In the aftermath of the CR100 debacle it may be helpful to discuss the direction and methods taken by Sonos management to achieve their end goal of retiring the CR100 by force and the impact on and perception of customers future buying decisions
They still have not made it clear in any believable way why they forced this issue which leaves many people puzzled and angry at the rendering useless of their legally owned equipment.
Personally , this is a first for me . I have never owned a product previously that I have bought that has been rendered useless by the creators period,. Far less easy to swallow is the subterfuge of the battery non issue to cover an ulterior motive. This makes the company Sonos look untrustworthy at best . If you have a reason for doing this , spit it out and let people know. I believe that I, as the purchaser gets to decide when it is time to retire my own possession. I have a belief that quality equipment that was sold as a quality product to prospective buyers should be subject to end of life decision only by the buyer and no one else.
I struggle with the management decisions taken that force me to re-evaluate my investment in their goods within my home.
Prior to the CR100 execution , I viewed my home audio system as an asset to my home , something that simply worked and worked well with minimal intervention required from me which is pretty much what I expect from audio equipment . Now I view the lifespan of this investment as something which looks like is beyond my control even if the equipment is still functioning regardless of my desire to maintain that .
The support aspect of this situation where Sonos staff went into hiding and avoided direct questions from concerned customers has to go down as a low point in any companies record in dealing with their best ambassadors.
These are just a few points that caused me to raise this topic for discussion regarding the ethicacy and morality and integrity of the current Sonos operation...any one of the the issues I have listed above would make Sonos or any other company ineligible for consideration for future investment either in business or in domestic life for this individual.
What do others think....? Please keep the thread social.
Page 2 / 6
Prior to the CR100 execution , I viewed my home audio system as an asset to my home , something that simply worked and worked well with minimal intervention required from me which is pretty much what I expect from audio equipment . Now I view the lifespan of this investment as something which looks like is beyond my control even if the equipment is still functioning regardless of my desire to maintain that .
discussion regarding the ethicacy and morality and integrity of the current Sonos operation...any one of the the issues I have listed above would make Sonos or any other company ineligible for consideration for future investment either in business or in domestic life for this individual.
As to the titled questions:
1. I have never used the CR100, but I find it a little hard to believe that the present model free controllers are so bad compared to it, that the lifespan of the investment in Sonos is affected. Sonos has sold millions of units since they stopped making/selling the CR100, as evidence of this.
2. Even if the lack of morality was to be stipulated, one would be cutting ones nose to spite ones face by not buying more Sonos kit for JUST this reason, unless one found some other maker that behaved differently and also offered all the Sonos features at the same price point. This also isn't like blood diamonds, surely. Or like using underaged labour in third world locations.
I can get people being annoyed because their perfectly serviceable remote is being consigned to the tech rubbish bin against their wishes. I got annoyed when Nokia discontinued a phone the day after launch and support ended 18months later. It put me off the company but I still ended up buying their products again… eventually. The Sonos One and “Alexa Enabled” could have been clearer, although I think Amazon needs to take some blame there too.
However to wish a company to fail and actively encourage that is even more immoral in my eyes. As someone who has worked for a company that has been dissolved it is a traumatic experience that I would not wish on anyone. To target Sonos when they have retired a 10 year old product, for which there are free alternatives, seems harsh in the extreme. Fine sell your kit, and don’t recommend them if asked but to go out of your way to tell others to boycott them? Surely the CR100 is not worth of that extreme a reaction?
However to wish a company to fail and actively encourage that is even more immoral in my eyes. As someone who has worked for a company that has been dissolved it is a traumatic experience that I would not wish on anyone. To target Sonos when they have retired a 10 year old product, for which there are free alternatives, seems harsh in the extreme. Fine sell your kit, and don’t recommend them if asked but to go out of your way to tell others to boycott them? Surely the CR100 is not worth of that extreme a reaction?
I am no longer a Sonos customer, just a user, until the gear can no longer serve MY purpose or Sonos allows me a choice in the Firmware I want to use.
When you want to buy more kit in future for whatever reason, how will you make sure of not facing similar issues with it? What kit maker will treat you different? Including in this issues like lack of repair services some years down the line.
I don't have a CR 100, but I do have close to useless iPod Touch devices that are in working condition, but not supported by Apple. But when I must have a device that only Apple makes that best meets my needs, I will still buy Apple for lack of better alternatives.
