End of Software Support - Clarifications

End of Software Support - Clarifications
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.

4256 replies

D
Userlevel 2
Badge +3

Memory is cheap now compared with 2009.  The impact of overloading on cost is much less significant now. 

It’s a fair point. though,  that developments always, inevitably, overtake memory that seems more than adequate now.  So it’s a judgement call, as none of us knows.  My judgement is that the Play:5 gen 2 will be good for another 10 years plus, and I will act accordingly.  You may make a different call and act differently.  Fine.

Incidentally, I love the way you switch your arguments just to score points.  Accusing Sonos of putting too much memory in! Hilarious.  Thanks for the entertainment.

I did not change my argument, i just say that if Daniel says that they will NEVER use up 256 Mbyte and that this amount is enough forever, it seems stupid of them to put in more memory and storage. Even though prices on memory and flash has gone down, there is a price difference between a 256 Mbyte and a 1 Gbyte flash chip and if they did not think that it was ever needed, they could have saved some money.

Maybe it is only ½ dollar cheaper, but ½ dollar times 100.000 sold devices, would still make 50.000 dollars just for one component.

 

The reason they have put in 1 Gbyte is because they believe that within the lifespan of these devices, they will need about that much ram/rom and that means that inside those products lifecycle, the Play 5 2.gen will be not be around for as long and this device is being sold today, alongside those other products with 4 times ram and rom.

Rumours have it, that the Play 5 will have a “gen 3” iteration, released soon, and if this is true, then you can expect that the Play 5. 2.gen will be phased out “due to low ram/rom” in 5 years time.

So you mean they could support the 32mb for 10 years but the 256mb only for around 10 years as well? The backlash sonos just got from all over the world is massive, they will do whatever they can to prevent that from happening again, the gen2 is here to stay, they should be able to update that speaker far longer than the gen1, this is just my 1 cents.

 

Moderator Note: Removed Profanity.

D
Userlevel 2
Badge +3

Sorry I don’t get what you are talking about. The Sub is running the very same firmware build as all the other Sonos products do. You are purposely confusing facts.

Sonos has said that they need to make the Play 5 and a few other units legacy because the firmware HAS to be the same on every single sonos unit in your system, otherwise they will not “communicate”.

The reason they legacy these products is that the firmware can not be held within 32Mbyte anymore.

So when they reach the 64 Mbyte limit, they will have to legacy all 64 Mbyte products as well.

 

Considering that Sonos have managed to support up to 15 year old gear until today, they will probably manage to support devices with twice the RAM/ROM of the now legacy gear for at least 8 years from present. A lot can happen in 8 years, the Sub (or any other Sonos product for that matter) may become defective and has to be replaced with a hypothetical 2nd gen Sub anyway for instance. There’s no point in driving yourself mad about anything that may or may not arise in a few years time.

Agree to 100%, i think that sonos Will find a way to keep your speakers running for a long time after they stop selling them 

 

D
Userlevel 7
Badge +5

@DK_Madsen Sonos say that unless units are on the same firmware version, they cannot communicate or do multi room. Which is why your idea doesn't work.

Why Sonos says this is not something I can challenge, not knowing what's under the hood of their system. Or, even if I knew it, not being able to understand it!

 


Yes same firmware revision on all units, but even though they have the same firmware i guarantee you that they have the firmware in “boxes”.

 

One part of the firmware handles wifi, one handles audio playback, one handles decoding of streaming and so on.

 

The “Every unit has to be on the same level” is just something they have decided, there is no law of physics that say that it HAS to be like that.

I bet that the part of the firmware that handles Play 5 specific tasks have not been altered for ages, so all they needed to do was to split the firmware up into 2 branches

 

  1. Full firmware for modern units
  2. Light firmware for legacy units

This way they could cut out every part of the firmware that the legacy units never use (Alexa, Airplay 2, etc) and release the light firmware.

Every time they released a new firmware, they could just update the firmware revision on the light firmware to match the full firmware, and in the case they changed parts of the full firmware, that was also present in the light firmware, they would update that part in the light as well.

If the firmware is written well, then the boxes i talk about is like “drivers”. One driver for the wireless module, one for the amplifier, one for decoding audio streams and so on. They only add the drivers  needed for the legacy products and leave everything else out of it.

This is how smart phone firmware is written, this way you dont need to change more than you have to and since everything is drivers, that connect to the “operating system“ you know that the parts you did not change, will work.

Or to put it another way….If the sonos firmware is written in such a way that they can not do this, it’s really poorly written.

G
Userlevel 6
Badge +4

@DK_Madsen Sonos say that unless units are on the same firmware version, they cannot communicate or do multi room. Which is why your idea doesn't work.

Why Sonos says this is not something I can challenge, not knowing what's under the hood of their system. Or, even if I knew it, not being able to understand it!

 


Yes same firmware revision on all units, but even though they have the same firmware i guarantee you that they have the firmware in “boxes”.

 

One part of the firmware handles wifi, one handles audio playback, one handles decoding of streaming and so on.

 

The “Every unit has to be on the same level” is just something they have decided, there is no law of physics that say that it HAS to be like that.

