Answered

SAVE THE CR100



Show first post
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.

3319 replies

Userlevel 7
Badge +2
[quote=kassey22000][quote=Wooks63]Actually, my voucher was worth £125, with which I purchased an iPort Xpress for the princely sum of nothing.

Someone commented that their old TV set doesn’t get any more firmware updates, but isn’t bricked, so why should Sonos do this to the CR100? The big difference here is that a TV is a standalone unit, whereas the CR100 has to communicate with multiple other devices, so it’s not reasonable to use this as a comparison in my opinion.[/i]


Mike, I'm so glad you were able to use your voucher to purchase a Non-Sonos product. That offer is NOT being given to the US customer base. $100 only toward the purchase of Sonos equipment which of course they don't offer a controller.

The comment on TV included the Smart Remote. That Smart Remote works on other LG TVs so your comment kind of misses the point. The CR100 is like a Smart Remote, it's handy, it's tactile, it can be used in the dark, in high humidity environments, and on and on. Why do you think almost every single TV, stereo, and many more audio equipment manufactures offer a handheld remote to this day? My household has tried to use the various crappy iOS apps to substitute the TV remote and they all suck.

The chipset in the CR100 is the same as in the ZP80 (see prior posts with accompanying photos), yet the ZP80 isn't being bricked (yet!). Why? Sonos had left the CR100 alone for a very long time without updates in the past, now they are bricking it in April simple as that - it is bad for the brand, and bad for loyal customers. Shame on Sonos' new management team for being so shortsighted.


Put together the facts:
Sonos used Fear and FUD (thank you to the self appointed message board police for providing that description) in their attempt to get the CR100 owners to relinquish their units for the sake of "safety" (only thing not added to that attempt was "For the children")
then they added to the FUD by claiming it was an elderly CPU, and I showed it was indeed the same as the ZP100 and could be the same as the ZP80, I just have not bothered to open one up to take a look.

Its apparent the CR100 is a device they simply do not want to support any longer, and likely due to the need for more resources in the limited resource pool that their firmware works with. I would suggest that much of the resources used by the CR200 should be close to the same, so I am sure the CR200 will be next, but with much fewer remaining "Working" CR200 around, and how they essentially run the same app as the rest of the touchscreen devices, I would suggest that they will not hear much from users when they want to kill the CR200, (their mistake was not setting the precedent first with the CR200)

Only real issues (aside from the fact that there is a growing number of users finally waking up to the issue and speaking out) is they built the Sonos Eco-System as a "one-sized fits all" and push the updates thru a single portal.
The best option for Sonos, if they want to save face and show they care about the users that bought their gear, is to create some some of Option to allow us the ability to "Opt-Out" or "remain a Legacy user" and keep from all further updates within our profiles, that SHOULD then only push a legacy version that will not cripple the CR100 and keep the Legacy Systems as they are today.
If implemented correctly they may even be able to allow for a "downgrading" of the firmware if you happen to want to add a new unit to your network along with the ability to update the Legacy code with API and certificate changes to keep the existing services and functions working. I am NOT suggesting adding anything new, just keep it operational.

Which as far as I am concerned is exactly what I would like, as I have no need or desire to move towards Voice, new streaming services and the demise of Local file storage:
Before I am flamed for this comment, ---DISCLAIMER--- this has not actually been discussed openly as local file storage is a "given" currently, however, as more users go to all-streaming and local file store is not currently able to be "Voice Controlled" along with the fact that the SMB protocol has never been fixed, you do the math and device if I may be onto something.
I am not interested in hearing from the "board police" accusing me of creating more FUD or reminding me of the honest mistakes I have made and recanted on. That's all getting too old and unless they can speak for Sonos Officially I do not care to hear from them,

this is not a $30 remote control, or even $100, these were around $300 new and I am using 8 of them, and moving to touchscreens would NOT replace their tactile control and single purpose ease. (I am not going to repeat everything I have already said about that.)

There has been an increase in the media on the issue lately, so more people are starting to learn of the pending demise coming in April.
Sonos has not pulled the trigger yet either, so there have also been no lawsuits to test the system. I would think someone might if they feel they have been slighted enough,
everyone has the right to do what they feel is best.

