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.
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.
Page 4 / 6
Coming at this as a CR100 owner (just the 2 of them) there are potential legal and moral / ethical issues here.
Legal first, I’m not in the law profession and there are obviously different laws across the world, but I’m assuming that legally (at least here in the uk) sonos have license conditions sewn up in such a way that they can legally send updates to my own purchased equipment in my house and render them useless whenever it decides to do so.
Except that's not accurate. Sonos is not pushing any software on to your equipment without your consent. Either you except or reject each update individually, or you specify that you automatically want to update whenever they are available. By your comments below, you seem to understand this, so I'm not sure why you would chose to word it as if you had no chose in the matter.
Moral / ethical next. I’m one of the vast majority of people who don’t have time to read dozens of pages of licence conditions in legal speak whenever I buy or upgrade something so I may have unwittingly signed up to conditions that allow them to do this. However, if I’d been alerted to a condition that stated that a company held the legal right to terminate the use of a product that I had legally purchased at a time of their choosing, guess what... I would not have bought it.
That is effectively what happened, but technically it's not. As with many modern products these days, you purchase the hardware and are given a free license for the software. Sonos didn't change anything on the hardware, just the software that you had a free license for. I get that that is irrelevant from the point of view of many, and it would clearly be bad business if a company made a habit of revoking free licenses. There may even be a legal case that a company most maintain free licenses to users if it was implied to be part of what a customer was buying when they bought hardware.
There’s plenty of parallels being drawn in this thread but I’m not sure they hit the mark for me. A parallel for me would be if Apple or Microsoft decided that they didn’t want anyone using legacy operating systems any more, so they sent out an ‘upgrade’ that rendered machines that used it unable to function ever again. They don’t do this and there are plenty of XP and NT systems out there, trust me I work in IT. Heck, I even have an old commodore Amiga that still works for the purpose it was purchased for - I accept I can’t do anything modern on it, but that’s fine. Another parallel I’ll draw is viruses... stuxnet last year was a virus that rendered people’s PCs useless, this was seen as a virus and treated as such by the international IT community, it had the same effect of running the ‘upgrade’ to 8.5 for those CR100 owners that were not aware of the effect it would have on their hardware - of which there are plenty.
I find it interesting that some are trying to call Sonos an appliance, like a kitchen toaster, for their analogies, while others are calling it like a computer. The reality is that it's both, and more, since each product is designed (some dependent) to work with other products, services, and the cloud. I think that changes things enough from other products so that most of the analogies are leaving out important aspects. I'd honestly say that this would be more like Amazon deciding that the echo 1.0 can no longer function, communicate with Alexa. That seems shocking right now, but 10 years from now when the tech and protocols have advanced significantly and relatively few are still using dot 1.0 and perhaps similar replacements are readily available and cheap?....I can see that. And to be clear, you aren't buying Alexa when you buy an echo dot.
Final point on this is that I have walled off my network (thanks to the advice of other sonos users, not on the advice of Sonos themselves might I add) and I’m still concerned I might have missed something that may result in an update being applied and therefore rendering my kit useless. In other words, I’m scared of the company that sold me my kit and who have now tried to send an update to it to stop it working and doing the thing I bought it for in the first place. They may as well send someone around to my house with a hammer to trash it when I’m not looking, it’ll be exactly the same outcome.
Therefore is it moral or ethical. Absolutely not in my book.
That's an over reaction. Sonos themselves told us that you can opt not to take the update. Walling the network is a way of preventing you from accidentally accepting the update. It is not to keep Sonos from updating software against your wishes like a virus.
Interestingly, this isn’t the first time I’ve been affected by something like this. Some years ago, I had a Sony pvr hard drive recorder that worked like a dream. That was until Sony decided to send a update and remove the pvr functionality, leaving me with a box that worked as long as I was there to press the record button when my tv show was about to start... similar behaviour from a corporate that left me with a device that didn’t do what it did when I bought it. Funnily enough I’ve not bought anything with a Sony badge since then and I’ll never do so again as I have a lack of trust in that brand due to this behaviour.