I bet that the part of the firmware that handles Play 5 specific tasks have not been altered for ages, so all they needed to do was to split the firmware up into 2 branches

 

  1. Full firmware for modern units
  2. Light firmware for legacy units

This way they could cut out every part of the firmware that the legacy units never use (Alexa, Airplay 2, etc) and release the light firmware.

Every time they released a new firmware, they could just update the firmware revision on the light firmware to match the full firmware, and in the case they changed parts of the full firmware, that was also present in the light firmware, they would update that part in the light as well.

If the firmware is written well, then the boxes i talk about is like “drivers”. One driver for the wireless module, one for the amplifier, one for decoding audio streams and so on. They only add the drivers  needed for the legacy products and leave everything else out of it.

This is how smart phone firmware is written, this way you dont need to change more than you have to and since everything is drivers, that connect to the “operating system“ you know that the parts you did not change, will work.

Or to put it another way….If the sonos firmware is written in such a way that they can not do this, it’s really poorly written.

You are of course absolutely correct in what you say, but you are also wasting your time arguing your valid point with these people. It doesn’t matter what you say; no matter how true and correct it is they will never accept that Sonos is anything but wonderful in all their design and product and marketing decsions.

D
Userlevel 7
Badge +5

You are of course absolutely correct in what you say, but you are also wasting your time arguing your valid point with these people. It doesn’t matter what you say; no matter how true and correct it is they will never accept that Sonos is anything but wonderful in all their design and product and marketing decsions.

No it seems that all the critics with valid points have vanished and only the core “religious follower” group is left.

None of these people are willing to challenge anything Sonos says, in the same way that a true religious believer does not want to challenge, if what their god has said is true. :)

Today Sonos stock dipped below 10USD, and with all the talk of corona and recession i would be really worried if i was sonos.

A new recession where people looses their jobs, and the first thing people will cut down on is “luxury” and atleast price wise sonos is a luxury brand.

I wonder if Sonos will survive, first the backlash of their poor decisions and now a possible recession. One thing is for sure, the backlash at their “retirement of older products” scheme, have not helped them one bit.

melvimbe

 


Yes same firmware revision on all units, but even though they have the same firmware i guarantee you that they have the firmware in “boxes”.

 

One part of the firmware handles wifi, one handles audio playback, one handles decoding of streaming and so on.

 

The “Every unit has to be on the same level” is just something they have decided, there is no law of physics that say that it HAS to be like that.

I bet that the part of the firmware that handles Play 5 specific tasks have not been altered for ages, so all they needed to do was to split the firmware up into 2 branches

 

  1. Full firmware for modern units
  2. Light firmware for legacy units

This way they could cut out every part of the firmware that the legacy units never use (Alexa, Airplay 2, etc) and release the light firmware.

 

 I don’t think it’s quite that simple.  Each product probably has different ‘boxes’ in it, depending on it’s specific features, not just the two groups you listed.  However, the box for certain features like WiFi need to be the same, so I agree with the point in general.

 

Every time they released a new firmware, they could just update the firmware revision on the light firmware to match the full firmware, and in the case they changed parts of the full firmware, that was also present in the light firmware, they would update that part in the light as well.

If the firmware is written well, then the boxes i talk about is like “drivers”. One driver for the wireless module, one for the amplifier, one for decoding audio streams and so on. They only add the drivers  needed for the legacy products and leave everything else out of it.

 

 

I believe this is already what’s happening.  I think you’re reading too much into the ““Every unit has to be on the same level” to mean every single piece of code rather than the ‘boxes’ that need to be the same/common on every device.  

 

If the above is true, that would mean that a change in the ‘alexa box’ would not add any code to the legacy devices, since they don’t have built in voice control.  A change to the WiFi driver, would effect the legacy devices.  If the upgraded WiFi driver doesn’t fit on the legacy devices, than it could be applied to any devices in your system.

Perhaps put a different way one way to look at it is….

Sonos devices must be on same firmware 

Some Sonos devices have voice control capabilities.

Therefore every Sonos has voice control firmware.

Therefore Sonos could make more space on legacy devices by removing voice control firmware where it isn’t used.

I don’t think the above is true.  I think it’s more like...

Sonos devices must be on the same firmware for the features the device supports

All Sonos devices have WiFi capabilities.

Therefore every Sonos device must be on the same WiFi firmware.

Therefore Sonos cannot update the WiFi firmware on any  Sonos device if there is not available space on every Sonos device.

 

The difference has to do with initial premise of the argument.  One premise is a literal interpretation of what Sonos said, the other a looser interpretation that makes more sense with the decision Sonos has made and seems to fit with the programming framework you believe it should be written as.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Danny
D
Userlevel 2
Badge +3

Memory is cheap now compared with 2009.  The impact of overloading on cost is much less significant now. 

It’s a fair point. though,  that developments always, inevitably, overtake memory that seems more than adequate now.  So it’s a judgement call, as none of us knows.  My judgement is that the Play:5 gen 2 will be good for another 10 years plus, and I will act accordingly.  You may make a different call and act differently.  Fine.

Incidentally, I love the way you switch your arguments just to score points.  Accusing Sonos of putting too much memory in! Hilarious.  Thanks for the entertainment.