Hmm... close to useless?... - here is an absolute example of Sonos losing a sale because I can no longer add any more components to my Sonos system because I'm locked down on 8.3 to preserve my 3 CR100s... - I recently decided to refit out my garage/workshop for some projects that I want to work on throughout this coming summer... - I decided I'd really like to have some music playing whilst I'm working in there, for potentially hours on end...
Until very recently, my immediate solution to that requirement would have been to nip into town & pick up another Play:1 or newer "one"... not any more... - I dug out my old 1st generation iPod touch, which i purchased new in late 2007 (ish), and a no-longer used micro stereo system with an analog audio in, from the loft..
Charged up the ipod, - still works perfectly... hooked it up to itunes on my PC - still recognised & connected perfectly... stuck several hundred tracks on it (it's a 64GB model, so I've still got loads more to add), hooked it all up in a cupboard in the garage (so I can close the door to keep sawdust to a minimum on the kit), and voila... - an 11 year old iPod touch is now my perfectly functional music system in the workshop, at the expense of 1 Sonos sale.
It's a similar age to the CR100's... it has not been bricked by Apple, despite being "no longer supported", and despite having an "ageing lithium ion battery" and despite containing "older generation hardware" that can no longer cope with the processing demands of modern era applications... and yet, it still functions in every way that matters for all of the reasons I bought it in the first place (i.e. to play music)...
That, my friends, is why Sonos is not, and could now never hope to be, the company that Apple is... - Apple will get more of my custom in the future, Sonos will not. End of.
Ah so this is just another CR100 thread then 😞
That's already been discussed exhaustive in the 'Save the CR100' thread. So, why the new approach – for your amusement only?
Short memory Smilja.?
Let's start with an example when Sonos lied to you.
You asked me for an example of when Sonos lied. I gave you one.
I was hoping to discuss underlying reasons for decisions made and how they affect the consumer and not try to regurgitate the CR100 thread. However your request for an example of a lie to their customer base and your response to me providing the example is taking the thread straight back into the area that we should avoid.
There's no new approach for my amusement. I am far from amused. If you cannot grasp any of the concepts listed in the title of the thread and contribute meaningfully without asking for examples of, to use your own words, things that have been "discussed exhaustive" in the CR100 thread then its probably time for you to re read the posts above and try to understand the point of this thread as separate from the Save the CR100 thread.
Kumar, I agree with much of your post about the throwaway nature of consumer products these days.
I have never had to consider whether my product's life span will be ended by me or by the manufacturer before this event but now it is clear that I will have to evaluate that in future buying decisions.
I first bought Sonos in 2005 I think and have expanded it steadily since then installing in multiple homes and in different countries. When I initially bought the system ,forced obsolescence of the product by the manufacturer itself was not even considered. I like you had previously come from traditional audio systems that just trundle on regardless.
In my initial post I mentioned that this was a first for me to have a manufacturer kill its own product , which for me and others has been a disturbing occurrence raising questions that previously did not exist for me.
I don't inhabit these forums , I am only here because of an action thrust on me, previously I was a happy customer now I am not.
I accept that things move along, technology changes and Sonos must move and stay current but it seems to me that they have placed whatever the goal was in retiring the CR100 ahead of their integrity.
The long term dwellers on this board seem unable or unwilling to address that particular aspect of this debate. I don't understand the devout nature of that position and what the motivation is for such a zeal attached to a manufacturer.
Have you read through this topic? Be prepared, you won't be able to re-install older apps as well.
I hope not!!
Sonos have moved their position in the market over the years as you would expect any company to do. But there does seem to be a pattern emerging that makes me feel uncomfortable at times. Going back many years these very forums where changed because, we were advised at the time, of scalability and to make the "user experience" better.
Many forum members offered suggestions and comments (e.g. please bring back a "post preview" option) on the changes but no action was made to accommodate them other than the now familiar "we are listening and your views are important to us".
Roll forward to today and this forum is still a shadow of its formal self, much harder to use as an exchange of ideas and search through, BUT arguably better (than the original forum and "Ask Sonos") for new users who have set-up issues. Back in 2005 there were very few set-up questions on the original forum, but as the Sonos offering evolved so did the complexity of setting things up (SoundBar was so hard that there was a dedicated help-line and very good they were too!). With hindsight you could put forward the argument that Sonos were therefore correct to change the forum even against the desire of the then current user base notwithstanding that the whole look, feel and use of the forum was changed.
So was the aim of that "update" to the original forum to give the users a "better experience" (as advised at the time) or to allow for better set-up solving for new Sonos users (which Sonos knew would become more important over time)?