I would guess that's a licensing or patent issue. Perhaps similar to how denon had to remove some functionality because infringed on Sonos patents. And that's a normal reaction, I don't doubt that. I boycotted, Best Buy for several years because of an incident I had with them. It came to the point though that I realized that I was a one off situation, and I was hurting myself by limiting my buying options much more than it was bothering Best Buy.
Regardless, everyone has a right to hold a grudge or not. Morality is subjective.
Userlevel 1
Hi Melvimbe,
I can understand some of your arguments, but it’s partly what sonos have done but also partly how they have done it...
“Except that's not accurate. Sonos is not pushing any software on to your equipment without your consent. Either you except or reject each update individually, or you specify that you automatically want to update whenever they are available. By your comments below, you seem to understand this, so I'm not sure why you would chose to word it as if you had no chose in the matter.”
You’re right I do not have to accept it, but when the ‘do you want to upgrade?’ box appears, there’s no reference to the fact that by choosing to update you are about to brick some of your hardware. In the case of the CR100,these were £350 boxes back in the day so they’re not cheap. Also, if you do end up updating Sonos refuse to let you downgrade back to a working version either.. finally, there’s no option to opt out of the update, you have to ensure no one in your household presses the update button either by taking action such as locking down your network or relying on everyone (including your children) remembering to not press update on any of your sonos controllers or tablet controllers... this has done in a way that leaves a sour taste in the mouth. If sonos had made the update process highlight that it was about to brick the controller and it gave you an option to opt out of future updates such that existing functionality was maintained I think most people would have been happy with this, but they didn’t.
“I find it interesting that some are trying to call Sonos an appliance, like a kitchen toaster, for their analogies, while others are calling it like a computer. The reality is that it's both, and more, since each product is designed (some dependent) to work with other products, services, and the cloud. I think that changes things enough from other products so that most of the analogies are leaving out important aspects. I'd honestly say that this would be more like Amazon deciding that the echo 1.0 can no longer function, communicate with Alexa. That seems shocking right now, but 10 years from now when the tech and protocols have advanced significantly and relatively few are still using dot 1.0 and perhaps similar replacements are readily available and cheap?....I can see that. And to be clear, you aren't buying Alexa when you buy an echo dot.”
Interesting analogy here, one with many parallels... I do have an echo dot and would be annoyed if existing functionality was withdrawn at any time in the future as the packaging did not say it was a time limited product. However, I don’t expect all new functionality to work in finitum as hardware does move on. The other difference is that an echo dot is a £40 device, not something that people have spend £1000’s on over the years - this is a factor as well in my opinion.
“That's an over reaction. Sonos themselves told us that you can opt not to take the update. Walling the network is a way of preventing you from accidentally accepting the update. It is not to keep Sonos from updating software against your wishes like a virus.”
Disagree on this point. If sonos had provided options to avoid the update, instructions as to how to prevent the update hitting and they provided a downgrade path for those who had accidentally accepted the update then I’d have accepted this as fair and moral. The fact is they did not provide any advice as to how to prevent the update and they only referenced sonos community generated instructions how to achieve this after a lot of bad feeling being vented on the boards.
Thanks for the decent reasoned response though !!
I can understand some of your arguments, but it’s partly what sonos have done but also partly how they have done it...
“Except that's not accurate. Sonos is not pushing any software on to your equipment without your consent. Either you except or reject each update individually, or you specify that you automatically want to update whenever they are available. By your comments below, you seem to understand this, so I'm not sure why you would chose to word it as if you had no chose in the matter.”
You’re right I do not have to accept it, but when the ‘do you want to upgrade?’ box appears, there’s no reference to the fact that by choosing to update you are about to brick some of your hardware. In the case of the CR100,these were £350 boxes back in the day so they’re not cheap. Also, if you do end up updating Sonos refuse to let you downgrade back to a working version either.. finally, there’s no option to opt out of the update, you have to ensure no one in your household presses the update button either by taking action such as locking down your network or relying on everyone (including your children) remembering to not press update on any of your sonos controllers or tablet controllers... this has done in a way that leaves a sour taste in the mouth. If sonos had made the update process highlight that it was about to brick the controller and it gave you an option to opt out of future updates such that existing functionality was maintained I think most people would have been happy with this, but they didn’t.
