Trade up scheme

I have posted some comments in another thread, but the above summary seems eminently sensible. And, if it is correct, is why I can't understand the furore over the Sonos offer which is just another option to consider based on the realities of the vintage of one’s kit.

Download the app version you want and keep it stored away. If you accidentally update your phone’s copy uninstall and reload the old version?

I’m not convinced that it will be that quick, but the answer is to take control of your system and lock it off… It’s yours - you paid for it - it runs on your network. If you must have streaming access then they’ll find a way of messing you up eventually (or let’s hope not), but you can hold off updates for some while, I’d have thought...

It’s good for some, not good for others, which is fine. There’s no requirement I’m aware of for a company to satisfy only one person’s desires. I’d probably feel much differently if it was a required upgrade, i.e. your hardware is going to stop working, but we’ll give you a 30% discount to replace gear that’s not going to work next week.

I can understand what Sonos is trying to do. I’m pleased that they’re at least getting a commitment from the trade in process to recycle the old equipment, rather than just giving the discount and forcing people to throw the items away. I’m also pleased that there’s no requirement to upgrade existing equipment, it’s purely an option for those who want to avail themselves.

Everyone has the option of doing it if they so desire, and not doing it if they don’t. I’ve seen several posts from people who have gotten more than the 30% by reselling their equipment without trading it in for the discount, good for them. Passing on the equipment is great. Recycling the equipment is good, too. Simply tossing it in the trash is bad.

Well personally I don’t think I’m trolling by saying I’d be annoyed if a company bricked the audio equipment that I own that is working perfectly well and trying to find out what is going on. I invested a fair sum in it whether or not it was in the past. 

To me it’s fairly unprecedented that a piece of equipment that is connected to my stereo and my in ceiling speakers in the bedroom just suddenly potentially gets “taken” from me unless I buy a modern version that does exactly the same thing. Even Apple’s multipurpose iPhones don’t get deactivated. They continue to run on the old software. With an audio component they are even simpler and only perform a predefined role so even harder to justify. So it’s fair enough in my opinion to ask whether they are planning to brick them if we don’t upgrade at some point. Knowledge is power.

Not supporting the CR100 is different because a viable alternative was provided via smartphones and desktop applications which 99.9% of people had access to therefore no loss was really suffered.

Also people’s circumstances change. When I bought them I had a much higher income. Now I’m retired spending that sort of money on replacements is not trivial. Like I said, I did not subscribe to a perpetual gravy train business model when I purchased them. I owe them nothing. They owe me a working product for the life of the hardware imo. The only constraint is software and as I said a one man development team has created a third party UI for it - so they can manage it no problem at all with their resources. Also that software constraint is a problem of their own making, it’s their design, it should not become my problem that they didn’t potentially think about the whole of life support costs. They should be supported until I decide they are no longer useful and decommission them myself.

And yes some of this is pre-emptive. If you don’t speak up you get walked over.

I understand that but isn’t there talk of them basically turning off support for them via the Sonos Controller app and the upgrade offer is basically a sweetener before that happens? My point was basically that short of wireless G protocol ceasing to exist, I can’t see why they can’t be supported given their hardware functionally is basically the same as the new incarnations. The front end has to deal with the same logic flows virtually as a Sonos Connect.

I guess I’m fishing for what is going on and what’s behind all this… I do know that as long as they work I’m happy with them the way they are,

I don’t really care that my zp80’s and zp100 are old - I’m getting old too lol. They do what I want and I don’t care that they run on Wireless G - big deal - wireless G can cope with streaming audio - that’s why the products worked in the first place. They work just as well the non microphone versions of recent Sonos Products for my purposes and work with far better speakers than the recent Sonos products to boot.

I don’t care about the upgrade offer either because to me most of the products are a downgrade for my purposes or only offer the same functionality in terms of my usage.

There is absolutely no reason by the ZP80’s and ZP100’s should be not supported because they are no different to the new Ikea speakers with no microphones or the Sonos One version that is new with no microphones.

