This is speculation by Ars Technica. Essentially, a recent firmware upgrade seems to have drastically lowered the battery life of some models. In addition, they are removing all third-party apps in the EU in response to the DMA.
Sounds like it’s more speculation from users published by Ars … which is fair but also needs to be taken to some degree with a grain of salt. This is not expert commentary, this is personal anecdote. It’s a grievance I have with a lot of media, e.g., interviewing random people on the street for “their take” … they don’t necessarily know what they’re talking about.
I’d flag this as concerning but, it’s also not uncommon for updates to devices to require more resources, with requires more power and can definitely be done accidentally. There’s the doomer argument that it’s all malicious planned obsolesced under the guise of plausible deniability … but I wouldn’t be so sure. They’re selling subscriptions for fitbit, for a subscription model to work, the fitbit needs to work; it’s against their own interest in continued revenue to brick the devices.
Google does need better support in general; it’s not uncommon for bugs to go unfixed for way longer than should be acceptable.
Most recently Roku.
That’s not a bricking from a firmware upgrade; it is scummy though.
Google’s history of bricking its smart home products goes back to at least 2016
They’ve discontinued products they haven’t launched but purchased, that’s not quite the same thing. Even some very old nest cams are still working just fine (again it’s against their best interest to sell subscriptions and have devices that they’re selling subscriptions for dropped from support/virus ridden/etc). That’s a bit scummy but it does make sense from a “we want some of their technology but don’t want to maintain their code/redevelop the product on our software.” Every piece of hardware they’ve done this on has seemed incredibly niche to me as well (i.e., not something you’re going to find in your local department store).
The exception to that was their nest home security system, which IIRC they allowed users to pivot into an ADT system (and I vaguely recall offering some level of refunds).
Their Stadia controllers they provided a free tool to convert into generic Bluetooth controllers after shutdown… Literally nothing to gain from that except perhaps some PR.
There’s plenty of evidence to the contrary for Google bricking perfectly good devices “just because.”
Wink threaten to brick your devices unless you suddenly start paying a monthly fee on top of your purchase price “for life”
Yeah, this is the typical “startup made a bad business decision and is now trying to squeeze users.” I hate it as much as you do (but it’s not Google, Samsung, or generally speaking the mobile sector/big tech/mainstream tech).
The following is pure speculation on my part: I think we’re at the beginning of a huge wave of planned obsolescence. Everyone and their mother are now training AI’s, and they want their customers to replace older products, which don’t support AI integration, with new ones. They’ll soon stop supporting the older devices or outright bricking them, to force people to buy the new ones.
Big “press X to doubt” from me, primarily because of the desire to sell subscriptions. I think more likely Google (as an example) will keep everything they can working and then sell Gemini subscriptions on e.g., the nest hub + make new nest hubs with attractive features.
Speculation on my part but I think Google invested in Fuschia (and ported tons of legacy devices in the Nest ecosystem) specifically because they wanted to reduce the security risk and maintenance burden of keeping old devices going (to maximize subscription revenue).
Sounds like it’s more speculation from users published by Ars … which is fair but also needs to be taken to some degree with a grain of salt. This is not expert commentary, this is personal anecdote. It’s a grievance I have with a lot of media, e.g., interviewing random people on the street for “their take” … they don’t necessarily know what they’re talking about.
I’d flag this as concerning but, it’s also not uncommon for updates to devices to require more resources, with requires more power and can definitely be done accidentally. There’s the doomer argument that it’s all malicious planned obsolesced under the guise of plausible deniability … but I wouldn’t be so sure. They’re selling subscriptions for fitbit, for a subscription model to work, the fitbit needs to work; it’s against their own interest in continued revenue to brick the devices.
Google does need better support in general; it’s not uncommon for bugs to go unfixed for way longer than should be acceptable.
That’s not a bricking from a firmware upgrade; it is scummy though.
They’ve discontinued products they haven’t launched but purchased, that’s not quite the same thing. Even some very old nest cams are still working just fine (again it’s against their best interest to sell subscriptions and have devices that they’re selling subscriptions for dropped from support/virus ridden/etc). That’s a bit scummy but it does make sense from a “we want some of their technology but don’t want to maintain their code/redevelop the product on our software.” Every piece of hardware they’ve done this on has seemed incredibly niche to me as well (i.e., not something you’re going to find in your local department store).
The exception to that was their nest home security system, which IIRC they allowed users to pivot into an ADT system (and I vaguely recall offering some level of refunds).
Their Stadia controllers they provided a free tool to convert into generic Bluetooth controllers after shutdown… Literally nothing to gain from that except perhaps some PR.
There’s plenty of evidence to the contrary for Google bricking perfectly good devices “just because.”
Yeah, this is the typical “startup made a bad business decision and is now trying to squeeze users.” I hate it as much as you do (but it’s not Google, Samsung, or generally speaking the mobile sector/big tech/mainstream tech).
Big “press X to doubt” from me, primarily because of the desire to sell subscriptions. I think more likely Google (as an example) will keep everything they can working and then sell Gemini subscriptions on e.g., the nest hub + make new nest hubs with attractive features.
Speculation on my part but I think Google invested in Fuschia (and ported tons of legacy devices in the Nest ecosystem) specifically because they wanted to reduce the security risk and maintenance burden of keeping old devices going (to maximize subscription revenue).