I am affected by this. I own 4 bikes, all with electronic shifting and 3 hammerhead computers.
This isn't just losing nice-to-have features, many of these features are for safety.
One example, the thumb toggles on the Di2 shifters allow me to change screens on my computer without removing my hands from the hoods / grips. They is now disabled. If you are descending at 40-50mph you have to remove your hand from your hood in order to see your map.
This might seem minor but the point is that cycling is already super dangerous. The tech is there for safety as much as anything else. I find this incredibly anti-cyclist and anti-consumer.
I take your point, but there is no way on God's green earth that I am going to look at a map for even an instant while descending that fast. My eyes are locked on the ground scanning for the tiniest crack or piece of junk that would send me to my doom.
I can't imagine going any direction except straight at that speed.
There are a bunch of features on Karoo that will show or indicate turns regardless of which screen you're on. As jfengel said, if you're going 50mph you should know where you're going and not looking at your computer. The other things being removed (battery level, gear indicator, shift mode) represent no realistic safety concerns.
I'm annoyed that I'm losing these features, too, but they are all firmly in the nice-to-have category. Just like bike computers in their entirety.
Following up to add some context to this since it struck a lot of debate. I feel very matter of factly that the assistance of a bike computer when used responsibly increases rider safety. All of the debate seems very semantic but look at a video such as this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AUTiwocccE
This is a 10-mile descent that thousands of cyclists do a weekly that would put you at 30-50mph for most of it. You can very obviously safely glance at your bike computer from time to time to see things like your speed, sharpness of upcoming curves, angles, upcoming obstacles, intersections, merges, and other important metrics that help inform your braking, turning and mental route preparation.
I've been road cycling and racing for many years. Taken many safety and skills courses. The most dangerous experiences I've ever had have been from incidents where glancing at a map would have prevented. Where I was riding moderately paced and unanticipated obstacles were around corners such as blind intersections.
Having laser focus on the road AND knowing what's ahead where you can't visually see are both equally important.
It's kind of funny that you think removing features from a cycling computer is the dangerous part, when we know from pretty much every other situation involving potentially dangerous tasks and computers it's the introduction of the device in the first place that creates most of the danger. Why would you even glance at a map while going 50 miles per hour on a bicycle?
> If you are descending at 40-50mph you have to remove your hand from your hood in order to see your map.
Well you don't have to, you can switch to the map screen before starting the descent. If you are willing to change screens while descending, the blame on safety is not on technology, but rather on your own decision to do so.
It's difficult to believe this was going to continue on wards as SRAM bought Hammerhead, it was only a matter of time before Shimano decided not to support a competitor product.
Apart from sharing the opinion here that this is a customer hostile move...
I'm pretty happy that my bikes (MTB and Road) have zero electric components (not even light if I don't strap it on) and I want to keep it that way. I have yet so see an electric part that I need or that even just provides me with enough benefit that it's worth the hassle of freakin' firware updates. Much less having a CAN bus on my bike? is this only for electric bikes or also for gears? I'm confused...
Anyhow, I always thought that running a bike repair shop might be my plan B for when I finally get fed up with computers, but I recently realized bikes are now computers with wheels, just like cars and fridges and toasters and door bells... So I'm looking for a new plan B.
FWIW, just as with fridges and toasters, I think this is a move in the wrong direction. It increases CO2/pollution footprint and reduces lifetime. And as we see here, it opens you up to a whole new class of customer abuse.
I was pretty anti-electronic shifting on my bikes...but once you have it, it's hard to go back. The automatic derailleur tuning to always have snappy, responsive shifts it pretty amazing. And then not having to change cables out is a nice bonus, though not a deal breaker. And even the aesthetics of a cable free bike begins to grow on you. luckily, battery charging is pretty simple, and I've been always having to charge a bike computer for the past 15 years anyway, so not a big deal to plug it in every couple of month. (This is coming from someone who used to single-speed mountain bike a lot, for the "simplicity" and because I was lazy to have to maintain much on my MTB). I'm kind of looking forward to a day when they get the internal hub thing dialed in and lightweight and can handle a lot of torq and not have the drag penalty, etc....
That said, I don't use any integrated shifting->head unit functionality. Not really sure what someone would use it for other than checking battery levels? Which is super simple to see on the hardware itself. And which is easier to just get off my phone.