Speaking just for myself my network is walled off, and it will remain that way until Sonos works out a way to reverse their direction on this, otherwise I will continue to run the walled off system as long as I can. I will no longer sing the praises or advise friends and clients towards a Sonos system as there are many other options today and none that have taken the same approach to kill off a perfectly good running piece of control gear by their own volition without providing any sort of option NOT to be included in the process. (or actually provide a proper "reason" from their forced move)
Again ---DISCLAIMER--- to avoid the flamers that continue to tell us they know more than we do,
You should not consider the "process" to opt out as provided by Ryan S as official. His detail was incomplete and also came with the same "we do not recommend" that officially Sonos Support advises to stay on the most current version. They have not provided any official option on this, and advised against it.
The users that have spent the time on this topic (you know, not the berating ones) have built methods and directions on how best to lock down the systems. See the links in this topic on how to proceed.

If Sonos decides that allowing users to "wall off", and no longer remain "customers", rather than "users", is an acceptable calculated loss they are willing to accept, then that is their choice. Those of us that do wall off will have to decide how to proceed going forward.

I can only hope Sonos realizes that finding a way to keep all of their customers "satisfied" is truly the best for business in the long run.
Userlevel 7
Badge +2
More thoughts on "HOW" Sonos could provide a legacy path

--Disclaimer-- at the risk of being told I am wrong, and being reminded how I "have been wrong" on this topic before, I want to suggest that unless the Self Professed Board Police can speak for Sonos to refute what I am suggesting, then go away.

one of the board cops asked the question "how" when commenting on having some sort of Legacy path created.
I will try to keep this short, but this came to me since I have had to learn as much as I did resurrecting a few ZP100s to lock them down. YES, I was working with a Bus Pirate, Yes I was replacing component level parts and watching the units boot, and forcing firmware to dead units, and yes, I fixed them.

1 Sonos already knows EXACTLY what hardware you own, by serial number, unit name and household. Do not forget this fact.
2: Sonos has one URL address that all devices go to for the upgrades, update.sonos.com
3: at this point, they have only needed to "send" to the requesting device the updated firmware in their "one sized fits all approach". so they just pump out one set of code.
I am uncertain if there is actually a specific firmware sent depending on the device VS the very same being sent, but even it its specific, this can still be managed (see number 4)
4: when the device (be it a player, or control, or bridge, Etc) all send the request along with its identifying detail.
for example, the following is submitted: (and this is in the ZR100 repair topic on this board)
URL is http://update-firmware.sonos.com/firmware/Gold/28.1-83251-v5.2-pcyakr-RC4/28.1-83040-1-1.upd?cmaj=27&cmin=2&cbld=80271&subm=3&rev=2®=1&serial=XXXXXXXX&sonosid=XXXXXXXX&householdid=XXXXXXXXXX

notice the bold text, Sonos know exactly which device they are sending firmware to and hey send it back with a name that includes that very detail.

this is all "behind the scenes" programming and management.
if an "option" to stay in a "legacy" or "V1" code were given, and we had the ability to select the option in our Sonos Profile, then when Your unit would send a request for the update THEIR system could lookup the account based on unit serial number, determine the option to remain on legacy, and then send the proper code.

to further this, the proper code versions could ALWAYS be the same only one ends in V1 or V2 or L, (whatever designation they want), the point it, the player/device will always load the latest code and even if you want to swap a unit from V1 to V2 or the other way around they COULD send the code with a firmware version number that will look to unit like its the "next generation" and boot that code. (a downgrade option should be possible)
In my opinion this could be done based on what I have seen and how these units boot their firmware. But Sonos must implement it and it would mean they must support a legacy path but they would not be "adding" any new features or further developing it, they would just be keeping it operational and updated for APIs and security certificates.

as far as the Apps are concerned, they would have to create a V1 and V2 and should even be able to have the App inform the user if they opened the wrong one and need to change apps based on Option selected in your Sonos account. (this could keep the Apps from updating improperly or even allow a user the ability to have both apps on the same device to service 2 different households if they are not on the same "Option".

