Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

inc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 302 posts

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#221

Post by Reubachi »

oarsinsync wrote: post #122
lostmsu wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't regular volume slider controls multiple remote speakers in case of connected Bluetooth headphones?

Depends on whether you consider a pair of bluetooth headphones as a single device or multiple devices. I'm unaware of many devices that output audio to multiple distinct bluetooth targets simultaneously. Bose have that feature as part of their app, but I don't think it's a standard thing as a rule.

Every windows PC, every android, and even things like Pi OS/linux kernel can push to multiple distinct bluetooth targets simultaneously. For android I think it's going on 7 years of that

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#222

Post by km3r »

mdoms wrote: post #216
kleiba wrote: post #42

For example, these changes mean you'll no longer be able to control the volume of a group of speakers. Instead, you'll have to change the volume on each individually. It also means you'll no longer be able to use the volume buttons on your phone to control a speaker group. Not here to defend Google, but how can something trivial like that even be patentable?

Look, everyone on this website is going to agree with you that the patents are pretty silly. But that doesn't change the two central facts of the article, 1. Sonos holds such patents 2. Google (the trillion dollar company) is actively making its products worse for users instead of licensing said patents. These are not free products like GMail, these are products that people have paid for, and these are not trivial fe…

Don't feed the [patent] trolls. I used this feature, and will miss it, but would rather Google not give in to abuse of the patent system.

On the otherhand, I will no longer consider Sonos products. Be better Sonos. Bluesound seems like the better alternative that is pushing for innovation over pure profit.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#223

Post by orangejuice101 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #130
katbyte wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well because of this I’ll never buy another Sonos product, and recommend everyone I know to something else. I wonder if lost revenue from people like me will make up for any gains here.

Conversely, I’d rather buy (and intend to) from Sonos versus Google considering Google’s product track record (killing everything in short order). Using patents to defend yourself from a Big Tech company is the unfortunate reality.

Just a heads up, Sonos was going to brick working devices to convince people to upgrade but public uproar convinced them not to.

https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/5/21166777/sonos-ending-recy...

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#224

Post by invisible »

hluska wrote: post #21

If anyone is interested, this article lists five patents: https://www.usitc.gov/system/files/secretary/fed_reg_notices... They’re located here (the source is kind of funny): https://patents.google.com/patent/US9748647?oq=9%2c195%2c258 https://patents.google.com/patent/US10209953B2/en?oq=10%2c20... https://patents.google.com/patent/US9219959B2/en?oq=9%2c219%... https://patents.google.com/patent/US8588949B2/en?oq=8%2c5…

Wow, only the first of these seems like anything beyond the obvious necessity to synchronize _anything_ (grouping, pairing, synchronizing, settings for a group).

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#225

Post by recursive »

s17n wrote: post #176

What's really frustrating about this situation for me is that Google has given up on audio (discontinued Chromecast Audio, no replacement for Home Max) but as a result of this bullshit, I also can't use my Google products with Sonos, the one 21st century company that is actually doing audio well. Instead, Google's strategy is to partner with a bunch of legacy audio companies ( https://www.google.com/chromecast/built-…

Last time I looked, I can't play my audio on a Sonos system. It's a complete non-starter.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#226

Post by s17n »

neoromantique wrote: post #184
s17n wrote: post #176

What's really frustrating about this situation for me is that Google has given up on audio (discontinued Chromecast Audio, no replacement for Home Max) but as a result of this bullshit, I also can't use my Google products with Sonos, the one 21st century company that is actually doing audio well. Instead, Google's strategy is to partner with a bunch of legacy audio companies ( https://www.google.com/chromecast/built-…

I'd take a NAD amp over anything that Sonos sells any day of the week, thanks.

Traditional hifi gear is a niche market. In the past this was fine, but the reality is that niche markets won't support the development and maintenance of high quality software that interoperates well with the ever-evolving ecosystem of streaming services and protocols. Sonos is the one company that is playing by the rules of today's market, has actual software developers working for them, and cares about audio quality.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#227

Post by alistairSH »

hnburnsy wrote: post #163
alistairSH wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally agree - I hate that consumer electronics, now including very expensive products like cars, are black-box with OTA updates that can alter functionality in undesirable ways. The latest update from Tesla including a significant UI update which many owners are unhappy about. One example I heard was the seat-heat control is now buried one level lower in the menu. Not only is that an annoying change, but potentiall…

Voice control... "My butt is cold" "My butt is too hot" https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1v4m7aHk__Kdfkoed...

Does it work with an accent? Serious question, voice control often doesn't work well with a heavy accent.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#228

Post by acomjean »

s17n wrote: post #226
neoromantique wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd take a NAD amp over anything that Sonos sells any day of the week, thanks.

Traditional hifi gear is a niche market. In the past this was fine, but the reality is that niche markets won't support the development and maintenance of high quality software that interoperates well with the ever-evolving ecosystem of streaming services and protocols. Sonos is the one company that is playing by the rules of today's market, has actual software developers working for them, and cares about audio quali…

We have a sony SRS-88 wireless home speaker. It's solid. But you can connect all sorts of ways. Airplay worked for a month, now it always sputters. My partner's Spotify seems to start and then send the stream straight to the device, so you can't control it from the original device anymore.

We've found the best way is straight bluetooth, or through the mini stereo plug that we have wired to the back.

https://www.sony.com/electronics/support/speakers-wireless-s...

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#229

Post by toomuchtodo »

orangejuice101 wrote: post #223
toomuchtodo wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conversely, I’d rather buy (and intend to) from Sonos versus Google considering Google’s product track record (killing everything in short order). Using patents to defend yourself from a Big Tech company is the unfortunate reality.

Just a heads up, Sonos was going to brick working devices to convince people to upgrade but public uproar convinced them not to. https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/5/21166777/sonos-ending-recy...

Yep! I'm aware. Conversely, the AI that runs Google has never halted the shutdown of a product due to public uproar (to my knowledge). It’s nice to know which orgs will flex under public pressure towards consumer utility.

Re: Google doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied

#230

Post by nailer »

Bud wrote: post #13
nailer wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Came here to say the same thing. I'm the last fan of Google but "the ability to connect speakers in groups and control their volume" is obvious to conceive of and implement to any engineer with sufficient expertise in the field.

It's not obvious at all, for wireless speakers, especially in complex multi-room setups. If it were obvious and easy, then everyone's wireless audio products would handle this as well as Sonos does. But they don't. I bought two Sonos One SLs and had them set up as a stereo pair that my Apple TV could talk to almost instantly. Then recently I got a Sonos Beam soundbar and wanted to use my One SLs as surround speakers.…

Latency was literally the first thing I considered and I haven’t done any audio work since the nineties.
Post reply on HN