Also, firmware updates are typically pretty simple these days due to the pretty decent phone app support. I've done firmware updates on both a Wahoo computer and SRAM shifting, and it was really straightforward, and never for a critical item, yet, only to get more features (though I'm not an early adapter in any of this). I guess I'll find out mre about Di2 specific integrations when my next bike arrives...
One thing I noticed after cycling across North America on a $500 hybrid and then Colombia on a $200 utility bike was that there is a wildly different class of cyclist that rides with computers and carbon fiber and shiny jerseys... They were as baffled by my setup as I was by theirs. It's almost an entirely different category of transportation. Or perhaps it isn't so much a form of transportation for them, it's a hobby - they often drive their bikes to the place they want to ride instead of just riding the in-between.
I imagine there is room to cater to both types of cyclist. Perhaps it was a self-selecting group for me, but I found every mechanic I visited on the road to be most busy with repairs of low-tech gear. It seems to me that low-tech bikes will continue to make up the long tail for many years to come, even if catering to those customers is less lucrative.
Going to have to disagree. Electronic shifting is definitely not a move in the wrong direction.
I used to be in in the camp where I thought electronic shifting was a gimmick. I got a bike that happened to come with di2 and its simply amazing. The shifts are responsive and clean. Adjustments are hardly ever needed and if you do, the process is beyond quick and amazingly accurate. I don't need to test shifting it through all the steps. Do you need it on a commuter bike? Definitely not but for a hobby bike (road cycling, gravel, mtb) its a really nice to have feature. Since you are already confused I would put you in the commuting territory (maybe unfair) which makes sense, its not really a useful feature in those cases. These have been around for a while and in the past few years cheap enough that it becomes a nice upgrade for hobby users.
Unless we hit mass extinction there is no way to stop progress. Humanity is going to continue to innovate and create. Sometimes those things are totally unnecessary. We should be looking to the future as a beacon of hope. Not trying to argue that we should not be mindful of our level of consumerism BUT humanity is going to keep innovating and lets look to the future that we will solve problems. Not that we are going to move back to an agrarian lifestyle. These devices most likely have an increase footprint, you now have a small motor and battery compared to a cable but the lifetime of the product I think is on-par or increased. Better shifting means longer chain/chain ring life.
I feel similarly about computers on bikes, even though I've had them for years before ditching them.
There's another facet to the problem of bike computers and I don't know if others feel this way but for me at least quantifying the time on the bike distracts from the joy of riding. Every time I turned on the bike computer it felt like I was "time-trialing" against myself, my previous rides, and randos whose stats I saw on Strava. It started to really make me miserable especially because as the years passed my "performance" more or less continuously degraded.
I feel differently about electronic shifting, though I probably will never experience it as my bike still has 2000's "vintage" Campy 9-speed and I see no need to ever change that unless I wreck it. The Shimano alfine internal hub has some models that use electronic shifting. It might be good on a utility bike-- if it's easy enough to deal with.
FWIW, the electronic drivetrains are superior in just about every performance metric, aside from needing to be charged every few weeks. You might not want an tablet computer in your refrigerator door but electronic bike shifting is more akin to going from carbureted to fuel injected engines, it is the more reliable and tunable of the two options.
Electronic shifting is actually pretty great. I get that it's not something everyone wants, but you owe it to yourself to give it a test ride before you dismiss it entirely.
It's fast, it's always precise (never drifts; no cables to stretch), insanely stable, requires virtually no effort to shift, and (at least for me) has provided a more reliable platform than cable-pull Ultegra was. The mech system was prone to alignment issues, cable issues, etc. With eTap, I just charge it every few weeks and I'm done.
Also, re: consumer abuse, read the linked article. Shimano are only able to do this because their connectivity is proprietary, apparently. More modern systems rely on open standards, apparently.
I wouldn't be too discouraged, it's still pretty rare to see on most bikes. I don't feel like it will become the norm outside of very-high-end, just because it can never be cheaper than cable shifted. People buying very-high-end stuff are usually acquainted with the warranty/return to manufacturer process so at least it won't be your hassle.
I have had the same though by the way. I reckon a small bike shop would be a great little business to run into retirement.
Built my last road bike from the ground up and I would say electronic shifting is my favorite part. Its more precise and easier to maintain than cable shifting.
All this compatibility warring sucks of course. But there's tons of merit to going digital on certain bike parts.
I'm the same way with my bikes, but after renting a bike in Santa Cruz, I definitely noticed a positive difference in shifting promptness with electronic vs cable. Not enough for me to retrofit an existing bike, but enough to use as a criteria point when comparing models. In some ways, its like going to linear brakes after using modulated for so long. Different experience, and I definitely prefer Shimano 4pot calipers over Srams.