I had to share my thoughts on this,
and again, before someone feels the need to tell me I am wrong, or Sonos would never do it, or I am ignorant or just plain stupid, perhaps you should consider how you will look if you do.

Tossing thoughts out there and perhaps Sonos has someone watching and can think this thru. I believe this is possible, Sonos needs to make it happen.

Its not April yet, there is still time.....
Userlevel 5
Badge +8
Plus Sonos has upnp control support (UNIVERSAL) so why not just strip the CR100's back to that - most of the services don't work anyway on the CR100 - just keep the music library and radio and we'll be happy
Userlevel 7
Badge +2
- but I - in common with everyone else here - have no metrics available to know how many CR100's are in use - only Sonos knows that, and they're keeping schtum...

My limited metrics - I know of 5 households using Sonos, mine included. All have used CR100's in the past, but no longer using. All have obtained the vouchers, and 4 have already spent them.


but again, this all comes down to choice, not forced obsolescence.
if you decided you do not need the units anymore, then good for you. As stated all thru this topic, I use the App and PC Application, I would always reach for the CR100 if I simply wanted to hear music or keep my eyes closed (think while in bed)
I invested in 8 of these units, and created my lifestyle with them.
What gives Sonos the permission to tell me "sorry- just kidding, we are turning them off now"?

someone stated there may only be a small number "left", so what? the board police like to tell people they have millions of units sold, so if this is to be true at what point should the "obligation" to support these units kick in? one way or another, they do not have the right to just decide to turn them off.
Userlevel 1
I don't understand why we shouldn't be able to opt out of the future options, but retain the ability to change to our systems within the current ecosystem. Personally I would prefer the ability to opt out of options because they are a pain in the neck. If you have several zones, computers,and iPads in the system, then each "upgrade" generates multiple delays when I go to listen to music. Worse, the upgrades have been meaningless for me.

Now the intentional obsoleting of what was an expensive unit seems tone deaf to past loyal customers, especially early adopters. This bricking of our equipment makes is hard to recommend Sonos to my friends, just as real competition is arriving on the market.

I wouldn't have made the subtaintion financial commitment if I had known Sonos was going to box me into this corner.
Userlevel 6
Badge +5
How many times do you really expect a response? The official response is on the very first post in this thread. That’s almost certainly all you’re going to get. Sorry you don’t like it.
If you think I have nothing better to do than fart about on these forums all day and chasing things up then you're wrong.

I volunteered some weeks back to co-ordinate an attempt to get Sonos to change their mind and - here's the thing - I will see that to the end, whatever the conclusion is.

You clearly don't like this, for whatever reason. Well tough luck.

Do I expect Sonos to provide what we have asked for? - No.

Do I expect a reply to the questions that have been asked? - Yes.

You have already shown yourself to accept what is told to you. By the way, 2 + 2 really does equal 5.

The good news is that when we get an official response from Sonos that goes your way, you and your mates can have a right old laugh at our expense.

Trouble is, by that time - as kmurray pointed out earlier - we won't be here anymore.

We'll be getting on with our lives at least with the satisfaction that we did not rollover and accept what was told to us.

Finally as to your post:

I'm really curious what the update will provide. #1 on my wishlist is implementation of the Alexa AudioPlayer interface, which will enable all sorts of things, like AnyPod, Stitcher, Radio Paradise, MyMedia (local files), soundscapes via voice control.

I probably speak on behalf of many others here by saying we don't care but as long as YOUR wishes are satisfied then we're all happy for you.
Userlevel 2
Badge
It really is ridiculous and extremely arrogant of Sonos Inc. to declare that items they sold at a high price tag are now being rendered unusable. The company should be sued, and at the very least, they should lose a significant block of loyal customers. By obsoleting the CR100 while the product still functions well for thousands of people, the company is sending a clear message that anything you buy from them is a potential brick. Sonos products are expensive, these are not throw-away items. I agree with many people here that the company is likely to target the ZP100, ZP80, and the CR200 product lines next. I can only hope that a third-party software movement emerges that will keep these great products working. Sonos Inc. clearly doesn't care that you invested a lot of money for a product that Sonos management can arbitrarily declare as garbage, even though it technically still works superbly.
Userlevel 3
Badge

I raised the issue with WHICH, the consumer champion in the UK. Their legal dept gave the following reply after a long exchange:

As you bought the controllers 12 years ago this means that any claim you may have been able to make could not be enforced. This is due to the fact even if we are able to make an argument for breach of contract, the time limit for bringing a breach of contract claim is 6 years from the date of purchase. As you are out of time, there is no action you could now take against the retailer.