If the latter, was Sonos morally right not to give the real reason? :?
If the latter, was Sonos morally right not to give the real reason?
Even if the answer to the above is no, morally they were not right, what next? If I needed another play 1, I would still buy one. Wouldn't you?
Although I still think that this community software sucks and the old forum was a much better place for everyone including noob users...
Hmm... close to useless?... -
the company that Apple is... - Apple will get more of my custom in the future, Sonos will not. End of.
Where I still need Apple functionality, I too will still buy Apple, but knowing that I may again suffer the same fate as I did with the close to useless iPod Touch. Close to useless also because it - a 2011 model - can also not be used to store Apple Music songs for offline listening, something that has nothing to do with Sonos. If it did that, I could use it as a source in the car or on holiday with my bluetooth portable. But no, Apple has seen it fit to now allow its 2011 model to work with Apple Music. Technically a different approach that does not brick it, but in effect, a similar result. In which case, what's to gain by moaning about it?
Have you read through this topic? Be prepared, you won't be able to re-install older apps as well.
Well, really not relevant... - my ipod touch is a music storage & playback device... it's not even on my WiFi - which I believe does reach the garage, so perhaps I can connect it up & see if I can get any streaming service or internet radio players to run on it... if I can, great, if not... who cares, it has some 500+ tracks on it now, and when I get time I'll increase that to a couple of thousand or so...
It sits there, offline, always charging, with enough music on it to be left in repeat-shuffle mode that I can go weeks without hearing the same song twice, and short of hardware failure of the device, nothing than anyone does or tries to do can affect that functionality...
I don't have, or use any apps on it, other than the built-in OS-level music player, playing my own legally owned music ripped as MP3s & copied onto the device. I expect it to go on serving in its current capacity for many more years to come.
YMMV...
Have you read through this topic? Be prepared, you won't be able to re-install older apps as well.
I have just fully read that topic top to bottom, and in fact, I suspect I have thoroughly debunked it as FUD... - to save you all the effort of going over there & finding my refutation post, I'll reproduce it here for you...
"Err... wait a minute... - I have just read the announcement in the link.. - to save everyone the effort of going there, here's the entirety of the text to be found there:
"iOS 11 delivers innovative features and the redesigned App Store to hundreds of millions of customers around the world. Your apps can deliver more intelligent, unified, and immersive experiences with Core ML, ARKit, new camera APIs, new SiriKit domains, Apple Music integration, drag and drop for iPad, and more. Starting July 2018, all iOS app updates submitted to the App Store must be built with the iOS 11 SDK and must support the Super Retina display of iPhone X."
Now, English is my first language, and I think I have a pretty good grasp of it, and to my mind, I see NOTHING there that suggests or outright states that END USERS of apps coming down TO their devices FROM the app store, have to running iOS11... - what it does plainly state, TO DEVELOPERS is that app DEVELOPERS must BUILD their apps and submit them TO the appstore with the iOS11 DEV KIT...
This announcement is on the DEVELOPERS website... - it is not an announcement to the millions of Apple device users who are consumers of those apps... it is not an announcement piped at users when they go to the appstore, nor is it in the iTunes release notes (AFAICT).
Therefore, is this not, in fact, just blatant FUD-mongering? - If anyone can point out an announcement from Apple that supports the assertion made in the opening post, then I'm happy to be corrected on any/all of my interpretations of the situation."
Your understandig of the term "lie" is quite odd.
funny,
any form of diversion, is a lie......
1: "for your safety and at the risk of fire" I call BS on that
2:"due to the aging CPU that is failing" So all my ZP100's using the exact same CPU is also failing?
these were LIES......
if you have children, how would you describe this?
I can see why you still feel like you could purchase from Apple again, Apple did not "brick" your IPod Touch, so in my book, the same issue does not apply.
Steve, with your skills, you are well placed to keep old equipment in service, but you must know you are a rare exception. And one that is getting even more rare given the nature of design/construction of modern kit, compared to amps of yesteryear that were more easily repaired with parts that were more easily available. Sonos, as do all other makes, do not have too many like you in their target market. And I doubt you will be differently served by any other make when you decide you need more kit.
As to the iPod touch, it was being used largely as a Sonos Controller host; now I cannot so use it, because it will not access iTunes to get the latest Controller version. So, I can no longer use it in the manner. To me, someone has done the same thing to it as has been done to the CR100.