Re: lights on bikes. Dynamos and dynamo hubs thankfully remain constrained by physics, so they will remain interoperable with a number of brands for a long time.
I highly recommend anyone that uses a bicycle for any meaningful amount as part of their day-to-day routine to get a dynamo hub and a light. You will save your sanity with battery replacements.
This is why I ride a brakeless track bike, everything else is just putting another level of annoying indirection between you and the thing you want to be doing.
The high level issue here is around data ownership, and device ownership.
I think the nearest car analogy is ODBII ports and data access - ANT+ is a wireless communication protocol, mostly for reading statistics (I think it can also be used for issuing commands).
Hammerhead had a license to access the privately configured Shimano data - and then they were purchased by SRAM (who are Shimano Bike division's main competitor).
As a result, Shimano is (for now) limiting a competitors ability to see the data produced by Shimano components.
This feels very petty to me - most of the data is essentially going to be "which gear is the front/rear in", and "what shifting pattern do you want to use" - though it might also extend to preventing future interoperability (like preventing competing wireless shifting levers triggering the other manufacturers components) - which would be a loss for consumers.
The "data" You're talking about is basically just battery level and which gear are You in.
Just for context, SRAM (the second biggest component producer and the new owner of Hammerhead) publishes the same data in plain ANT+ format. It's basically an open standard over which sensors broadcast their data. Anyone who is interested can read it, no license agreements necessary.
AFAIK Shimano has decided to encrypt their packages and the license is for the encryption keys / algorithms.
I have a Hammerhead 2 and Di2. The most commonly used functionality for me was using the buttons on the brake shifter hoods to control the screens on the HH. It meant you could control the device without moving your hands and I use it all the time.
Having access to shifter position and Di2 battery levels was also super useful. This move really pisses me off!
Guess I will not be updating the firmware of my HH2 for a while at least.
Lack of interoperability in any system is a bad thing for consumers. However in this case you could argue that Shimano are right. It's fine to allow interoperability without the data. A KMC chain will work with a Shimano derailleur. Shimano should have no problem with that. But Shimano have to assume that SRAM would now get all the aggregate data on the operation of thousands of their Di2 systems. So SRAM could see how much faster or slower the Di2 gear shifts are. How many times the user had to make the same shift twice maybe because of failure. If a user tends not to use the largest sprocket when putting in a lot of effort then maybe it means their gears aren't tuned correctly etc. So it's competitive intelligence that SRAM can use to out compete. When Shimano allowed Di2 interoperability their intention was that it would be for the benefit of the consumer, not their direct competitor.
The solution to this type of intentionally incompatible product is to return to a legal and cultural environment that respects adversarial interoperability[1]. If a company doesn't want to implement the features people want[2], some other company should be able to provide their own (possibly reverse engineered) implementation.
Trying to restrict competitors from making interoperable products is admitting you don't want to participate in a well-running competitive market and instead deserve monopoly power.
For those that don't click through, the real f-you aspect here is that until recently Shimano's own site bragged of its compatibility with Hammerhead, so presumably people bought Di2 equipped bikes based on that promise -- and now have had it jerked back.
I'm not affected -- my bikes run SRAM -- but if I were a Shimano user, I'd be pretty damn angry. It's a petty, smallminded move.
Does this go through their cloud or is it local-only? If it uses Shimano online services they have a point, but if it's local between devices that the cyclist had paid for, why should Shimano have any say in it?
Shimano are obviously assholes here, but Hammerhead are also disappointing for not standing their ground.
As far as I understand the bike computer connects to the group set (Di2) on the bike directly using either ANT+ or Bluetooth signal and no internet is needed for their communication. This is how I have used both.
I think you can even DIY a device which connects to the group set. ANT+ is open access.
This is local only over a pretty simple communication protocol. Hammerhead had previously licensed that protocol, but Shimano cancelled the contract when Hammerhead were acquired by Shimano's largest competitor.
I'm not a lawyer so don't know if they _need_ to have a license for the protocol, but presumably they think they do.
I struggle to think of a good term for companys that insist on high ecosystem control.
The idea of Competitve Compatibility somewhat suggests an alternate path. But just defining these denialist products, that resist their users having any choice- it's a pretty blamket phenomenon & yet lacks a name.
This is not about pettiness: users should be able to opt out of updates that remove functionality. We are still in the prehistoric age of consumer rights for software and it shows. Would you be okay with your dishwasher dropping high temperature washes because the manufacturer decided so?
