Remember how frustrating it is when expensive smart home devices get abandoned? Bose was about to pull the plug on their smart speaker (as I wrote about here) – a device that originally cost around $600 USD – but something changed.
What Changed
After significant online backlash (including my own critique link above), Bose has made a surprising move. They’re not just slightly extending the end-of-life date by a few months; they’re actually open-sourcing the speaker’s API documentation. This means customers who bought these speakers can potentially keep using them even after official support ends.
Users will still be able to use AirPlay, Spotify Connect, and some Apple functionalities even after the official support window closes. It’s a major win for consumers who invested serious money in these devices.
The Bigger Issues
This didn’t happen quickly. The initial criticism came out in November, and it took Bose over two months to respond. This highlights a bigger issue in tech: when you buy a “smart” device, you’re not really buying full ownership. The company can essentially disable features at any time.
While this open-source move is great, it also reveals a deeper problem in the smart device market. Consumers are purchasing products that aren’t truly theirs, with critical functionality controlled by the manufacturer. Bose’s reversal is a step in the right direction, but it also serves as a warning about the fragility of smart home technology.
The fallout from Bose’s initial decision was brutal. People went through months of frustration, with some potentially selling their speakers or tossing them out due to the announced end of support. It’s a classic example of e-waste. People would rather throw away expensive tech than find alternative solutions.
Now that Bose has reversed course, some of those who ditched their speakers are likely feeling pretty frustrated. But this doesn’t automatically make Bose a hero.
History of Bad Practice
Take their headphones, for instance. In a previous review, I highlighted how the QuietComfort line essentially duplicated the QC45 model with minimal changes. The real motivation? A classic corporate move, releasing virtually identical products with just enough cosmetic differences to justify a price hike. It was essentially the same headphone, just with a slight colour variation and name change, allowing Bose to charge more for a “new” model. Except the QuietComfort was exactly the same in performance as the QC45.
Current State
So while the open-source speaker move seems positive, it feels more like damage control than genuine customer care. Bose has a long way to go to rebuild consumer trust. This isn’t a complete redemption, it’s just a small step in the right direction.
The underlying message is clear: tech companies need to prioritize long-term product support and genuine innovation, not just marketing tricks and planned obsolescence. Consumers are getting smarter, and they’re not willing to accept being taken advantage of anymore.
Let’s be crystal clear: Bose isn’t your friend. They didn’t suddenly become consumer champions, they were forced into this decision by massive customer backlash. Their initial plan was to abandon a product that customers paid hundreds of dollars for, effectively rendering expensive tech useless.
This is a pattern with Bose. Whether it’s dropping support for smart speakers or releasing nearly identical headphones at higher prices, their strategy seems to be maximizing profit while minimizing actual value for consumers. They’re banking on most people not paying close attention.
Stay informed. Question companies. Don’t let them get away with these consumer-hostile practices.