I did not change my argument, i just say that if Daniel says that they will NEVER use up 256 Mbyte and that this amount is enough forever, it seems stupid of them to put in more memory and storage. Even though prices on memory and flash has gone down, there is a price difference between a 256 Mbyte and a 1 Gbyte flash chip and if they did not think that it was ever needed, they could have saved some money.

Maybe it is only ½ dollar cheaper, but ½ dollar times 100.000 sold devices, would still make 50.000 dollars just for one component.

 

The reason they have put in 1 Gbyte is because they believe that within the lifespan of these devices, they will need about that much ram/rom and that means that inside those products lifecycle, the Play 5 2.gen will be not be around for as long and this device is being sold today, alongside those other products with 4 times ram and rom.

Rumours have it, that the Play 5 will have a “gen 3” iteration, released soon, and if this is true, then you can expect that the Play 5. 2.gen will be phased out “due to low ram/rom” in 5 years time.

So just because they release a gen3 they Will stop updating a product that works just fine with 256mb ? You must be really scared and sad when sonos releases new hardware thinking you wont be able to use your perfectly fine and working speakers just cus a new one comes out

melvimbe

You are of course absolutely correct in what you say, but you are also wasting your time arguing your valid point with these people. It doesn’t matter what you say; no matter how true and correct it is they will never accept that Sonos is anything but wonderful in all their design and product and marketing decsions.

 

I see no problem with the arguments made, other than I don’t agree with the initial premise the argument is based on.  I understand the basis for the premise, but don’t interpret it the same way.   

 

I also don’t think it’s very  accurate to say that those who disagree with your conclusion think Sonos could do no wrong.  I haven’t seen anyone say that Sonos marketed this correctly, or that Sonos products are without flaw.   As these things tend to go, points of agreement aren’t highlighted while points of disagreement get all the attention.

Danny
Ken_Griffiths

So just because they release a gen3 they Will stop updating a product that works just fine with 256mb ? You must be really scared and sad when sonos releases new hardware thinking you wont be able to use your perfectly fine and working speakers just cus a new one comes out

Only the legacy devices mentioned in the Sonos announcements will not get any updates… even if the Play:5 (gen2) speaker stopped being manufactured/sold today… the minimum time in which it would not become supported and receive updates is 5 years from now … In practice however, it’s more likely to be closer to double that period, or longer, but I’m basing  that on Sonos’ past record for product support.

D
Userlevel 2
Badge +3

So just because they release a gen3 they Will stop updating a product that works just fine with 256mb ? You must be really scared and sad when sonos releases new hardware thinking you wont be able to use your perfectly fine and working speakers just cus a new one comes out

No .. you misunderstand, only the legacy devices mentioned in the Sonos announcements will not get any updates… even if the Play:5 (gen2) speaker stopped being manufactured/sold today… the minimum time in which it would not become supported and receive updates is 5 years from now … In practice however, it’s more likely to be closer to double that period, or longer, but I’m basing  that on Sonos’ past record for product support.

Yes hopefully 10 years after they stop selling it, maybe its just me but i have accepted that i have to buy new speakers maybe 7 years from now, but how is it different to anything else i buy? I buy a new smartphone every 3 year for the same amount that 2 play 5 costs, do feel bad for the people who are heavily invested in sonos, but i however have made peace with it

G
Userlevel 6
Badge +4

You are of course absolutely correct in what you say, but you are also wasting your time arguing your valid point with these people. It doesn’t matter what you say; no matter how true and correct it is they will never accept that Sonos is anything but wonderful in all their design and product and marketing decsions.

No it seems that all the critics with valid points have vanished and only the core “religious follower” group is left.

None of these people are willing to challenge anything Sonos says, in the same way that a true religious believer does not want to challenge, if what their god has said is true. :)

Today Sonos stock dipped below 10USD, and with all the talk of corona and recession i would be really worried if i was sonos.

A new recession where people looses their jobs, and the first thing people will cut down on is “luxury” and atleast price wise sonos is a luxury brand.

I wonder if Sonos will survive, first the backlash of their poor decisions and now a possible recession. One thing is for sure, the backlash at their “retirement of older products” scheme, have not helped them one bit.

Yes it is rather like a religion isn’t it - or perhaps a cult. The cult of Sonos :)

D
Userlevel 7
Badge +5

 


Yes same firmware revision on all units, but even though they have the same firmware i guarantee you that they have the firmware in “boxes”.

 

One part of the firmware handles wifi, one handles audio playback, one handles decoding of streaming and so on.

 

The “Every unit has to be on the same level” is just something they have decided, there is no law of physics that say that it HAS to be like that.

I bet that the part of the firmware that handles Play 5 specific tasks have not been altered for ages, so all they needed to do was to split the firmware up into 2 branches

 

  1. Full firmware for modern units
  2. Light firmware for legacy units

This way they could cut out every part of the firmware that the legacy units never use (Alexa, Airplay 2, etc) and release the light firmware.

 

 I don’t think it’s quite that simple.  Each product probably has different ‘boxes’ in it, depending on it’s specific features, not just the two groups you listed.  However, the box for certain features like WiFi need to be the same, so I agree with the point in general.

