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

Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 478 posts

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#331

Post by kirstenbirgit »

kristianc wrote: post #318
jakobegger wrote: post #311

I was going to buy a Sonos speaker, but this changed my mind. I'm not buying a device that was built to be bricked. I would have bought a Sonos instead of an Apple Homepod because I thought they were more "open". But if the manufacturer can just make my device useless, I'm not interested. Audio and Hifi gear is extremely versatile and virtually everything is compatible. High end devices easily last for decades. This…

> I would have bought a Sonos instead of an Apple Homepod because I thought they were more "open". But if the manufacturer can just make my device useless, I'm not interested. Nope, it’s just iOS updates that brick HomePods.

That was a bug, not a 'feature' like Recycle Mode.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#332

Post by Cougher »

lvturner wrote: post #205
llampx wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same millenials who are buying Bluetooth speakers at unprecedented rates?

It's almost like the word "millennial" is completely void of meaning... Who ever would have thought labeling three decades worth of people across the whole globe with a single label AND THEN trying to draw generalisations from it was a fools errand?

The word "millennial used in a comment is a pretty easy signal that there's probably dumbassery ahead.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#333

Post by jakobegger »

kristianc wrote: post #318
jakobegger wrote: post #311

I was going to buy a Sonos speaker, but this changed my mind. I'm not buying a device that was built to be bricked. I would have bought a Sonos instead of an Apple Homepod because I thought they were more "open". But if the manufacturer can just make my device useless, I'm not interested. Audio and Hifi gear is extremely versatile and virtually everything is compatible. High end devices easily last for decades. This…

> I would have bought a Sonos instead of an Apple Homepod because I thought they were more "open". But if the manufacturer can just make my device useless, I'm not interested. Nope, it’s just iOS updates that brick HomePods.

Yes. Just to be clear, I'm going to buy neither a Homepod nor a Sonos. I think I'm going to get dumb speakers and a Raspberry/Hifiberry. Shairplay does 90% of what I want a smart speaker to do, and I think a Raspberry is a pretty future proof device.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#334

Post by sm4rk0 »

taneq wrote: post #299
crazygringo wrote: post #203

It seems like a lot of commenters here (as well as the tweets) are totally missing the purpose of the recycle mode. If you want to sell, give away, or otherwise let someone else reuse your Sonos, then DON'T PUT IT IN RECYCLE MODE . Easy peasy. Recycle mode exists for when you intentionally want to get a Sonos trade-in credit for recycling your speakers for materials . But because you don't send the speakers directly…

Of course Sonos wants to remove speakers from the second hand market. That doesn't make it remotely good for anyone else or for the environment.

You are not forced to take the incentive. You can always sell the device on a second hand market and get more money than that incentive.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#335

Post by brigade »

hakfoo wrote: post #278
noodlesUK wrote: post #10

What’s intensely frustrating about this is that audio equipment is one of the few areas where old high end kit is still absolutely fantastic for current users. I have an NAD 3020 from the 1980s which works perfectly with the same pair of speakers that it was bought with. I can’t say the same about other tech, but audio just doesn’t age at the same speed.

I think one of the interesting aspects is that performance plateaued in a lot of ways. If you look at the S/N and distortion specs on a new affordably priced receiver, they won't be meaningfully better than a mid-range unit from the late 70s/early 80s. All the new HDMI and 20.7 Dolby Surround does nothing for two-channel MP3s or CDs. Because the performance is equal, it's allowed build quality to shine. 15kg of heats…

Ehh, S/N has improved so much since the 80's that the noise floor of today's low-end receivers are significantly better than basically all high-end equipment from back then, especially if you include the DAC.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#336

Post by sm4rk0 »

kirstenbirgit wrote: post #331
kristianc wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would have bought a Sonos instead of an Apple Homepod because I thought they were more "open". But if the manufacturer can just make my device useless, I'm not interested. Nope, it’s just iOS updates that brick HomePods.