“I find it interesting that some are trying to call Sonos an appliance, like a kitchen toaster, for their analogies, while others are calling it like a computer. The reality is that it's both, and more, since each product is designed (some dependent) to work with other products, services, and the cloud. I think that changes things enough from other products so that most of the analogies are leaving out important aspects. I'd honestly say that this would be more like Amazon deciding that the echo 1.0 can no longer function, communicate with Alexa. That seems shocking right now, but 10 years from now when the tech and protocols have advanced significantly and relatively few are still using dot 1.0 and perhaps similar replacements are readily available and cheap?....I can see that. And to be clear, you aren't buying Alexa when you buy an echo dot.”
Interesting analogy here, one with many parallels... I do have an echo dot and would be annoyed if existing functionality was withdrawn at any time in the future as the packaging did not say it was a time limited product. However, I don’t expect all new functionality to work in finitum as hardware does move on. The other difference is that an echo dot is a £40 device, not something that people have spend £1000’s on over the years - this is a factor as well in my opinion.
“That's an over reaction. Sonos themselves told us that you can opt not to take the update. Walling the network is a way of preventing you from accidentally accepting the update. It is not to keep Sonos from updating software against your wishes like a virus.”
Disagree on this point. If sonos had provided options to avoid the update, instructions as to how to prevent the update hitting and they provided a downgrade path for those who had accidentally accepted the update then I’d have accepted this as fair and moral. The fact is they did not provide any advice as to how to prevent the update and they only referenced sonos community generated instructions how to achieve this after a lot of bad feeling being vented on the boards.
Thanks for the decent reasoned response though !!
Userlevel 1
That’s interesting, someone else reported updating as normal and then getting a message saying that the CR100 no longer worked... without any notification as to the impending impact...
Anyone interested in CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT. The only reason CR100 was killed was monetary. What changed from prior release when CR100 worked to now when CR100 is a brick? Investing thousands of dollars in Sonos allowing the company to grow only to be screwed. My CR100's worked great no issues., The BOZO that made this decision should be fired! I asked to talk with someone at the company about the disregard of a loyal user. NO ONE AVALIABLE.
No very aware . Re-read the title of the thread please.
Once was enough, I saw nothing that wasn't discussed in the thousands of posts in the other thread, so I thought I was helping you out to get the information you were looking for. Guess not.
Can't help you there pal...this is an entirely different subject matter . Differentiation can be difficult to grasp. IE. if you are a hammer everything looks like a nail.
But thanks anyway for your kind consideration.
But thanks anyway for your kind consideration.
But thanks anyway for your kind consideration.
You're welcome!
I see this as a much larger than Sonos issue, about a consumption driven economic growth model; if any values are to be questioned, the ones that drive these are the culprits that need to be in the dock.
In Home audio, the days when people happily used decades old kit with the same remote - where the remote was even part of the kit - are gone, swept away with the "growth based on planned obsolescence" model everywhere.
Hopefully, those holding on to their CR100s are being consistent across their consumption behaviour, as it relates to clothes, cars, homes, computers, appliances and the rest. Unfortunately, this is very hard to do for every such purchase, and Sonos is just a small part of the shift in everyone's behaviour. And core value questions in this context therefore need to be framed much more broadly.
And if everyone were to hypothetically switch overnight away from this model, GDP growth everywhere will not just slow down, but will go negative for a long while, leading to a corresponding drop in average income levels.
The Earth will probably heave a sigh of relief though.
In Home audio, the days when people happily used decades old kit with the same remote - where the remote was even part of the kit - are gone, swept away with the "growth based on planned obsolescence" model everywhere.
Hopefully, those holding on to their CR100s are being consistent across their consumption behaviour, as it relates to clothes, cars, homes, computers, appliances and the rest. Unfortunately, this is very hard to do for every such purchase, and Sonos is just a small part of the shift in everyone's behaviour. And core value questions in this context therefore need to be framed much more broadly.
And if everyone were to hypothetically switch overnight away from this model, GDP growth everywhere will not just slow down, but will go negative for a long while, leading to a corresponding drop in average income levels.
The Earth will probably heave a sigh of relief though.
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.
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.