Or a more dystopic example: your fridge actively jamming the wifi of your washing machine because they are from two warring brands
Shimano is notoriously anti consumer. I use 2x8 speed brifters. They actually work better than modern ones imo, because you can go into any gear from either front cog with no issue (supposedly this is a no no on larger gearsets). However, the rubber hoods are wearing apart because they are 20 years old, shimano stopped selling the parts, and no one makes a third party replacement. People on forums resort to buying new brifters and casting aside these perfectly good 2x8s that just have some worn rubber on them. I am getting by with some wraps of tape but its certainly not pretty looking.
so apparently Hammerhead makes a smartwatch-esque handlebar-mounted computer that integrates with Shimano bicycle hardware, but they're having some kind of contract dispute..?
not a long article, but the relevant parts seem to be:
> At the request of Shimano, [...] software update on June 2nd [...] will remove on-screen battery status and shifter mode data, front and rear derailleur indications, and Karoo screen control via the Di2 hood buttons from Shimano Di2 drivetrains.
> Shimano has withdrawn permissions [...] until we are able to forge a new agreement.
Is Shimano doing this because SRAM (a competitor) bought Hammerhead? Makes me skeptical we will ever see Shimano STEPS battery % and mode on the Hammerhead. Hammerhead sells an Android powered bike computer with a great set of features and UX compared to the legacy brands that have dominated the market forever (Garmin, Bryton, Wahoo).
So how does this work legally - I bought a product with functionality X, and later the manufacturer can remove that functionality from me?
What if that's the one and only functionality that I need - are they going to compensate me? Aren't they revising contract of sale after the money is paid?
Could the manufacturer start charging me subsribtion for some functionality that was previously 'included'?
What are the limits to how much could be taken back from me after I paid money for the goods? If I bought a car, and the manufacturer updated it to require a separate subscribtion for driving in each state, would that actually be illegal?
I don't know we get there, but we need a functional legislative branch that can implement what will be widely popular legislation to prevent large companies from using their market power in obviously anti-consumer ways.
More than 35 years ago, I started saying "Friends Don't Let Friends Ride Shimano". Although it was somewhat tongue in cheek, it was actually supposed to be true.
Nothing in that time has made that seem like less useful advice, and quite a bit has happened (including this news) that makes it seem even more apropros than before.
[+] [-] talove|3 years ago|reply
This isn't just losing nice-to-have features, many of these features are for safety.
One example, the thumb toggles on the Di2 shifters allow me to change screens on my computer without removing my hands from the hoods / grips. They is now disabled. If you are descending at 40-50mph you have to remove your hand from your hood in order to see your map.
This might seem minor but the point is that cycling is already super dangerous. The tech is there for safety as much as anything else. I find this incredibly anti-cyclist and anti-consumer.
[+] [-] jfengel|3 years ago|reply
I can't imagine going any direction except straight at that speed.
[+] [-] farski|3 years ago|reply
I'm annoyed that I'm losing these features, too, but they are all firmly in the nice-to-have category. Just like bike computers in their entirety.
[+] [-] talove|3 years ago|reply
This is a 10-mile descent that thousands of cyclists do a weekly that would put you at 30-50mph for most of it. You can very obviously safely glance at your bike computer from time to time to see things like your speed, sharpness of upcoming curves, angles, upcoming obstacles, intersections, merges, and other important metrics that help inform your braking, turning and mental route preparation.
I've been road cycling and racing for many years. Taken many safety and skills courses. The most dangerous experiences I've ever had have been from incidents where glancing at a map would have prevented. Where I was riding moderately paced and unanticipated obstacles were around corners such as blind intersections.
Having laser focus on the road AND knowing what's ahead where you can't visually see are both equally important.
[+] [-] contravariant|3 years ago|reply
Why don't you simply not update the firmware?
[+] [-] skeeter2020|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] elbigbad|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] julenx|3 years ago|reply
Well you don't have to, you can switch to the map screen before starting the descent. If you are willing to change screens while descending, the blame on safety is not on technology, but rather on your own decision to do so.
[+] [-] ajdude|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] incahoots|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Melatonic|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 1-more|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pharmakom|3 years ago|reply
However, your situation sucks and I hope a work-around is found.