Kumar,
good points, and I agree, I am not the typical user and am not a revolving buyer of anything. (much to the dismay of my kids who over time never had the "latest and greatest"
as a side note, my repair shop was open in the 80's and 90's, and was shut down as I saw the change of durable goods to disposable goods take place and what was once a $300+ consumer item that anyone would pay $85 to fix became a cheap $65 item and you could not economically fix (VCR's were the perfect example)
NONE of these Sonos items are low cost, and that is another reason why this issue is insulting to some.
in your case, with the Touch, Apple is having to move forward with software for their entire music service, your touch depends on the service to provide the music.
in the CR100, this was a Controller first, and then over time they added streaming services to the CR100 and made the unit much more functional. this was great.
Take away ALL the streaming add-ons they put into the unit and it would STILL be a controller for the base system and for people hosting their own files on their own network.
Your Touch actually depended on a service to operate, the CR100 was the UI for the original system and technically did not.
what (in my opinion) people are missing is these units were $350+ (with the dock) and had a defined purpose. The least Sonos could have done is to remove all the added streaming services and allow those of us with the CR100 to retain the use of the original UI.
the best option would be to allow for a legacy firmware path that would keep us at the ~8.2 level.
I hate to see the end of any good working piece of gear, but in every case it should be my choice, call me a dinosaur......
It sits there, offline, always charging, with enough music on it to be left in repeat-shuffle mode that I can go weeks without hearing the same song twice, and short of hardware failure of the device, nothing than anyone does or tries to do can affect that functionality...
If you are fine with just that functionality, I agree you will see many years from it. Or not. My classic iPod crashed a year ago, HDD failure, so there is that.
But these days I don't buy new music, now that I find Apple Music serving all those needs. And also allowing offline storage for playing it in the car or on travels. Fortunately I have a handed down to me iPhone 5s that serves for just this application, but the iPod touch from 2011 will not.
Take away ALL the streaming add-ons they put into the unit and it would STILL be a controller for the base system and for people hosting their own files on their own network.
Good point, but not doing this, IMO, does not make Sonos immoral. Did they lie in this case - I can't say, I haven't tracked the CR100 subject. I don't see them doing anything very different from other makes, is the only point I am making.
IMO also by the way, all the controller upgrades they do is just a lot of noise with little forward motion. Take away a few things like Trueplay and I would say no forward motion for all the upgrade noise and heat since the time I have had Sonos from 2011. Fortunately, my upgrade process is robust, so this is just a minor irritant for me.
Now if my two Connect Amps were to ever be bricked in the coming years by Sonos.......
That's what I call an excellent example of using semiotics.
2:"due to the aging CPU that is failing" So all my ZP100's using the exact same CPU is also failing?
these were LIES......
if you have children, how would you describe this?
I would describe this as becoming entangled in contradictions. No more, no less.
It sits there, offline, always charging, with enough music on it to be left in repeat-shuffle mode that I can go weeks without hearing the same song twice, and short of hardware failure of the device, nothing than anyone does or tries to do can affect that functionality...
If you are fine with just that functionality, I agree you will see many years from it. Or not. My classic iPod crashed a year ago, HDD failure, so there is that.
But these days I don't buy new music, now that I find Apple Music serving all those needs. And also allowing offline storage for playing it in the car or on travels. Fortunately I have a handed down to me iPhone 5s that serves for just this application, but the iPod touch from 2011 will not.
Indeed, and everyone's circumstance will be different... I understand your preference is the apple music service, and that's not available to you on your old touch... - but I still make the point, that had you any offline music in your possession, you *could* load it onto that touch, and still have some music playing use out of it. I'm lucky I guess that I was a prolific CD purchaser throughout the 80's & 90's, and I have long since ripped all of them to MP3s on my NAS drive, - same goes for SWMBO's CD collection too. Latterly, after CD purchasing became old-school, I did switch to purchasing music online for download, but I always made certain to make sure I bought DRM-free MP3, so it would be compatible with all my music playing devices. These days of course, most of my music consumption is streaming, but I still have access to my large NAS library of tens of thousands of tracks, including all the "best" (IMO!) music of the last 40 years, which frankly is all I need/want to be satisfied... there seems to be VERY little indeed new material coming out that I'd consider worth buying...
the government in Norway has recently mandated the complete switch off of all FM radio in favour of DAB, so my in-car radio is similarly bricked, and again, it's going to be one of my old ipods or iPhones to the rescue, filled up with classic tunes from my own library...
If the latter, was Sonos morally right not to give the real reason?