 

Every time they released a new firmware, they could just update the firmware revision on the light firmware to match the full firmware, and in the case they changed parts of the full firmware, that was also present in the light firmware, they would update that part in the light as well.

If the firmware is written well, then the boxes i talk about is like “drivers”. One driver for the wireless module, one for the amplifier, one for decoding audio streams and so on. They only add the drivers  needed for the legacy products and leave everything else out of it.

 

 

I believe this is already what’s happening.  I think you’re reading too much into the ““Every unit has to be on the same level” to mean every single piece of code rather than the ‘boxes’ that need to be the same/common on every device.  

 

If the above is true, that would mean that a change in the ‘alexa box’ would not add any code to the legacy devices, since they don’t have built in voice control.  A change to the WiFi driver, would effect the legacy devices.  If the upgraded WiFi driver doesn’t fit on the legacy devices, than it could be applied to any devices in your system.

Perhaps put a different way one way to look at it is….

Sonos devices must be on same firmware 

Some Sonos devices have voice control capabilities.

Therefore every Sonos has voice control firmware.

Therefore Sonos could make more space on legacy devices by removing voice control firmware where it isn’t used.

I don’t think the above is true.  I think it’s more like...

Sonos devices must be on the same firmware for the features the device supports

All Sonos devices have WiFi capabilities.

Therefore every Sonos device must be on the same WiFi firmware.

Therefore Sonos cannot update the WiFi firmware on any  Sonos device if there is not available space on every Sonos device.

 

The difference has to do with initial premise of the argument.  One premise is a literal interpretation of what Sonos said, the other a looser interpretation that makes more sense with the decision Sonos has made and seems to fit with the programming framework you believe it should be written as.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

BUT...If you are right...And i think you might be, then i dont understand that they can say “There is not enough room” on legacy devices going forward.

 

Unless they plan on doing some crazy big update of the boxes that even the legacy devices uses and i bet that the parts that the legacy devices use, is not something they update on a regular basis as these are base functionality that has been refined over the years to a point where not a lot of bugs have to be corrected.

 

I would expect the problem with the nand flash size to be more of a “We can not add new features, there is no room for them” but i would not expect them to add new features to the older generation devices anyways, in the same way that they dont support airplay 2 on older devices.

 

Even if they suddenly wanted to rewrite the whole syncing between devices part, why not just keep the legacy units legacy, and incorporate the legacy functionality into the other units and if a user chose to stream across modern and legacy, it would default to the legacy mode….Maybe the sound quality would be worse because of lower bitrate, but then that would maybe even be a selling point.

 

Kind of…..Try to listen how much better the sound is, when streaming on modern units only.

 

This would be something that would make users want to upgrade, because they can “see …. hear” the difference and what they are getting with an upgrade.

Instead they turned this situation upside down and started off by taking something away from people, telling people that they HAD to do it….But not really WHY they had to do it….Not in a tangiable way atleast.

D
Userlevel 7
Badge +5

only the legacy devices mentioned in the Sonos announcements will not get any updates… even if the Play:5 (gen2) speaker stopped being manufactured/sold today… the minimum time in which it would not become supported and receive updates is 5 years from now … In practice however, it’s more likely to be closer to double that period, or longer, but I’m basing  that on Sonos’ past record for product support.

How is that based on previous record for product support.

 

The Play 5 gen 1 was introduced in november 2009, and is now leacy in May 2020. That is 10,5 years from introduction to retirement.

The play 5 gen 2 was introduced in 2015 making it ~5 years old. So if the gen 1 and gen 2 have similar product cycles it will last for ~6 years from today, not “double” as in 10 years from now.

D
Userlevel 7
Badge +5

So just because they release a gen3 they Will stop updating a product that works just fine with 256mb ? You must be really scared and sad when sonos releases new hardware thinking you wont be able to use your perfectly fine and working speakers just cus a new one comes out

Based on what they did with the Play 5 gen 1, is it not reasonable to expect them to do the same product cycle with the gen 2.

Play 5 gen1 is to be “legacied” 10,5 years after introduction.

The gen 2 is right now about 5 years old, so ~6 years left before it is made legacy.

Ken_Griffiths

Yes hopefully 10 years after they stop selling it, maybe its just me but i have accepted that i have to buy new speakers maybe 7 years from now, but how is it different to anything else i buy? I buy a new smartphone every 3 year for the same amount that 2 play 5 costs, do feel bad for the people who are heavily invested in sonos, but i however have made peace with it

 

Yes, I am quite happy here too with the stated 'minimum' level of Sonos Support that they have announced in their recent statements. 

 

I have seen people here in the community, try to compare Sonos products to things like old passive speakers that they bought ‘donkey years' ago and think because such speakers have lasted them 30 years, that Sonos products should also do the same, but that is like comparing Apples to Pears, as these Sonos products are all-in-one smart-home computerised multi-room wireless speakers. The Passive Speaker boxes are a completely different type of product.

 

Anyhow thinking back, over a period of 5 years, or so, I have replaced quite a few devices here, including a built-in double oven, hob, fridge, washing machine, main TV, several mobile phones, laptop, iPad, TiVo box and a router (and a few other devices that don't immediately spring to mind) ...and I don’t think any one of those things were 'in service' any longer than 7 years overall from date of purchase, before they 'bit the dust' for a variety of different reasons and had to be recycled/replaced. 