[+] [-] black_puppydog|3 years ago|reply
I'm pretty happy that my bikes (MTB and Road) have zero electric components (not even light if I don't strap it on) and I want to keep it that way. I have yet so see an electric part that I need or that even just provides me with enough benefit that it's worth the hassle of freakin' firware updates. Much less having a CAN bus on my bike? is this only for electric bikes or also for gears? I'm confused...
Anyhow, I always thought that running a bike repair shop might be my plan B for when I finally get fed up with computers, but I recently realized bikes are now computers with wheels, just like cars and fridges and toasters and door bells... So I'm looking for a new plan B.
FWIW, just as with fridges and toasters, I think this is a move in the wrong direction. It increases CO2/pollution footprint and reduces lifetime. And as we see here, it opens you up to a whole new class of customer abuse.
[+] [-] taude|3 years ago|reply
That said, I don't use any integrated shifting->head unit functionality. Not really sure what someone would use it for other than checking battery levels? Which is super simple to see on the hardware itself. And which is easier to just get off my phone.
Also, firmware updates are typically pretty simple these days due to the pretty decent phone app support. I've done firmware updates on both a Wahoo computer and SRAM shifting, and it was really straightforward, and never for a critical item, yet, only to get more features (though I'm not an early adapter in any of this). I guess I'll find out mre about Di2 specific integrations when my next bike arrives...
[+] [-] alisonatwork|3 years ago|reply
I imagine there is room to cater to both types of cyclist. Perhaps it was a self-selecting group for me, but I found every mechanic I visited on the road to be most busy with repairs of low-tech gear. It seems to me that low-tech bikes will continue to make up the long tail for many years to come, even if catering to those customers is less lucrative.
[+] [-] infecto|3 years ago|reply
I used to be in in the camp where I thought electronic shifting was a gimmick. I got a bike that happened to come with di2 and its simply amazing. The shifts are responsive and clean. Adjustments are hardly ever needed and if you do, the process is beyond quick and amazingly accurate. I don't need to test shifting it through all the steps. Do you need it on a commuter bike? Definitely not but for a hobby bike (road cycling, gravel, mtb) its a really nice to have feature. Since you are already confused I would put you in the commuting territory (maybe unfair) which makes sense, its not really a useful feature in those cases. These have been around for a while and in the past few years cheap enough that it becomes a nice upgrade for hobby users.
Unless we hit mass extinction there is no way to stop progress. Humanity is going to continue to innovate and create. Sometimes those things are totally unnecessary. We should be looking to the future as a beacon of hope. Not trying to argue that we should not be mindful of our level of consumerism BUT humanity is going to keep innovating and lets look to the future that we will solve problems. Not that we are going to move back to an agrarian lifestyle. These devices most likely have an increase footprint, you now have a small motor and battery compared to a cable but the lifetime of the product I think is on-par or increased. Better shifting means longer chain/chain ring life.
[+] [-] crispyambulance|3 years ago|reply
There's another facet to the problem of bike computers and I don't know if others feel this way but for me at least quantifying the time on the bike distracts from the joy of riding. Every time I turned on the bike computer it felt like I was "time-trialing" against myself, my previous rides, and randos whose stats I saw on Strava. It started to really make me miserable especially because as the years passed my "performance" more or less continuously degraded.
I feel differently about electronic shifting, though I probably will never experience it as my bike still has 2000's "vintage" Campy 9-speed and I see no need to ever change that unless I wreck it. The Shimano alfine internal hub has some models that use electronic shifting. It might be good on a utility bike-- if it's easy enough to deal with.
[+] [-] talove|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ubermonkey|3 years ago|reply
It's fast, it's always precise (never drifts; no cables to stretch), insanely stable, requires virtually no effort to shift, and (at least for me) has provided a more reliable platform than cable-pull Ultegra was. The mech system was prone to alignment issues, cable issues, etc. With eTap, I just charge it every few weeks and I'm done.
Also, re: consumer abuse, read the linked article. Shimano are only able to do this because their connectivity is proprietary, apparently. More modern systems rely on open standards, apparently.
[+] [-] Crabber|3 years ago|reply
There is nothing left to be improved, only gimmicks with aggressive marketing
Just be happy with the bike you have, and ride
[+] [-] ehnto|3 years ago|reply
I have had the same though by the way. I reckon a small bike shop would be a great little business to run into retirement.
[+] [-] cyberpanther|3 years ago|reply
All this compatibility warring sucks of course. But there's tons of merit to going digital on certain bike parts.
