4 ms·

It’s tough because what if the company doesn’t want to maintain the software? Are they obligated to keep the software up to date despite the one-time-sale? It’

It’s tough because what if the company doesn’t want to maintain the software? Are they obligated to keep the software up to date despite the one-time-sale? It’s a similar reason why much of the software moved to a subscription model, the recurring costs. Alternatively, there should be some group of smart individuals who come up with some protocol for various devices where, if a manufacturer decides to EoL the sale (specifically saying not a rental), of a product, then they must switch to that protocol. But after their hands are clean. This issue sucks on many levels, one of which is someone like myself, and many others here, want the convenience of say smart home products. For instance, with Nest, due to their mothership and proprietary API’s, I have to settle for either an inferior product, or spend time setting up a home automation stack. Which is great if it’s a hobby and/or enjoyable, but I just want the features without the hassle. The real open source revolution will come when many of these privacy-first, host-your-own XYZ are truely turn key. I think we’re getting closer but just not their yet

fsflover 4y ago
> Are they obligated to keep the software up to date despite the one-time-sale? No. But they also should have no right to stop others from supporting the software: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34858209 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34858209.
adrianN 4y ago
No, they don't need to keep the software up to date, they just have to ensure that the device continues working. Almost everything that uses electricity has a bit of software. Most devices don't need any updates. At the very least they need to enable somebody else to keep the devices running, for example by open sourcing the infra needed to do so.
RobotToaster 4y ago
>Are they obligated to keep the software up to date despite the one-time-sale? If it's a security issue, then it was sold defective.
JohnFen 4y ago
> It’s a similar reason why much of the software moved to a subscription model, the recurring costs. That reasoning doesn't make sense for this case, either.

fsflover 4y ago

> Are they obligated to keep the software up to date despite the one-time-sale? No. But they also should have no right to stop others from supporting the software: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34858209 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34858209.

adrianN 4y ago

No, they don't need to keep the software up to date, they just have to ensure that the device continues working. Almost everything that uses electricity has a bit of software. Most devices don't need any updates. At the very least they need to enable somebody else to keep the devices running, for example by open sourcing the infra needed to do so.

RobotToaster 4y ago

>Are they obligated to keep the software up to date despite the one-time-sale? If it's a security issue, then it was sold defective.

JohnFen 4y ago

> It’s a similar reason why much of the software moved to a subscription model, the recurring costs. That reasoning doesn't make sense for this case, either.