So if I get 5+ years, or more, from my Sonos products, then I’m not going to groan about that at all. 

I see people here have had their Sonos devices well over 10+ years and for many of us, I’m sure that 'trend' will long-continue, but accept there will always be a few exceptions of hardware failure, that’s inevitable when products are mass-produced on such a large scale. 

 

I read somewhere that Sonos shift 1200+ products every day/365 and if that’s true, the forum here has very few complaints overall, relatively speaking.

 

Even those people who are now worried by owning Sonos devices that may only last them 5-10 years from purchase, may go onto choose to take their custom elsewhere, but even then, there is no guarantee, wherever they may go, that the ‘similar’ hardware they purchase will last any longer from some other manufacturer. 

 

Some may go back to buying passive speakers etc; but that’s not what I want for my home audio system these days. 

 

So I don’t see the point in 'arguing the toss' about the possible life-span of Sonos products, because if you do compare matters 'like for like' the Sonos products past-reputation of longevity speaks (entirely) for itself. So as mentioned earlier in this thread, I recently bought more Sonos devices and have chosen to personally stick with the Sonos brand, as I honestly see absolutely no reason at all not to do so.

melvimbe

BUT...If you are right...And i think you might be, then i dont understand that they can say “There is not enough room” on legacy devices going forward.

 

Unless they plan on doing some crazy big update of the boxes that even the legacy devices uses and i bet that the parts that the legacy devices use, is not something they update on a regular basis as these are base functionality that has been refined over the years to a point where not a lot of bugs have to be corrected.

 

 

I don’t know exactly what crazy big update would be, but yes, I suspect that the update is in the boxes legacy and modern devices both have for common functionality.  Something along the lines of making the multiroom audio more stable, less drop outs, etc.    I agree that it’s possibly not something that gets updated very often.  I also think it’s quite possible that it’s something most users won’t notice any real difference between modern and legacy systems, and therefore conclude that it was not necessary.

 

 

I would expect the problem with the nand flash size to be more of a “We can not add new features, there is no room for them” but i would not expect them to add new features to the older generation devices anyways, in the same way that they dont support airplay 2 on older devices.

 

 

I agree that a feature addition/improvement that like airplay shouldn’t cause problems for legacy speakers and shouldn’t be the cause of this split.  However, it could be a system wide feature addition that will only work with code added to all devices in the system.  I struggle to imagine what that could be, but can’t rule it out as a possibility.

 

 

Even if they suddenly wanted to rewrite the whole syncing between devices part, why not just keep the legacy units legacy, and incorporate the legacy functionality into the other units and if a user chose to stream across modern and legacy, it would default to the legacy mode….Maybe the sound quality would be worse because of lower bitrate, but then that would maybe even be a selling point.

 

 

Isn’t this what Sonos said they were going to do?  Are you suggesting that something where Sonos sort of separates the syncing functionality and other features that are device specific.  That way users would opt to go with sync 1.0 or sync 2.0 if they have modern devices only.  The rest of the system would update like normal with new features going to the devices that can handle them. 

 

If that’s along the lines you’re thinking, I am not against the idea, but I don’t know if that’s a possibility.  I also wonder what sort of support costs that would mean going forward if it is possible.

 

 

Kind of…..Try to listen how much better the sound is, when streaming on modern units only.

 

This would be something that would make users want to upgrade, because they can “see …. hear” the difference and what they are getting with an upgrade.

 

 

Whatever “it” is, sound improvement or more stability, I think everyone will be happier if they can clearly tell the difference between legacy and modern systems after May.   That seems like something that would be good for both customers and Sonos.

 

 

Instead they turned this situation upside down and started off by taking something away from people, telling people that they HAD to do it….But not really WHY they had to do it….Not in a tangiable way atleast.

 

They never said anyone had to replace all their legacy devices, but I agree that they could have said it a lot better.   Currently, it looks as if staying legacy is risking potential bad things happening, while going with a modern system is just maintaining status quo.  There hasn’t been much of a carrot provided, other than modern device features we already know.  I do hope there is a carrot involved, but they just can’t tell us yet for whatever reason.  Regardless, I think it would have better to  announce the change as “Sonos 2.0” then anyone with modern devices only can upgrade to, while others can stay on “Sonos 1.0”.  Even without providing a reason for 2.0, just yet, I think it would have given a better overall connotation, something to look forward to rather than problems to avoid.  But I don’t work in marketing.

 

Danny
melvimbe

only the legacy devices mentioned in the Sonos announcements will not get any updates… even if the Play:5 (gen2) speaker stopped being manufactured/sold today… the minimum time in which it would not become supported and receive updates is 5 years from now … In practice however, it’s more likely to be closer to double that period, or longer, but I’m basing  that on Sonos’ past record for product support.

How is that based on previous record for product support.

 

The Play 5 gen 1 was introduced in november 2009, and is now leacy in May 2020. That is 10,5 years from introduction to retirement.

The play 5 gen 2 was introduced in 2015 making it ~5 years old. So if the gen 1 and gen 2 have similar product cycles it will last for ~6 years from today, not “double” as in 10 years from now.