[+] [-] dd82|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xattt|3 years ago|reply
I highly recommend anyone that uses a bicycle for any meaningful amount as part of their day-to-day routine to get a dynamo hub and a light. You will save your sanity with battery replacements.
[+] [-] thot_experiment|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pharmakom|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gavanm|3 years ago|reply
I think the nearest car analogy is ODBII ports and data access - ANT+ is a wireless communication protocol, mostly for reading statistics (I think it can also be used for issuing commands).
Hammerhead had a license to access the privately configured Shimano data - and then they were purchased by SRAM (who are Shimano Bike division's main competitor).
As a result, Shimano is (for now) limiting a competitors ability to see the data produced by Shimano components.
This feels very petty to me - most of the data is essentially going to be "which gear is the front/rear in", and "what shifting pattern do you want to use" - though it might also extend to preventing future interoperability (like preventing competing wireless shifting levers triggering the other manufacturers components) - which would be a loss for consumers.
[+] [-] MezzoDelCammin|3 years ago|reply
The "data" You're talking about is basically just battery level and which gear are You in.
Just for context, SRAM (the second biggest component producer and the new owner of Hammerhead) publishes the same data in plain ANT+ format. It's basically an open standard over which sensors broadcast their data. Anyone who is interested can read it, no license agreements necessary.
AFAIK Shimano has decided to encrypt their packages and the license is for the encryption keys / algorithms.
[+] [-] dabeeeenster|3 years ago|reply
Having access to shifter position and Di2 battery levels was also super useful. This move really pisses me off!
Guess I will not be updating the firmware of my HH2 for a while at least.
[+] [-] discreteevent|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pdkl95|3 years ago|reply
Trying to restrict competitors from making interoperable products is admitting you don't want to participate in a well-running competitive market and instead deserve monopoly power.
[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera...
[2] including features like interoperability with a competitor's product.
[+] [-] ubermonkey|3 years ago|reply
For those that don't click through, the real f-you aspect here is that until recently Shimano's own site bragged of its compatibility with Hammerhead, so presumably people bought Di2 equipped bikes based on that promise -- and now have had it jerked back.
I'm not affected -- my bikes run SRAM -- but if I were a Shimano user, I'd be pretty damn angry. It's a petty, smallminded move.
[+] [-] Nextgrid|3 years ago|reply
Shimano are obviously assholes here, but Hammerhead are also disappointing for not standing their ground.
[+] [-] geraneum|3 years ago|reply
I think you can even DIY a device which connects to the group set. ANT+ is open access.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANT_(network)
[+] [-] markmark|3 years ago|reply
I'm not a lawyer so don't know if they _need_ to have a license for the protocol, but presumably they think they do.
[+] [-] rektide|3 years ago|reply
The idea of Competitve Compatibility somewhat suggests an alternate path. But just defining these denialist products, that resist their users having any choice- it's a pretty blamket phenomenon & yet lacks a name.
[+] [-] richardfey|3 years ago|reply
Or a more dystopic example: your fridge actively jamming the wifi of your washing machine because they are from two warring brands
[+] [-] CalChris|3 years ago|reply
https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2022/03/strava-abruptly-ends-3rd...
and then eventually backed down
https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2022/03/strava-reverses-course-t...
He rightfully has a lot of sway and hopefully Shimano will see his light.
[+] [-] asdff|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smegsicle|3 years ago|reply
not a long article, but the relevant parts seem to be:
> At the request of Shimano, [...] software update on June 2nd [...] will remove on-screen battery status and shifter mode data, front and rear derailleur indications, and Karoo screen control via the Di2 hood buttons from Shimano Di2 drivetrains.
> Shimano has withdrawn permissions [...] until we are able to forge a new agreement.
[+] [-] kldavenport|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ClumsyPilot|3 years ago|reply
What if that's the one and only functionality that I need - are they going to compensate me? Aren't they revising contract of sale after the money is paid?
Could the manufacturer start charging me subsribtion for some functionality that was previously 'included'?
What are the limits to how much could be taken back from me after I paid money for the goods? If I bought a car, and the manufacturer updated it to require a separate subscribtion for driving in each state, would that actually be illegal?
[+] [-] hughw|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] i5heu|3 years ago|reply
I will switch now to another producer.
No money for customer hating companies.
[+] [-] qq66|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PaulDavisThe1st|3 years ago|reply
Nothing in that time has made that seem like less useful advice, and quite a bit has happened (including this news) that makes it seem even more apropros than before.
[+] [-] wly_cdgr|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yesdocs|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] INTPenis|3 years ago|reply