onwards there too. Pick another one at random: NatWest Bank - Android 6 onwards.

How could that be possible? Sonos won’t let me use the app to use my own audio hardware devices properly with Android 7, yet my bank is happy for me to use Android 5 for remote access to my bank account (which admittedly has a paltry sum in it). Please explain that one to me.

Userlevel 7
Badge +23

Anyway, what’s the answer to how the banks can tolerate the incredible security risks of Android 5 while Sonos apparently can’t cope with Android 7? - or have all the Android experts in this thread gone to bed?

Your bank clearly doesn’t care enough about you. For example my employer would not allow your phone to connect to its corporate network as it is deemed too a high security risk. Android 9 is the oldest OS that they permit as they value their network very highly. Higher than your bank values your account, for example.

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

In case you were thinking “Ok, those are all banks, with huge resources”, let me give another example: Push Doctor. It’s an app used by the UK National Health Service for private real-time medical consultation with NHS patients. Developed and maintained externally, but “bought in” by the NHS.

What is the minimum version of Android that their app will accept? Android 4.4.

So, the “experts” here that wrote above that it simply wasn’t possible to write and maintain an app that will run under Android 7 in a secure manner were talking complete, arrant nonsense, and doing it with confidence. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

Then I would recommend that you seek legal relief, in whatever country you live in. You may want to have your legal counsel double check the legal agreements that came with your speakers, and that you agreed to when you use the Sonos software. But you may have standing, I’ve not met with legal counsel myself. 

I can only provide information regarding consumer law in Australia. We have a government run body called the ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) that is empowered to enforce Australian Consumer Law (ACL). The Sonos company is in breach of the “Consumer Guarantee” and more specifically the  fit for purpose clause.

The following is an extract from the ACCC Consumer Guarantee clause

“Businesses that sell goods guarantee that those goods:

  • are fit for any purpose that the consumer made known to the business before buying (either expressly or by implication), or the purpose for which the business said it would be fit for

No where did Sonos ever mention prior to purchase that they will prevent the use of the device in the future for its original intended purpose. This is a clear breach and is enforceable by ACCC law.   

Then seek legal action. Listening to us discuss it won’t change anything. 
 

I would be willing to wager that any lawyer / barrister worth their salt would look at the terms and conditions you agree to on use of the software and turn you down, but perhaps things are different in Australia, and certainly differing laws may apply. 
 

My expectation is Sonos has employed their own legal team to be sure that they can’t be prosecuted, but that wouldn’t stop you from trying. And perhaps succeeding, where others have failed. 

There’s not much you can “do” about it. Once the OS stops being supported by the maker of the OS, Sonos is likely to ‘retire” it as well. You could get/borrow another newer device in case of setup needs, but just using the controller as a player, you should be fine for a while. It’s just not going to get security updates (from either the OS maker, or Sonos) in the meantime.

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

But it’s an OS that Sonos’ own support article says is supported! The phone is quite happy running Android 7 - it’s just the app that says Android 7 is no longer supported, even though it is supported.

That’s why I would like to “do” something about it!

Your information is stale. Android 8 is now the minimum.

Would you be willing to pay an annual maintenance fee? This would be more palatable for developers than a buy once, free support forever business model. Also, think of the poor developer who is stuck maintaining Windows XP product -- at no cost to the customer. If this developer must change companies, (possibly due to running out of cash) there is relatively low demand for XP developers and a career is on the line.

I agree that the overall situation wastes a lot of resources.

Another detail is that fancy products require a huge scale. Developing a product can cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Unless the product will sell hundreds of millions, cost to the consumer would be out of reach.

What I really object to is that Sonos has made an active decision to cripple the app on my 3 ½ year old phone. I no longer have any choice about using that device, even if I accept performance and security limitations. If I bought it for the purpose of controlling Sonos devices, I have no choice but to stop using it.

And I have an Amazon Fire device bought a mere 21 months ago mainly for Sonos use, which Amazon in their wisdom have seen fit not to advance beyond Fire OS 5.6.8.0, based on the ancient Android 5.1.1. I know who to blame there, and it’s not Sonos.

 

By the way “cripple” is rather hyperbolic, if you’re speaking of S1 on Android 5/6/7 (and Fire OS 5/6 for that matter). The controller app would be just as useful for everyday music play. It’s the configuration options which have been removed. Another, more up to date, device could be used for those occasional tasks -- even if it was temporarily borrowed.