3 ms·

Sonos built a great system then destroyed it with greed/planned obsolesence. They shafted so many customers with the S1/S2 incompatibility, leaving so many exp

Sonos built a great system then destroyed it with greed/planned obsolesence. They shafted so many customers with the S1/S2 incompatibility, leaving so many expensive and perfectly capable 'legacy' systems unable to add new (S2) devices. It was purely to try and force people to upgrade perfectly decent devices, and prematurely turn a whole lot of S1 devices into e-waste. While their products are still good, I wouldn't buy one again for fear of them introducing an S3 and rendering another set of devices obsolete.

djrogers 5y ago
I was upset at the time, but in hindsight, and given how they've managed to continue to support both S1 and S2 product lines, I can't really say they did it wrong. Bifurcating your app to continue to provide support for 10+ year old hardware is a lot better than simply EOL'ing said hardware.
- bluescrn 5y ago
  The problem is that '10 years old' in computing is fairly ancient, whereas in hi-fi, quality hardware will keep going for many decades with minimal maintenance. Not sure why they felt the need to split the app into two rather than support the control of all devices through a single app, even if the S1 devices have a bit less functionality, or if S1 and S2 devices can't be grouped into a single zone. And then they've prevented some new devices from running with the S1 app. My parents tried to buy an extra speaker, but it didn't work with their S1 system (whereas only a few months ago, they added a soundbar that worked fine) It's a mess. It could have been handled a lot better. What new features do you even get with S2 that require more powerful hardware?
  - avianlyric 5y ago
    > What new features do you even get with S2 that require more powerful hardware? * Airplay * Hi-res audio formats * Better onboarding experience (BLE based, and can take advantage of iOS APIs to share Wifi password) * Support for DTS and Dolby Atmos I suspect the reason for bifurcation is because the speakers form a cluster on your network. The apps don’t talk to individual speakers, the speakers elect a cluster leader and the app talks only with the leader. The leader then figures out how to get your command to the target speaker, which may be via your normal wifi, but could also be via the private Sonos Net mesh network the speakers form. They want all the speakers to run exactly the same firmware because it’ll significantly reduce the complexity of their net code. No need to write forward or backwards compatible protocols, every speaks the same language. Side effect of this choice is that your firmware features become limited by your oldest hardware, even with feature flags, binary size could still be an issue for old devices. So this means at some point you need either: 1. Start running two firmware versions, and some how make your net code forward/backwards compatible. Very difficult when dealing with tightly defined high entropy protocols needs for low latency comms, and super tight timing requirements. 2. Split make a set of your devices stuck on old software and incompatible with new hardware. So new and old can no longer join the same cluster. But simplify your net code. Sonos obviously chose option 2, and I can understand why they made that choice. As for the apps, having them communicate with two different Sonos clusters, and somehow merge the UI sounds like a UI nightmare. Not unsolvable, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they tried it, and decided the experience was so crap and confusing, they were better of just making two apps. Given what Sonos do, and rather extreme technical requirements of syncing audio to within a millisecond or two over dodgy wifi connections. I can sympathise with the difficult technical and product decisions that led to S1/S2. I personally doubt it’s an artificial limitation created for cynical profit pumping. But I can totally see it as way of reducing their software development complexity and costs, which is not an unreasonable business decision (Sonos isn’t a charity after all).
ska 5y ago
I solved this by just sticking with my S1 devices. Other than the horrible software, still going ok. When I eventually replace, it won't be sonos, but I've yet to see a really good option for replacing it.
jethro_tell 5y ago
There's not as much lock-in with the analog formats, you want different speakers or a different head unit with the same speakers you just change shit out at the end of the wires. All these strange products we are getting around media probably mostly has to do with licensing requirements for DRM. I assume it's as much the industry these people are working with/coming from as it is the actual straight greed of sonos.
iypx 5y ago
I'm in the same vein as the OP you're replying.. I got a cheap HIFI (I think) Samsung system from 20+ years ago (paid $100 second-hand at that time), I use it as an amplifier through aux for the last 15 years (2x15W). Beside that, still have my tiny pc speakers, even older, from around the win98 era. Neither seem to be asking for any firmware update, seem to be working fine so far. Haven't seen any other speakers in stores so far which could beat in quality the pair of Samsungs I got, they're basically monitors.. They now make soundbars, sonoses, bluetooth speakers... it amazes me that people put up with all of this, it's truly amazing people are convinced this is better than the old, wired, boring stuff.
- NoPicklez 5y ago
  If you buy what I could call a standard/proper home theater receiver, it is likely to last you a lifetime. But with Sonos you are buying cutting edge features that have not been tried and tested in the long term and are likely to change. The idea with Sonos was that they wouldn't release new hardware each year, but that the hardware would improve through software updates. For example, I have had two Play 3 speakers and the Sub since 2016. These worked great, then Sonos released TruePlay which allowed your speakers to configure themselves based on the space you were in. Its important to note that these speakers have been around since 2011 and 2013, so not a short space of time when it comes to technology. The amazing thing with Sonos, was that anyone in the house could open up the app and play music through WiFi AND have a home theatre setup that could play from the TV. The beauty of the app is that it operates on its own, it doesn't rely on your mobile phone once you have left the house.
  - iypx 5y ago
    This is what I was talking about.. Sonos basically reinvented my Samsung remote. (+ the 8 meter cable I made as a 14 year old kid so I can connect it to the TV which was on the other side of the living room, cause my parents asked me if I could connect both for a house party). Amazing.
    - NoPicklez 5y ago
inopinatus 5y ago
On the contrary. Their S1 platform started in 2005. They continue to produce great new products with S2, yet S1 stuff continues to function, it just runs ships-in-the-night for those of us with both. Frankly, I'm amazed and impressed they retained compatibility for as long as they did. I have other electronic devices in my possession with such functional longevity, but I can count them on one hand, and none of the others try to perform anything remotely so sophisticated as a Sonos player does. These allegations of being intentionally malicious / consumer hostile don't stand up to scrutiny, nor to comparison with known examples of planned obsolescence in consumer electrical, such as Canon inkjets or Bosch kitchen appliances.