What action you may be able to take against the manufacturer would be dependent on if there is any guarantee in place and what the terms and conditions of the guarantee actually state.

Assuming that there is no guarantee then there is in effect no remedy that you would be entitled to. In this situation my advice would be to contact the manufacturer in order to see if you can at least negotiate an additional voucher as you have more than one controller.




Thank you for actually contacting a consumer protection agency and getting the actual legal explanation. Too many armchair lawyers in this thread spouting legal "expertise", complete with their idle threats of class action suits. This certainly paints a more realistic picture of what Sonos is liable for. Seems Sonos is quite amenable to issuing additional vouchers, which is in line with the recommendations from WHICH.


I would really rather you did not hijack my inputs to further your own standpoint on this issue, thank you. Make no mistake, I am furious with Sonos' handling of this issue. Do not confuse my apparent surrender as being in any way grateful.

I have read all 80+ pages of comments and the biggest disappointment to me in all this is the few posters who have revelled in the situation.
Userlevel 5
Badge +3
I cannot expect guests to install the app (or frankly to work it out)

Is there a reason you can't leave instructions for your guests on how to install the Sonos app on their phone/tablet right next to the instructions for connecting to wifi?


In fairness, I think he gave one. I also think that if I was the guest and I didn't already have Sonos I would not want to download an app I knew nothing about.

Which leads me to another related point that this thread keeps emphasising to me: whilst I am very grateful for all the advice on how to block ports and impose parental restrictions, the fact remains that I bought a plug and play at whole house music system with a (actually six) bespoke controller. I didn't buy anything other than that (although by virtue of my Sonos network experience I have become the IT network goto guy for friends and family). The idea that a CR100 owner should have to do anything at all to continue his or her enjoyment of the controller simply doesn't start from the right of place. Nor does "the world is a cruel place".

T
Userlevel 5
Badge +2

2. Sonos have had their cash out of us so don't care anymore. Most of us have "maxxed-out" our Sonos systems although Ive always been tempted to add another one or two..


Not sure that every early adopter has maxed out there system. I always envisaged growing my system further (and have grown it) when I have considered a product meets my needs.
Up until this point, I have always look forward to seeing the latest addition and developments to the Sonos eco-system .

(Correct me if I'm wrong?) but the "offical" recommended solution to avoid bricking my hardware seems to be version lock my system (via a convoluted series of DNS / Privacy/ Update hacks / third party controller apps)
This seems do defy all business logic as Sonos does not provide legacy firmware, As such it will be impossible for me to purchase further products after the next update as these would be incompatible with my existing system firmware????

But what intrigues me most is that all controllers are "enablers" for the Sonos system. eg the more controllers the better people can access the hardware, be they legacy or cutting edge they facilitate access to the hardware Sonos is trying to make money out of selling.
Userlevel 7
Badge +2

Sonos doesn't make money from streaming services, streaming services do so you shouldn't worry about that.


Evidence please. Are you the Sonos CFO or Accountant?

And while your at it can you provide evidence that they don't hope to make revenue from streams in the future. Will be you willing to provide a guarantee. That will be a no then. Thanks for your best guess.

Dave


- Sonos has stated so, that's for you to believe or not
- Sonos has also stated they have never and will never sell user information to any 3rd party, again for you to believe or not

And it doesn't make sense:
Music service subscriptions are directly with that music service, not through Sonos.
Most music services aren't profitable at all and some are even competitors to Sonos (Apple, Google, Amazon), you really think they pay Sonos to have their service play on Sonos?
If Sonos would do that most services probably wouldn't be available on Sonos, so that's not really in their interest is it?