 

If all we had to look at was the history of the play:5 gen 1, I think your assessment would be reasonable.  However, we know the product life of other Sonos products as well, which has been longer than 10 years.   Of course we also know the difference in memory and perhaps have a different sense of the speed of tech these days...vaguely.  Based on that, I would feel comfortable going with around 7 or 8 more years rather than 10. If there was something to the play:5 that made it more reasonable to expect a shorter life than other products, I’d downgrade that guess.  No guarantee, other than 5 minimum, regardless.

 

I am more inclined to suggest people wait on buying a play:5, or a playbar really, right now, for potential new features like voice control, airplay, auto trueplay, etc,  from next gen products, more so than concerns about product longevity.  Although it’s possible, likely even, that a gen 3 play:5 will last longer than a gen 2, you can also see in Sonos history that the ZP products last as long as their predecessors, the connect and connect:amp.

Danny
D
Userlevel 2
Badge +3

only the legacy devices mentioned in the Sonos announcements will not get any updates… even if the Play:5 (gen2) speaker stopped being manufactured/sold today… the minimum time in which it would not become supported and receive updates is 5 years from now … In practice however, it’s more likely to be closer to double that period, or longer, but I’m basing  that on Sonos’ past record for product support.

How is that based on previous record for product support.

 

The Play 5 gen 1 was introduced in november 2009, and is now leacy in May 2020. That is 10,5 years from introduction to retirement.

The play 5 gen 2 was introduced in 2015 making it ~5 years old. So if the gen 1 and gen 2 have similar product cycles it will last for ~6 years from today, not “double” as in 10 years from now.

Yes but who Said they can only support a speaker for 10 years? Sonos? If so please post me a link to it! Just because gen1 got supported for 10 years dosnt mean the gen2 have to, still alot more, alot more memory in the gen2 they can push it alot further, but i dont care because i think sonos Will come up with a whole new solution for future legacy products, the anger is out there and sonos knows it, also, i am very into sonos i completely love it! I Will always buy new speakers every 5-10 years anyway, 

W
Userlevel 5
Badge +2

Yes hopefully 10 years after they stop selling it, maybe its just me but i have accepted that i have to buy new speakers maybe 7 years from now, but how is it different to anything else i buy? I buy a new smartphone every 3 year for the same amount that 2 play 5 costs, do feel bad for the people who are heavily invested in sonos, but i however have made peace with it

 

How is it different? Because you are looking at it from a tech perspective and not a hifi perspective. Only a very small part of your speaker is going to die due to support issues - the drivers and amplification will live on quite happily. You’re replacing things that aren’t in any way broken or degraded, just because the things that feeds them is defunct. Hifi has a history of lasting a LONG time… tech, as you suggest, we get used to replacing. A lot of us see Sonos as hifi first, with smart functionality second, and are not happy to replace. Some people, I suppose, see the smart part first and are therefore happier to replace.

D
Userlevel 7
Badge +5

Yes hopefully 10 years after they stop selling it, maybe its just me but i have accepted that i have to buy new speakers maybe 7 years from now, but how is it different to anything else i buy? I buy a new smartphone every 3 year for the same amount that 2 play 5 costs, do feel bad for the people who are heavily invested in sonos, but i however have made peace with it

 

Yes, I am quite happy here too with the stated 'minimum' level of Sonos Support that they have announced in their recent statements. 

 

I have seen people here in the community, try to compare Sonos products to things like old passive speakers that they bought ‘donkey years' ago and think because such speakers have lasted them 30 years, that Sonos products should also do the same, but that is like comparing Apples to Pears, as these Sonos products are all-in-one smart-home computerised multi-room wireless speakers. The Passive Speaker boxes are a completely different type of product.

 

Anyhow thinking back, over a period of 5 years, or so, I have replaced quite a few devices here, including a built-in double oven, hob, fridge, washing machine, main TV, several mobile phones, laptop, iPad, TiVo box and a router (and a few other devices that don't immediately spring to mind) ...and I don’t think any one of those things were 'in service' any longer than 7 years overall from date of purchase, before they 'bit the dust' for a variety of different reasons and had to be recycled/replaced. 

So if I get 5+ years, or more, from my Sonos products, then I’m not going to groan about that at all. 

I see people here have had their Sonos devices well over 10+ years and for many of us, I’m sure that 'trend' will long-continue, but accept there will always be a few exceptions of hardware failure, that’s inevitable when products are mass-produced on such a large scale. 

 

I read somewhere that Sonos shift 1200+ products every day/365 and if that’s true, the forum here has very few complaints overall, relatively speaking.

 

Even those people who are now worried by owning Sonos devices that may only last them 5-10 years from purchase, may go onto choose to take their custom elsewhere, but even then, there is no guarantee, wherever they may go, that the ‘similar’ hardware they purchase will last any longer from some other manufacturer. 

 

Some may go back to buying passive speakers etc; but that’s not what I want for my home audio system these days. 

 

So I don’t see the point in 'arguing the toss' about the possible life-span of Sonos products, because if you do compare matters 'like for like' the Sonos products past-reputation of longevity speaks (entirely) for itself. So as mentioned earlier in this thread, I recently bought more Sonos devices and have chosen to personally stick with the Sonos brand, as I honestly see absolutely no reason at all not to do so.