djrogers 5y ago

I was upset at the time, but in hindsight, and given how they've managed to continue to support both S1 and S2 product lines, I can't really say they did it wrong. Bifurcating your app to continue to provide support for 10+ year old hardware is a lot better than simply EOL'ing said hardware.

bluescrn 5y ago
The problem is that '10 years old' in computing is fairly ancient, whereas in hi-fi, quality hardware will keep going for many decades with minimal maintenance. Not sure why they felt the need to split the app into two rather than support the control of all devices through a single app, even if the S1 devices have a bit less functionality, or if S1 and S2 devices can't be grouped into a single zone. And then they've prevented some new devices from running with the S1 app. My parents tried to buy an extra speaker, but it didn't work with their S1 system (whereas only a few months ago, they added a soundbar that worked fine) It's a mess. It could have been handled a lot better. What new features do you even get with S2 that require more powerful hardware?
- avianlyric 5y ago
  > What new features do you even get with S2 that require more powerful hardware? * Airplay * Hi-res audio formats * Better onboarding experience (BLE based, and can take advantage of iOS APIs to share Wifi password) * Support for DTS and Dolby Atmos I suspect the reason for bifurcation is because the speakers form a cluster on your network. The apps don’t talk to individual speakers, the speakers elect a cluster leader and the app talks only with the leader. The leader then figures out how to get your command to the target speaker, which may be via your normal wifi, but could also be via the private Sonos Net mesh network the speakers form. They want all the speakers to run exactly the same firmware because it’ll significantly reduce the complexity of their net code. No need to write forward or backwards compatible protocols, every speaks the same language. Side effect of this choice is that your firmware features become limited by your oldest hardware, even with feature flags, binary size could still be an issue for old devices. So this means at some point you need either: 1. Start running two firmware versions, and some how make your net code forward/backwards compatible. Very difficult when dealing with tightly defined high entropy protocols needs for low latency comms, and super tight timing requirements. 2. Split make a set of your devices stuck on old software and incompatible with new hardware. So new and old can no longer join the same cluster. But simplify your net code. Sonos obviously chose option 2, and I can understand why they made that choice. As for the apps, having them communicate with two different Sonos clusters, and somehow merge the UI sounds like a UI nightmare. Not unsolvable, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they tried it, and decided the experience was so crap and confusing, they were better of just making two apps. Given what Sonos do, and rather extreme technical requirements of syncing audio to within a millisecond or two over dodgy wifi connections. I can sympathise with the difficult technical and product decisions that led to S1/S2. I personally doubt it’s an artificial limitation created for cynical profit pumping. But I can totally see it as way of reducing their software development complexity and costs, which is not an unreasonable business decision (Sonos isn’t a charity after all).