I would also remind everyone that Sonos stated we MUST trash the CR100 due to a Battery Fire Hazard (Fear)
and the unit is failing due to an AGING CPU (Fud)

so, are we to really believe everything Sonos tells us?
Innocently choosing and playing music tonight when - BAM - the screen was taken over by a message stating an update was required: just a basic message and a big red button to tap marked UPDATE NOW. Tucked below on the bottom bar of the message box was a small 'Done' - which could, presumably, also be tapped. Nothing else. No explanation for why an update was required nor any warning that such an upgrade might change anything of consequence. And would tapping the 'Done' just make the message go away - or would it also set the update off? I chose to close the app (Android tablet); on reopening, the message had gone.

Now, of course, I was alert to the consequences of this update warning (from these forums) - many won't be. Updating would take away 2 CR100s used every day and a slightly elderly small Android tablet. I have already lost Sonos functionality on a perfectly capable Vista laptop. No email on the matter, by the way...

Despite being alert to the implications of an update (all auto updates turned off), I was shocked by this message and the complete lack of guidance in the window that appeared. So easy for someone using Sonos to just tap UPDATE and be done with it (and goodly chunks of the kit). This action by Sonos, barging into my front room with such a misleading message, trying to seduce me into a damaging update, is simply disingenuous. In fact it just stinks. What kind of company are we all tied to / have invested in?

Of course I am not in the business of tossing out our Sonos suite (used daily since 2006) but I have lost faith in this firm. And I am angry: just who do they think they are? Why do they care so little about their customers?

I know it's all been said in this topic but, well, I'm just saying it again.
Userlevel 4
Badge +6
Staggered that some still want to defend this decision and the appalling way it’s been implemented.
Eg.
Had to Fight to get one voucher per cr100.
But still Cannot use vouchers at the Sonos dealers I’ve bought all my stuff from.- (Stealing their own dealers customers and they aren’t happy about that either)
Cannot use 2 vouchers on one item.
July deadline on use of vouchers -refused to extend. I don’t need anything yet. But I am forced to buy something or lose it.

This is nothing but a win for Sonos and screw the customer.
There is no defence nor justification that I can find.
Userlevel 7
Badge +2
I owned and used a CR100 for years. Heft, convenient hard buttons, and other things aside, for anyone who ever tried to search using the CR100, "elegant" would be the last word used to describe it.

No one is going to argue the CR100 sucks for searching, we all agree.
however, we cut our teeth on the CR100 and trained our systems to present the music the way WE felt was best.
All the dynamic searching and now voice control DID NOT EXIST at the time.
I WILL use a phone/tablet/PC for searching and setting up the library, after that its the other 99% of the time that the CR100 is all need and want.

this really is Sonos trying to shove us into the new media and voice control, and that is NOT what we use Sonos for.
where their arrogance is, is thinking that their forced one-sized-fits-all solution is the ONLY way it should be done.
nothing could be further from the truth.
Hell. I was a Mobile DJ for 22 years (seems like a past life) and I have all the music I need, if I wanted to select a specific song and it was off an obscure album I am sure that Alexa will not have it for me, while my library does. No one is offering local library voice control, and I would not need it, the CR100 allows me to pull it right up.
I am going to assume that most WITHOUT a CR100 have no idea how that even works.... and the newbies into Sonos not only have never seen CR100 they also do not actually own their own music.

Sonos needs to find a way to keep the Legacy stuff alive. Period.
Make the Sonos Eco-System more flexible and you can win more generations of users.
Userlevel 5
Badge +4

We appreciate the concern and your love of the CR100, and the team has been listening to your feedback here.

No, you are not listening. THAT is the problem.


We strive to keep products working with core functionality for as long as possible and we’ve worked to keep the hardware running for almost a decade since it was last available for sale.

Untrue. My CR100s are perfectly functioning NOW.


We always encourage Sonos owners to stay up-to-date with software upgrades, but ultimately this choice is yours. If you do choose to take steps to ignore future software upgrades, skipping the update in April that will disconnect the CR100 from your system, you will no longer be able to add speakers, and you will not receive new features or security patches. Additionally, opting not to update means you are acknowledging the risk of the aging lithium ion battery in your controller. Whichever you choose, we’re here to help and answer questions.


This is not the full picture. I don't want your updates for "services" but I need the security patches. The battery story is an outright lie. Continuing to push this nonsense is only making you look worse.

