Hacker News Reader

> it wasn't cost effective maintaining backwards compatibility

Open-source the last compatible version of the client and let the community maintain it? Or at the very least publish the API specification and let the community build a new one from scratch?

View on HN

Yes please to the API bit. I'm maintaining the "unofficial Sonos controller for Linux" and it'd help a great deal if I didn't have to Wireshark the protocol all the time.

https://github.com/pascalopitz/unoffical-sonos-controller-fo...

It's a shame this is being downvoted. People paid money for these devices, and it's disgusting that we allow companies to render inoperative perfectly working hardware just because they don't feel like supporting it anymore.

Open sourcing the old version of the software might be too much to ask for various reasons, but publishing API documentation in order to enable third party implementations IMO should be legally required in cases like this.

iirc it wouldn’t have been inoperative - it just couldn’t work with the newer software and therefore couldn’t be meshed with newer devices. I was under the impression that the hardware would work with the now legacy software without issue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com