4 ms·

I own the WH-1000XM2 (same app for both models) and the reason the app requests location is for a singular feature called 'Adaptive Sound Control'. This featu

I own the WH-1000XM2 (same app for both models) and the reason the app requests location is for a singular feature called 'Adaptive Sound Control'. This feature lets the app change sound profiles based on where you are, so yes - location access is required. Stating that this is "their design philosophy" is a stretch here. I realize Sony doesn't have a stellar track record but in their defense if you don't use 'Adaptive Sound Control' the app does not and will not try to enable Location access unless you turn said feature on and the app doesn't already have access. So, no - you don't need to pay for the convenience of Sony's app by allowing Location access as it's not required but for a singular feature that is fundamentally based around setting profiles based on your location.

woadwarrior01 7y ago
> So, no - you don't need to pay for the convenience of Sony's app by allowing Location access as it's not required but for a singular feature that is fundamentally based around setting profiles based on your location. I reinstalled the app to see if I was misremembering it. The app requests for always on location information upon installation and pairing with the headphones. The garden path in the UX of the app is to allow location access. If the user chooses to not allow location access by tapping the tiny "Later" button, the main screen prominently features a Switch control (which is off) for Adaptive Sound Control, tempting the user to toggle it on, which requests always on location access. Given all of this, it's very difficult to interpret this "feature" in a favorable light. Fortunately, the app's privacy policy[1] does not seem to mention anything about them collecting location information (but they do claim to collect "country or region"). On the other hand, the manual for the app[2] also has no mention of it requesting always on location access either, which doesn't inspire much confidence. Not to mention the 27 month data retention policy and the policy of sharing with their "affiliates". After having read the privacy policy, I'm glad I chose not to use the app and will continue to do so. [1]: https://musiccenter-cdn.meta.ndmdhs.com/headphones/pp/20190305/pp/hpc_pp_en.html https://musiccenter-cdn.meta.ndmdhs.com/headphones/pp/201903... [2]: https://helpguide.sony.net/mdr/hpc/v1/en/index.html https://helpguide.sony.net/mdr/hpc/v1/en/index.html
- sosborn 7y ago
  > Given all of this, it's very difficult to interpret this "feature" in a favorable light. What would you rather they do? They ask for permission for a specific feature and when denied, the feature is turned off. When you try to turn on the feature, it requests access for that feature. It sounds like it works exactly as it should.
  - windexh8er 7y ago
    Agreed. I feel like the argument against in this thread is a poor strawman. I've never allowed any permissions for this app and have yet to have any functionality diminished. The app doesn't require any registration (which is not oft the case these days) and as others have pointed out most all functionality can be had via direct controls on the headphones. You can get away with not using this app for most everything except firmware updates and location specific features.
  - woadwarrior01 7y ago
    > What would you rather they do? I would rather that they document why they need background location access and not try to hoodwink their users into granting them carte blanche access to the users' location data. There's a fairly established pattern in mobile apps where they show a screen informing the user of the reasons why an app needs location access before requesting it from the OS. And that isn't the case with the app in question. Nowhere in their product documentation (for both the app and the headphones) do they mention that their product needs background location access. Also, let's not forget the context of the post here. The Bose Connect app (at least on iOS) does not demand access to the user's location. They got sued for lesser privacy violation (in my subjective opinion) and rightly so. Any app demanding background location access, especially an app for a pair of headphones is a serious concern, IMO. The other commenter in this thread seems to be insinuating that I have a bias against Sony. But that's certainly not the case. I've spent a lot of money on Sony's mirrorless cameras and lenses and continue to do so. Sony undoubtedly makes great hardware, but on the other hand, privacy is also very important to many of us. One could argue that privacy is far more important than the fancy hardware. Finally, coming back to the "feature" in question, "Adaptive Sound Control". The feature seems to be built around classifying whether the wearer of the headphones is standing still, or walking or running or using a mode of transport and applying the user selected profile based on the activity. Couldn't this be implemented in a much more efficient manner in hardware with an accelerometer in the headphones? I understand that this would mean a slightly reduced battery life on the headphones for people using the feature, but would be a better trade off, IMO. And yes, decisions like this are a product of a company's design philosophy.

woadwarrior01 7y ago

> So, no - you don't need to pay for the convenience of Sony's app by allowing Location access as it's not required but for a singular feature that is fundamentally based around setting profiles based on your location. I reinstalled the app to see if I was misremembering it. The app requests for always on location information upon installation and pairing with the headphones. The garden path in the UX of the app is to allow location access. If the user chooses to not allow location access by tapping the tiny "Later" button, the main screen prominently features a Switch control (which is off) for Adaptive Sound Control, tempting the user to toggle it on, which requests always on location access. Given all of this, it's very difficult to interpret this "feature" in a favorable light. Fortunately, the app's privacy policy[1] does not seem to mention anything about them collecting location information (but they do claim to collect "country or region"). On the other hand, the manual for the app[2] also has no mention of it requesting always on location access either, which doesn't inspire much confidence. Not to mention the 27 month data retention policy and the policy of sharing with their "affiliates". After having read the privacy policy, I'm glad I chose not to use the app and will continue to do so. [1]: https://musiccenter-cdn.meta.ndmdhs.com/headphones/pp/20190305/pp/hpc_pp_en.html https://musiccenter-cdn.meta.ndmdhs.com/headphones/pp/201903... [2]: https://helpguide.sony.net/mdr/hpc/v1/en/index.html https://helpguide.sony.net/mdr/hpc/v1/en/index.html

sosborn 7y ago
> Given all of this, it's very difficult to interpret this "feature" in a favorable light. What would you rather they do? They ask for permission for a specific feature and when denied, the feature is turned off. When you try to turn on the feature, it requests access for that feature. It sounds like it works exactly as it should.
- windexh8er 7y ago
  Agreed. I feel like the argument against in this thread is a poor strawman. I've never allowed any permissions for this app and have yet to have any functionality diminished. The app doesn't require any registration (which is not oft the case these days) and as others have pointed out most all functionality can be had via direct controls on the headphones. You can get away with not using this app for most everything except firmware updates and location specific features.
- woadwarrior01 7y ago
  > What would you rather they do? I would rather that they document why they need background location access and not try to hoodwink their users into granting them carte blanche access to the users' location data. There's a fairly established pattern in mobile apps where they show a screen informing the user of the reasons why an app needs location access before requesting it from the OS. And that isn't the case with the app in question. Nowhere in their product documentation (for both the app and the headphones) do they mention that their product needs background location access. Also, let's not forget the context of the post here. The Bose Connect app (at least on iOS) does not demand access to the user's location. They got sued for lesser privacy violation (in my subjective opinion) and rightly so. Any app demanding background location access, especially an app for a pair of headphones is a serious concern, IMO. The other commenter in this thread seems to be insinuating that I have a bias against Sony. But that's certainly not the case. I've spent a lot of money on Sony's mirrorless cameras and lenses and continue to do so. Sony undoubtedly makes great hardware, but on the other hand, privacy is also very important to many of us. One could argue that privacy is far more important than the fancy hardware. Finally, coming back to the "feature" in question, "Adaptive Sound Control". The feature seems to be built around classifying whether the wearer of the headphones is standing still, or walking or running or using a mode of transport and applying the user selected profile based on the activity. Couldn't this be implemented in a much more efficient manner in hardware with an accelerometer in the headphones? I understand that this would mean a slightly reduced battery life on the headphones for people using the feature, but would be a better trade off, IMO. And yes, decisions like this are a product of a company's design philosophy.