Stop acting like a bunch of bullies. You sold me my CR100, I paid you plenty of money for it, you have NO RIGHT to deliberately make it stop working and force it into landfill for your own selfish, greedy whims.

You know, I laughed when I first saw this hashtag (because most of this is real hyperbole)...but now I'm right on with them: https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/sonosdoesntcare

#sonosdoesntcare #savetheCR100
We appreciate the concern and your love of the CR100, and the team has been listening to your feedback here. We’ve tried to keep our reasons for making this decision clear.

The CR100 is a unique Sonos product as it has an internal lithium ion battery, which was never intended or recommended to be replaceable. Additionally, the hardware of the CR100 has aged. As you know, it already can’t keep up with new features. For these reasons, the best course of action for CR100s is to safely dispose of them.

We strive to keep products working with core functionality for as long as possible and we’ve worked to keep the hardware running for almost a decade since it was last available for sale. We have no plans to disconnect any of our legacy players, although in the future they may not get some new features that become available on newer Sonos products.

We always encourage Sonos owners to stay up-to-date with software upgrades, but ultimately this choice is yours. If you do choose to take steps to ignore future software upgrades, skipping the update in April that will disconnect the CR100 from your system, you will no longer be able to add speakers, and you will not receive new features or security patches. Additionally, opting not to update means you are acknowledging the risk of the aging lithium ion battery in your controller. Whichever you choose, we’re here to help and answer questions.


But you haven't been honest in the slightest! Answer me these three simple questions with direct answers:

1. If there is a battery risk, legally in the UK there needs to be a recall. Is there a battery risk?
2. With the update methodology adopted by Sonos it is almost impossible to avoid updates in future (e.g. a new phone, a new Sonos Play 1, etc.). Given this, how are users supposed to avoid updates over the long term?
3. Explain how you can talk about security vulnerabilities yet do not support SMB v2?

I am not deploying Sonos in my new house and will be selling my existing gear because you won't give straight, honest answers to the above (ready to apologise if you do...) and are demonstrating you do not value (read, invest in software engineering effort) your customers enough to code a solution to this perfectly solvable scenario.

To put it bluntly, with your actions you have lost my trust.


Your lack of response on this Sonos speaks volumes.

You can't even look your users in the eye and respond to simple questions.
Userlevel 7
Badge +6
The CR100 is a unique Sonos product as it has an internal lithium ion battery, which was never intended or recommended to be replaceable. Additionally, the hardware of the CR100 has aged. As you know, it already can’t keep up with new features. For these reasons, the best course of action for CR100s is to safely dispose of them.

Additionally, opting not to update means you are acknowledging the risk of the aging lithium ion battery in your controller.

Ryan,

This is just wrong. Please point me to a single piece of legislation, for any country, that allows you to manufacture equipment and then state it is dangerous to continue to use and that users must dispose of it, and your liability for it has ended.

If you manufacturer it, you are responsible for it. There is no time limit on this.

The General Product Safety Regulations 2005

“dangerous product” means a product other than a safe product;

“recall” means any measure aimed at achieving the return of a dangerous product that has already been supplied or made available to consumers;

Obligations of producers and distributors
9.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), where a producer or a distributor knows that a product he has placed on the market or supplied poses risks to the consumer that are incompatible with the general safety requirement, he shall forthwith notify an enforcement authority in writing of that information and
(a) the action taken to prevent risk to the consumer; and
(b) where the product is being or has been marketed or otherwise supplied to consumers outside the United Kingdom, of the identity of each Member State in which, to the best of his knowledge, it is being or has been so marketed or supplied.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply—
(a) in the case of a second-hand product supplied as an antique or as a product to be repaired or reconditioned prior to being used, provided the supplier clearly informed the person to whom he supplied the product to that effect,
(b) in conditions concerning isolated circumstances or products.



You have previously stated these devices are safe. Now you are saying they are not.

I will repeat the question I have previously asked. Is the product safe (in which case your post is just using FUD), or the product is not safe (in which case this is a recall).