I would therefore be annoyed if my audio equipment was forcibly deactivated and I don’t give a toss about fanboys here who don’t care because they have recently bought the latest and greatest. I’m not in the habit of charitable donations to companies that can’t manage their business models into the future. I didn’t sign up for a perpetual income stream back to Sonos (although I did recently buy a Sonos Beam for my TV because I thought the company was decent since I found my older products reliable). I bought supposedly simple media streamers and a media streamer amplifier that is effectively part of my house ie. inbuilt ceiling speakers. Not my fault they took away the CR100 interface and then have to support an app to control them.

Besides they are no different to their other modern products in terms of function anyway other than the wireless G network protocol which is no skin off their teeth. I mention that functionally they are not much different to some of their other products because from a programming perspective their user interface functionality through the app would work the same way and from a coding perspective it’s not much different.

All I can say is I’m loyal to Sonos for the moment and did recently buy a new product as mentioned - but I deactivating would make me instantly disloyal and they wouldn’t be getting any more of my cash in the future no matter what - hypothetically speaking. My ZP100 is an expensive bit of kit especially for the modern equivalent and is a perfectly good amplifier as well.

Also as far as supporting their app goes you have individuals that write sophisticated apps that aren’t companies including ones for Sonos would you believe - so I don’t buy the lack of resources constraint I’ve heard touted here on their part. If a single developer can do it - so can Sonos.

Since they paid me more in the discount than I paid for my ZP-80s when I first bought them new I’m sure not feeling ripped off. I see it as I got 13 years of free use and a small cash gift for upgrading.

The upgrade is an offer, if you don’t like it ignore it.

case in point:  https://www.ebay.com/itm/-/324002474324

At least this seller KNOWS and DISCLOSES that this unit has been bricked by Sonos as part of the trade-up program.  I predict we’ll see many more people ‘recycling’ in this fashion and it’s not going to be pretty...

So how is 'responsibly recycling’ such an old speaker/device not helping? … it’s better than Sonos continuing to make new devices by using even more of the earths natural resources, particularly when many folk just take their speakers off to landfill.. this provides more of an incentive to us ALL to recycle the now rather old Sonos products.

Perhaps read Ryan’s post again …

https://en.community.sonos.com/wireless-speakers-228992/trade-up-scheme-6831609#post16370464

I’m used to consider my phone as a device to update every two or three years, and my computers, my printer and so on.

But I consider my HiFi should last a bit more. Moreover, I would like to be able to decide by myself when is a good time to replace all my sonos devices and not being forced to change them at a time.

Time ago, Ubiquiti did a big change between their first and second generation cameras and the third one. They made a special offer of 50% discount to replace the old cameras by new ones. That was a good offer, and if you didn’t want to change your cameras you they allowed you to continue using them with a concrete NVR sofware on your server. It was a nice offer and at my job, we decided to change a lot of really_old cameras by really_new with high improvements in resolution (that’s the most important thing in a camera). We’re still happy Ubiquiti customers and I still recommend Ubiquiti products. In fact, after that I decided to buy Ubiquiti cameras for my home. That's what I spect of a good company that sells tecnology.

I hope Sonos will think about and gives a solution for their customers, otherwise I believe they will have a problem.

Regards,

  Manuel Martínez

There’s absolutely no requirement for you to upgrade if you choose to continue to use your older generation speakers. However, it appears that if that’s the case, there’s no need to give you a discount on new equipment, either. 

I think also that Sonos should clarify what would happen in the future with the obsolete speakers. Would they work with new versions of the Sonos App? Could we keep a working version without updating the app? (that seems dificult to believe). Would they have a “first-gen” working app?

I think Sonos is a very good multiroom system with a good app and, until now, it allows you to mix different speakers of different generations… but now, things seems to get worse. To me, the trade-up offer means that they don’t want to continue working to update “old” speakers. I understand it, but one thing is not receiving updates with new features on them and the other is to be unable to use it anymore.  to

I know that Sonos have not announced the end-of-life for old play:5 and connect-amp but that’s what I understand.  

And about the 30% discount. It’s not a wonderful offer, it’s easy to have a 15% discount on Amazon and sometimes a 20%, so the trade-up doesn’t look like a good bussiness at first sight.

Regards,

  Manuel Martínez