There is a distinct difference between replacing products because they wear out or burn out, and replacing products because the manufacturer decides that he wants to sell you more products.

D
Userlevel 7
Badge +5

 

I don’t know exactly what crazy big update would be, but yes, I suspect that the update is in the boxes legacy and modern devices both have for common functionality.  Something along the lines of making the multiroom audio more stable, less drop outs, etc.    I agree that it’s possibly not something that gets updated very often.  I also think it’s quite possible that it’s something most users won’t notice any real difference between modern and legacy systems, and therefore conclude that it was not necessary.

I dont have any problems with dropouts when doing party mode i must say, i dont know if there are a lot of users experiencing this ?

 

I agree that a feature addition/improvement that like airplay shouldn’t cause problems for legacy speakers and shouldn’t be the cause of this split.  However, it could be a system wide feature addition that will only work with code added to all devices in the system.  I struggle to imagine what that could be, but can’t rule it out as a possibility.

Me 2.

BUT even if they have some good reason to do this, i still think it would have been better to just tell the public.

Then i would be able to make a qualified decision if the new features would be something i would be willing to replace my legacy units for.

If they dont release anything major, after the may cutoff, i would say, that is proof that this was an attempt to do a “money grab” rather than a technical necessity.

 

Isn’t this what Sonos said they were going to do?  Are you suggesting that something where Sonos sort of separates the syncing functionality and other features that are device specific.  That way users would opt to go with sync 1.0 or sync 2.0 if they have modern devices only.  The rest of the system would update like normal with new features going to the devices that can handle them. 

 

If that’s along the lines you’re thinking, I am not against the idea, but I don’t know if that’s a possibility.  I also wonder what sort of support costs that would mean going forward if it is possible.

Lets play with this idea.

They have some newly written codebase that we will call sync 2.0 and there is simply not enough room inside the legacy products to implement sync 2.0

What they say they will do is make anyone with one or more legacy products decide between

  1. Keep every product on sync 1.0
  2. Update modern products to sync 2.0 and let legacy products work independently on sync 1.0 on a seperate network.

If this is the case, what i propose is that since there is plenty of flash storage on the modern products, they keep both sync 1.0 and sync 2.0 and if you only play on modern products they use sync 2.0, but if you want to play on a mix, they all default to sync 1.0

If they did this and explained to people what the difference between sync 1.0 and sync 2.0 is…..This could be higher quality audio…..Then people would be able to make a decision, based on facts and what their needs are. and not like now where no one knows why or what they get, if they upgrade their legacy products to modern ones.

 

Whatever “it” is, sound improvement or more stability, I think everyone will be happier if they can clearly tell the difference between legacy and modern systems after May.   That seems like something that would be good for both customers and Sonos.

Sonos HAS to have something ready for May…

If all people that has only modern products get’s is small bugfixes, then it will be obvious that sonos just wanted to try and pressure people to buy new products.

The fact that they have not said anything about what is in store, points a bit in the direction, that they actually dont have anything special.

 

 

They never said anyone had to replace all their legacy devices, but I agree that they could have said it a lot better.   Currently, it looks as if staying legacy is risking potential bad things happening, while going with a modern system is just maintaining status quo.  There hasn’t been much of a carrot provided, other than modern device features we already know.  I do hope there is a carrot involved, but they just can’t tell us yet for whatever reason.  Regardless, I think it would have better to  announce the change as “Sonos 2.0” then anyone with modern devices only can upgrade to, while others can stay on “Sonos 1.0”.  Even without providing a reason for 2.0, just yet, I think it would have given a better overall connotation, something to look forward to rather than problems to avoid.  But I don’t work in marketing.

I totally agree.

They have been far to vague about WHAT the advantages of doing the trade in and staying modern is going to be, compared to staying all-legacy. (And this is where the cynic in me says that the reason they have not told anything, is probably because there is actually nothing exciting to tell).

I am going to stay all-legacy.

I think that even if the streaming services decides to change someting in their stream, they will keep a stream with the old format, alive, if they risk loosing X hundred thousand legacy-sonos users if they go “new streaming format only”.

 

Smilja

I think that even if the streaming services decides to change someting in their stream, they will keep a stream with the old format, alive, if they risk loosing X hundred thousand legacy-sonos users if they go “new streaming format only”.

 

The streaming services would have to support the ‘old format’ don’t you think?

 

Never mind, it doesn’t matter what we are trying to explain anyway because we are again back on square one in this wild-goose chase. :rolling_eyes:

 

There is a distinct difference between replacing products because they wear out or burn out, and replacing products because the manufacturer decides that he wants to sell you more products.

 

»And the world is like an apple whirling silently in space, Like the circles that you find in the windmills of your mind.« (›Windmills Of Your Mind‹ [1967]. Music by Michel Legrand ; English lyrics written by Alan & Marilyn Bergman)
melvimbe

 

I don’t know exactly what crazy big update would be, but yes, I suspect that the update is in the boxes legacy and modern devices both have for common functionality.  Something along the lines of making the multiroom audio more stable, less drop outs, etc.    I agree that it’s possibly not something that gets updated very often.  I also think it’s quite possible that it’s something most users won’t notice any real difference between modern and legacy systems, and therefore conclude that it was not necessary.