Regards
Dave

P.S. I note you have ignored my previous tough questions after specifically asking for questions.
Userlevel 1
V Unhappy about this whole event, seems very much like planned obsolescence. I have 2 CR 100's as part of a 7 zone system and use them in bathrooms & outside. I have new batteries in both so the only reason they wont work is due to SONOS actions. Thanks. Glad to know you appreciate my business over the last years.
Will consign SONOS to the same bin as I dumped Apple into years ago if they continue with the action to stop the CR100. I (and many others) need water proof (resistant) control solution. Why would you reduce your system's flexibility? Don't need more functionality, just basic browse and play operations in wet and outside areas.
And a £100 voucher for store that doesn't provide the solution? thanks! I'll keep it in my chocolate teapot!
Userlevel 1
End of Life-ing hardware has got to be one of the stupidest things a company can do. How could i ever trust Sonos again? Today it's the CR100, tomorrow, it's what? Sorry, won't be doing business with Sonos anymore.

I, like many on this thread, was one of the original supporters of Sonos. Treating the long time customers like this is just plain dumb.
Userlevel 6
Badge +5
Any limitations on the number of mp3s? How about the radio stations? Let's see some of those differences:
  • SMB3 implemented
  • Indexing capacity = 200,000 songs.
  • Same radio station choices as far as I could tell.
  • Upgrade choices for the firmware include auto-update, no update, update via USB stick
  • Trigger and IR in (good for whole house system integration, especially with legacy remotes)
  • Separate Subwoofer out on the Node 2 (not just Coax / fiber optic - they both have that).
  • Analog / Digital in on the PowerNode 2
  • Ability to attach a USB hard drive with music content

I wonder how many potential Sonos customers are choosing Bluesound instead of Sonos because of these differences alone. The big differentiator (CR100) is going away, I hear many of the CR200's appear to have failed due to touchscreen weaknesses? How many existing legacy customers will throw up their hands in frustration and adopt this system the next time something Sonos-related breaks on its own or is broken by the OEM?

As best as I can tell, the Node 2 and PowerNode 2 can pretty much do everything a Connect and Connect:Amp can do, at similar price points. They have more interfaces (for whom that matters), more software upgrade options, and so on. For some, the addition of a Vault 2 is the cherry on top as it obviates the need to set up a NAS.
Userlevel 5
Badge +2
I believe Sonos has gone totally deaf on this topic
...
It's not just about being able to play music well... the real aim of these on-demand spoken-command system is to monetize the user base... allowing us to listen to our own music is not the end goal because there is not much money in that.

No, where silicon valley wants us to go is streaming services: Subscriptions, referral fees, market research, selling usage habits, etc.in turn allow the creating of an ongoing income stream does not end with the sale of the equipment. Every firmware update may allow Sonos to test new partners, new services, or discontinue existing ones (see Amazon a year ago).
...
Sadly, Sonos may be curtailing future sales among their most faithful customers with this move
....


Some interesting points you suggest, that the motivation of Sonos is based on a desire to further "monetize the user base", if this really is the case I can't help but feel they have been living in the land of over inflated silicon valley valuations and they will kill a perfectly viable business by trying to squeeze customers until they respond by telling them to politely stick there products where the sun does not shine.
A very sad suggesting if this is there intent, are you basing this on anything more than speculation?

By all means offer new services to users and take a commission if people think they are a sufficiently valuable addition to the base product (which have been bought and paid for in full) but to actively undercut the base product by forced redundancy seems ridiculously short sighted.

Anyone for SONOS willing to offer an informed explanation or has "Sonos gone totally deaf" as suggested?
Userlevel 4
Badge +1
I’m not on twitter but I can see their page. Has anyone raised this with Sonos in a more public environment. I think comments here are playing into their hands. We are whingeing in their closed room - public comments are more likely to get sonos to remove their heads from their arses.
Userlevel 7
Badge +2

Well if I was one of his guests I would be pretty upset if I had to install another App on my smartphone or tablet just to use the TV let alone the HiFi!! I expect the TV to have a remote and the HiFi to either have controls on the front or a remote like the TV.


What does the CR100 have to do with the tv remote? if the setup did have a playbar or playbase, I would expect that it's probably programmed into the tv remote.