That was a bug, not a 'feature' like Recycle Mode.

Anyway, you should be aware of risk when buying a piece of hardware which depends on a service (like OTA updates or cloud connection).

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#337

Post by Cougher »

mark-r wrote: post #239
Doji wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't buy smart speakers. Just buy regular speakers. Then you can plug them into whatever you like, run whatever software you like (e.g. pi musicbox) etc. So you actually own them, and they should serve you well for many years, for whatever you may need. Also don't buy soundbars. Speakers don't want to be long and skinny. You'll end up paying a lot more for a lot less sound. Also consumer grade speakers are often mor…

I've found Guitar Center to be a good place to check out and buy monitor speakers and headphones.

I don't know if it still applies, but studio speakers used to be notorious for bad sound. I would also hope that you wouldn't be considering guitar amp-type speakers as well.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#338

Post by sqldba »

crazygringo wrote: post #203

It seems like a lot of commenters here (as well as the tweets) are totally missing the purpose of the recycle mode. If you want to sell, give away, or otherwise let someone else reuse your Sonos, then DON'T PUT IT IN RECYCLE MODE . Easy peasy. Recycle mode exists for when you intentionally want to get a Sonos trade-in credit for recycling your speakers for materials . But because you don't send the speakers directly…

There should not be any opt-out for recycling because everyone foots the cost of a shitty planet to save your $50 credit.

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#339

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

WiseWeasel wrote: post #189
Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They seem to be one of the few brands that give good audio quality and modern convenience at the same time. For example, I was looking for a device that would (1) be placeable on my living room furniture[1], and let me use a couple of trusty Monitor Audio speakers both (2) for playing music (e.g. from my phone, computer or streaming sources like Spotify) and (3) for TV audio, as those speakers sound much better than…

I feel like 30cm max depth is going to be a problem for most audio gear. So-called compact ones seem to optimize for height, with depth around 40cm [1], and the shallower ones [2, 3] seem to be around 31-33cm. Get a deeper console? [1] https://www.crutchfield.com/S-JPQM9erNVfS/p_642NR1609/Marant... [2] https://www.bestbuy.com/site/sony-7-2-ch-with-dolby-atmos-4k... [3] https://www.crutchfield.com/S-5ZKPlNFrS4r/p_022R…

So that's precisely my point: convenience. My option was:

- Bend over backwards to buy from other audio brands, by throwing away my perfectly functional and nice designer furniture and replacing it with something deeper, that would take more space, probably be (IMHO) uglier and fit the room worse, and annoy my partner who doesn't care for audio as much as I do.

- Buy the Sonos Amp because it does the job while being small and fitting my existing furniture without further ado.

It was an easy choice...

I understand and respect that in homes where audio is a really high priority, they will plan the room around it and have deep enough furniture. On the other extreme, people who don't care much about audio just are happy buying any of the multiple sound bars in the market that fit anywhere. But if you are in the middle ground, i.e. you want a compromise between good audio quality and convenience, it seems that Sonos is practically the only brand that cares. At least in the case of an amp/receiver, that's the case, as I explained. And I suppose this is an important component of Sonos's success (and what surprises me is that others don't do the same...).

Re: Sonos's “recycle mode” intentionally bricks devices so they can't be reused

#340

Post by vinw »

jakobegger wrote: post #333
kristianc wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would have bought a Sonos instead of an Apple Homepod because I thought they were more "open". But if the manufacturer can just make my device useless, I'm not interested. Nope, it’s just iOS updates that brick HomePods.

Yes. Just to be clear, I'm going to buy neither a Homepod nor a Sonos. I think I'm going to get dumb speakers and a Raspberry/Hifiberry. Shairplay does 90% of what I want a smart speaker to do, and I think a Raspberry is a pretty future proof device.

You should also take a look at snapcast as an open Sonos alternative that can run on raspberry pi.

https://github.com/badaix/snapcast

Post reply on HN