I dont have any problems with dropouts when doing party mode i must say, i dont know if there are a lot of users experiencing this ?

 

 

I have had an issue here or there, but nothing major.  And I have seen some issues reported here.  Regardless, it’s just a hypothetical. I’m not trying to claim this is the reason for the change.

 

 

Me 2.

BUT even if they have some good reason to do this, i still think it would have been better to just tell the public.

Then i would be able to make a qualified decision if the new features would be something i would be willing to replace my legacy units for.

If they dont release anything major, after the may cutoff, i would say, that is proof that this was an attempt to do a “money grab” rather than a technical necessity.

 

 

I can see where Sonos would want to give us much notice as possible for the change, and shorter notification for a new product or feature.  Sonos has done that previously to avoid trade secrets, slow purchase of current speakers (presumably), and avoid backlash if they miss a release date.  Regardless, May is not a deadline.  Nothing wrong with staying on legacy until there is compelling reason to upgrade.

 

As far as concluding it’s a money grab if we don’t see a major upgrade, I think that arguement gets strengthened a bit, but again, the upgrade might be something that customers won’t necessarily notice.  That would be disappointing, but not proof of a money grab to me.    Also possible that the major improvement comes months later,    And it’s also seems like this whole process is lossing customers, minimizing or eliminating any money gain.

 

 

Isn’t this what Sonos said they were going to do?  Are you suggesting that something where Sonos sort of separates the syncing functionality and other features that are device specific.  That way users would opt to go with sync 1.0 or sync 2.0 if they have modern devices only.  The rest of the system would update like normal with new features going to the devices that can handle them. 

 

If that’s along the lines you’re thinking, I am not against the idea, but I don’t know if that’s a possibility.  I also wonder what sort of support costs that would mean going forward if it is possible.

Lets play with this idea.

They have some newly written codebase that we will call sync 2.0 and there is simply not enough room inside the legacy products to implement sync 2.0

What they say they will do is make anyone with one or more legacy products decide between

  1. Keep every product on sync 1.0
  2. Update modern products to sync 2.0 and let legacy products work independently on sync 1.0 on a seperate network.

If this is the case, what i propose is that since there is plenty of flash storage on the modern products, they keep both sync 1.0 and sync 2.0 and if you only play on modern products they use sync 2.0, but if you want to play on a mix, they all default to sync 1.0

If they did this and explained to people what the difference between sync 1.0 and sync 2.0 is…..This could be higher quality audio…..Then people would be able to make a decision, based on facts and what their needs are. and not like now where no one knows why or what they get, if they upgrade their legacy products to modern ones.

 

 

Like I said, I’m not against the idea, but I don’t know that it’s possible either.

 

 

Whatever “it” is, sound improvement or more stability, I think everyone will be happier if they can clearly tell the difference between legacy and modern systems after May.   That seems like something that would be good for both customers and Sonos.

Sonos HAS to have something ready for May…

If all people that has only modern products get’s is small bugfixes, then it will be obvious that sonos just wanted to try and pressure people to buy new products.

The fact that they have not said anything about what is in store, points a bit in the direction, that they actually dont have anything special.

 

I don’t think they have to have something ready for May, I think they need to have it annouced before May.  If I remember correctly, the Sonos Beam was announced in April/May for release in July.  My guess would be something like that happens.

 

I totally agree.

They have been far to vague about WHAT the advantages of doing the trade in and staying modern is going to be, compared to staying all-legacy. (And this is where the cynic in me says that the reason they have not told anything, is probably because there is actually nothing exciting to tell).

I am going to stay all-legacy.

I think that even if the streaming services decides to change someting in their stream, they will keep a stream with the old format, alive, if they risk loosing X hundred thousand legacy-sonos users if they go “new streaming format only”.

 

 

I can’t fault a strategy of staying all-legacy when there isn’t anything compelling enough to upgrade to modern products.

 

Appreciate the thoughtful conversation.

 

 

 

Danny
A
Userlevel 6
Badge +11

You are of course absolutely correct in what you say, but you are also wasting your time arguing your valid point with these people. It doesn’t matter what you say; no matter how true and correct it is they will never accept that Sonos is anything but wonderful in all their design and product and marketing decsions.

No it seems that all the critics with valid points have vanished and only the core “religious follower” group is left.

None of these people are willing to challenge anything Sonos says, in the same way that a true religious believer does not want to challenge, if what their god has said is true. :)

Today Sonos stock dipped below 10USD, and with all the talk of corona and recession i would be really worried if i was sonos.

A new recession where people looses their jobs, and the first thing people will cut down on is “luxury” and atleast price wise sonos is a luxury brand.

I wonder if Sonos will survive, first the backlash of their poor decisions and now a possible recession. One thing is for sure, the backlash at their “retirement of older products” scheme, have not helped them one bit.

 

Amen brother 🙂 …. but they are tenacious that’s for sure.  One of the vanished :-) 

J

What a ludicrous waste of time this thread has become. Is there going to be another two months of pointless speculation? See you in May.

Terms & ConditionsCookie settings