Lets discuss the morality of a company who are happy to lie to customers . Are you comfortable buying from a company that openly lies ?
To the first part, I respect your approach, and I wish I could follow it. I cannot in many cases because the old product, and I largely refer to appliances and electronics kit here, can no longer be easily repaired. And living in a world that thrives on throwaway, it isn't easy to march to a different drum where one does not have the necessary skills to do so.
I bought Sonos with no expectations of useful life from it beyond 5-10 years, given the nature of its construction and non availability of parts/service. Before that, my high end audiophile kit was, in theory, bought with longer life expectations; ironically, being a victim of the audiophile equipment churn, none was used as long as I have used Sonos kit since 2011.
But if I was to now look to buy only such products that are not of a throwaway nature, much of my purchasing would be a severe challenge. Products that will outlive me are either not available or are very expensive.
To the second part of "open lying", since I do not have the CR100, I haven't followed this subject closely enough to have identified any open lies, so I can't answer the question directly. I do know I have an iPod touch and a Sonos iPod dock that are not in use anymore because of Apple. I don't like it, but that seems to be how things are these days. From what I have seen of Sonos, they certainly seem to be doing more than Apple to maintain usability of old kit and perhaps more than many others in home audio, via ensuring backward compatibility in their new features; all of the kit that I bought from Sonos since 2011 other than the dock is fully usable and some like the play 1 continue to get new features and tweaks, free. On this subject therefore, I have no issue with Sonos even while recognising that the kit is not built to the same standards of, as an example, my now sold Quad 909 amplifier.
I do agree that Sonos is guilty in its marketing of either not telling the full story, or using slogans that contain exaggerated statements; but not more so than other makers of audio and other products. One has learnt to not believe all the marketing jazz in every such case; if I was to not buy from all such that do this, there would be almost none I could buy anything from.
To expand on the 909 amp; I bought it new in 2002 and sold it in 2014 once Sonos took over all music duties in the home. Had I kept it, it would have gone back to Quad in about 2020 for new capacitors and a general service, and would have been good for another 20 years.
I don't think I use any products that are built in that way anymore; not even cars. I certainly don't equate Sonos with Quad on this aspect, and Sonos also justifies this by being a lot cheaper than Quad.
I don't think I use any products that are built in that way anymore; not even cars. I certainly don't equate Sonos with Quad on this aspect, and Sonos also justifies this by being a lot cheaper than Quad.
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?
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.......
Userlevel 7
+5
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...
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.
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.
Isn't the CR100 a lot older than "at least a previous version"? As far as I know, it hasn't been sold by Sonos for at least five years now, and closer to ten.
Userlevel 7
+22
I buy very little I expect will last me over 10 years.
Userlevel 7
+22
Whatever turn it into to whatever you want - as normal just trying to be an antagonist on this board. I am not specifically talking about Sonos ... when in fact Sonos has held steadfast to much older equipment. So thanks for validating how well Sonos is keeping me current.
I have tried as hard as I can to distance this thread from the Save the CR100 thread. Unfortunately your reference to the save the CR100 again takes us back into the territory that I made efforts to avoid from the starter post.
Your previous post mentions a voucher enabling a purchase for a modern day equivalent of a ZP. Are you in addition to being a benevolent ,charitable, delusional , guidance person also a clairvoyant??
I see no reason why Sonos would retire a ZP unit without a similar compensation to that offered for the last retired unit. You didn't answer my very pertinent question on this matter, and instead decided to hurl personal insults. So much for a "discussion".
Why am I not the least surprised that you and jgatee would be ok with this. I bet you would even thank them for the voucher and opportunity to spend more money as you both pretty much argued in the other thread. Religious devotion. Laying the ground work for brickening #2 are we? :8
Actually, it was many of the other posters in that thread who were begging to spend more money on a replacement. If you like, I can post links.
By the way, what other thread is that? Surely not the one you have tried hard to distance this one from?
Nope, just read it again. I'm pretty sure you equated the reasons behind switching forum software to a morality issue.
I say again, good grief. If that's all you've got, no wonder the need for an echo chamber. :8
I say again, good grief. If that's all you've got, no wonder the need for an echo chamber. :8
Page 4 / 6
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.