Even if the answer to the above is no, morally they were not right, what next? If I needed another play 1, I would still buy one. Wouldn't you?
Although I still think that this community software sucks and the old forum was a much better place for everyone including noob users...
WHAT HAPPEND TO MY POST?
Surely it was not "moderated" ?? It was a lot longer and more thought through that single sentence quoted above!!
Now if my two Connect Amps were to ever be bricked in the coming years by Sonos.......
Interesting take on the controller in regards to the little progress in your point of view.
In one of your other posts in this thread you say you bought Sonos with an expected 5-10 year life span. If they brick your Amps but you got your 5-10 years use would you still be upset? Or Are you making a distinction between bricking and the units failing on their own?
With not getting updated any longer the apps will effectively become obsolete, don't you think? Each time you'll try to run them, you'll probably be prompted to update in order to continue.
In one of your other posts in this thread you say you bought Sonos with an expected 5-10 year life span. If they brick your Amps but you got your 5-10 years use would you still be upset? Or Are you making a distinction between bricking and the units failing on their own?
The latter; I can live with hardware not lasting for more than 10 years, but not with the bricking of a functional Connect Amp. The former is an act beyond Sonos control and a 10 year life at the price point seems fair with anything more a bonus. I am also OK with Sonos not offering the Trueplay feature for the Connect Amp, while doing so for existing play 1 units.
@TJRL: I noticed that your post went missing about the time I replied to it and I had nothing to do with it:-). Wouldn't have happened on the old forum!
In one of your other posts in this thread you say you bought Sonos with an expected 5-10 year life span. If they brick your Amps but you got your 5-10 years use would you still be upset? Or Are you making a distinction between bricking and the units failing on their own?
The latter; I can live with hardware not lasting for more than 10 years, but not with the bricking of a functional Connect Amp. The former is an act beyond Sonos control and a 10 year life at the price point seems fair with anything more a bonus. I am also OK with Sonos not offering the Trueplay feature for the Connect Amp, while doing so for existing play 1 units.
@TJRL: I noticed that your post went missing about the time I replied to it and I had nothing to do with it:-). Wouldn't have happened on the old forum!
Kumar,
2 big differences in how we apparently think here.
I do not purchase consumer electronics or any household appliance with the acceptance that I should be happy with 5-10 years of use. I will maintain and take care of the product assuming it will die 1 of 2 ways, either it fails due to poor manufacturing, or I will kill it.
the industry knows how to build everything to last, if they only wanted to.
Will I accept an assumed "lifespan", sure, on some types of items, but they need to be lower cost and considered disposable.
Allowing any company to be the decision maker on exactly when an item is to be killed off is a new thing, brought on mostly by the "software" needs of these items. I believe they need to update things to fix issues and keep them running, and when an appropriate amount of time (this is what all industries need to sort out) takes place they should be able to "stop maintaining" that unit BUT they should not be allowed to kill it off without some sort of options for the users to keep it workable. ... if only the car companies could have had that power back 50 years ago, they would have been dancing....
in the end I have only repeated that Sonos should have allowed for a Legacy fork in the road,
2 big differences in how we apparently think here.
I do not purchase consumer electronics or any household appliance with the acceptance that I should be happy with 5-10 years of use. I will maintain and take care of the product assuming it will die 1 of 2 ways, either it fails due to poor manufacturing, or I will kill it.
in the end I have only repeated that Sonos should have allowed for a Legacy fork in the road,
The problem is exactly that - comparatively poor manufacturing/component quality is what comes in the way of multi decade lifespans for almost every product made today at the mass market price points. Although I meant closer to 10 when I said 5-10 years, that is based on experience with the average product life today; and as I posted, I also would be very disappointed if a working product like a Connect Amp is bricked after ten years. That said, over a use of ten years the consequent daily cost of the Connect Amp in terms of investment, about 12 cents a day, is acceptable to me. For a similar expected life, the play 1 units are also good deals which is why I have four of them; my two Connect Amps were bought before the 1 units were introduced.
To the second point that is well taken, my only submission is that not so allowing a legacy fork does not make Sonos a company with no ethics, morality or integrity; it is a stretch, to conclude that from just this decision, given the current prevailing philosophy of products made and sold everywhere, not just in home audio.
With not getting updated any longer the apps will effectively become obsolete, don't you think? Each time you'll try to run them, you'll probably be prompted to update in order to continue.
Anyway, Apple is one of the more heavy-handed companies in regards to OS upgrades but even it has enough foresight to support at least a previous version as well the current one.
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.