Now if his guests do not own a smartphone or tablet (and why should they?) they will be really annoyed!!


Then provide a tablet for them. This argument somewhat reminds me of hotels that used (still do?) provide a clock radio with an ipod/iPhone docking station for use with your apple product. Being that I didn't have an iPhone, I couldn't use it, but I never felt cheated by the hotel. I understand there a differences in expectations between a hotel and an B&B. It's not meant to be a perfect analogy.

Personally, I have couple trips planned this Spring, and I have no idea what sort of sound system will at wherever I stay. I plan on bringing my phone and a portable Bluetooth speaker. Problem solved.


OK, in simple terms:-

Q "What does the CR100 have to do with the tv remote?"
A If I rented a flat for a holiday and I had to download an app onto my smartphone to use the TV I would not be all that happy. The same argument applies to using the HiFi system in the flat. So the point I was trying to make is that, I regard the CR100 as the same as a TV remove (but for the stereo rather than the TV), as I am sure the OP's customers would.

"Q" "Then provide a tablet for them."
A I think the OP covered this point, if he provided a tablet it would be a more attractive target for theft as tablets are universally useful unlike the CR100 (or a TV's remote to thrash that thyme!).

"Q Personally, I have couple trips planned this Spring, and I have no idea what sort of sound system will at wherever I stay. I plan on bringing my phone and a portable Bluetooth speaker. Problem solved."

A I guest it depends on the price paid and the facilities expected. If I paid top price for a fully featured holiday rental I would not expect to have to bring my own music system (or controller for the music system). In addition in my post I was using the assumption that the occupant my not own a smartphone or tablet (and why should they?).

Long post short:-

We purchased a music system with a remote controller at a time when there was no "App" alternative. Now Sonos are taking our remotes away and requiring us to replace them with an App running on some generic hardware platform that might also become unsupported at any time.

Most people would be unhappy if they purchased a TV with a remote controller and after a few years the manufacturer disabled that remote and required the owner to start using an App that was not as good as the disabled remote.

Melvimbe - If you are happy with things as they are, then I am happy for you. Just try to understand the OP's point of view even if you would not be upset if you were in his position.
Userlevel 7
Badge +5
"Important Reminder to Sonos management
I'm out reaching to tell you that for all I care you can go & boil your head.
If/when my software is updated and thus destroys my personal property, you will no longer be able to call me a customer. To learn more about why I'm taking this stance, please read the previous 90-odd pages of posts.

The choice to retire my CR100, always should have been mine, and mine alone. Opting not to accept your forced obsolescence means that I will no longer have the ability to buy any more Sonos products and services, not that I would want to buy anything in future from a company that behaves in this way. I acknowledge that I won't be able to add any more services that I don't want or need, nor add any more crappy & almost unusable voice assistants.

As I shall continue to use, and enjoy my valuable CR100s, I acknowledge the "risk" of the near brand new lithium ion batteries continuing to function and to charge as normal.

A code for a single voucher for £100 off something else from Sonos.com is an insult, and not worth the electrons required to type the words.

For help understanding why a new controller option isn't what I want, check back through the many & varied reasons eloquently described over the preceding 89 pages."
Userlevel 1
This is Sonos giving the big middle finger to the people who basically supported them in the beginning. Anyone who owns a CR100,CR200, ZP80 and ZP100 are the die hard customer base who spend the $$$ supporting your product early on. I guess Sonos thinks that they have enough of a new customer base to say F U to us. I have 8 zones/9 players, I've given some players to family new and hand-me-downs so I've supported the brand. I wasn't quick enough to stop my phone from auto-update and now I have limited functionality which is basically holding my system hostage until I update. Listen I'm not going to dump my hardware but I'm not getting any new stuff or making any recommendations. I can understand that they might not want to support 10 year old hardware but bricking a working piece of equipment. Talk about environmentally insensitive. Do I now just toss it in the garbage? What about the CR200 or original ZP's? If they stop working after an update, should I assume that Sonos has deemed them obsolete. I use to always update my stuff confident that stuff will work now I don't know anymore. And on a side note, I'm still waiting for Google home assistant Sonos integration? Spend less time taking away functional products and more time adding new ones (ie. Google Home integration) .