ska 5y ago

I solved this by just sticking with my S1 devices. Other than the horrible software, still going ok. When I eventually replace, it won't be sonos, but I've yet to see a really good option for replacing it.

jethro_tell 5y ago

There's not as much lock-in with the analog formats, you want different speakers or a different head unit with the same speakers you just change shit out at the end of the wires. All these strange products we are getting around media probably mostly has to do with licensing requirements for DRM. I assume it's as much the industry these people are working with/coming from as it is the actual straight greed of sonos.

iypx 5y ago

I'm in the same vein as the OP you're replying.. I got a cheap HIFI (I think) Samsung system from 20+ years ago (paid $100 second-hand at that time), I use it as an amplifier through aux for the last 15 years (2x15W). Beside that, still have my tiny pc speakers, even older, from around the win98 era. Neither seem to be asking for any firmware update, seem to be working fine so far. Haven't seen any other speakers in stores so far which could beat in quality the pair of Samsungs I got, they're basically monitors.. They now make soundbars, sonoses, bluetooth speakers... it amazes me that people put up with all of this, it's truly amazing people are convinced this is better than the old, wired, boring stuff.

NoPicklez 5y ago
If you buy what I could call a standard/proper home theater receiver, it is likely to last you a lifetime. But with Sonos you are buying cutting edge features that have not been tried and tested in the long term and are likely to change. The idea with Sonos was that they wouldn't release new hardware each year, but that the hardware would improve through software updates. For example, I have had two Play 3 speakers and the Sub since 2016. These worked great, then Sonos released TruePlay which allowed your speakers to configure themselves based on the space you were in. Its important to note that these speakers have been around since 2011 and 2013, so not a short space of time when it comes to technology. The amazing thing with Sonos, was that anyone in the house could open up the app and play music through WiFi AND have a home theatre setup that could play from the TV. The beauty of the app is that it operates on its own, it doesn't rely on your mobile phone once you have left the house.
- iypx 5y ago
  This is what I was talking about.. Sonos basically reinvented my Samsung remote. (+ the 8 meter cable I made as a 14 year old kid so I can connect it to the TV which was on the other side of the living room, cause my parents asked me if I could connect both for a house party). Amazing.
  - NoPicklez 5y ago

inopinatus 5y ago

On the contrary. Their S1 platform started in 2005. They continue to produce great new products with S2, yet S1 stuff continues to function, it just runs ships-in-the-night for those of us with both. Frankly, I'm amazed and impressed they retained compatibility for as long as they did. I have other electronic devices in my possession with such functional longevity, but I can count them on one hand, and none of the others try to perform anything remotely so sophisticated as a Sonos player does. These allegations of being intentionally malicious / consumer hostile don't stand up to scrutiny, nor to comparison with known examples of planned obsolescence in consumer electrical, such as Canon inkjets or Bosch kitchen appliances.