I am affected by this. I own 4 bikes, all with electronic shifting and 3 hammerhead computers.<p>This isn't just losing nice-to-have features, many of these features are for safety.<p>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.<p>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.
Apart from sharing the opinion here that this is a customer hostile move...<p>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 <i>need</i> or that even just provides me with enough benefit that it's worth the hassle of freakin' <i>firware updates</i>. Much less having a CAN bus on my bike? is this only for electric bikes or also for gears? I'm confused...<p>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.<p>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.
The high level issue here is around data ownership, and device ownership.<p>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).<p>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).<p>As a result, Shimano is (for now) limiting a competitors ability to see the data produced by Shimano components.<p>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 solution to this type of intentionally incompatible product is to return to a legal and cultural environment that respects <i>adversarial interoperability[1]</i>. 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.<p>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.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interoperability" rel="nofollow">https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera...</a><p>[2] including features like interoperability with a competitor's product.
It's a super gross, super hostile move.<p>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.<p>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?<p>Shimano are obviously assholes here, but Hammerhead are also disappointing for not standing their ground.
I struggle to think of a good term for companys that insist on high ecosystem control.<p>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?<p>Or a more dystopic example: your fridge actively jamming the wifi of your washing machine because they are from two warring brands
DCRainMaker was pretty successful with the Strava kerfuffle where Strava had abruptly ended 3rd party data sync to Apple Health<p><a href="https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2022/03/strava-abruptly-ends-3rd-party-data-push-to-apple-health.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2022/03/strava-abruptly-ends-3rd...</a><p>and then eventually backed down<p><a href="https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2022/03/strava-reverses-course-turns-back-on-apple-health-sync-functionality.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2022/03/strava-reverses-course-t...</a><p>He rightfully has a lot of sway and hopefully Shimano will see his light.
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..?<p>not a long article, but the relevant parts seem to be:<p>> 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.<p>> 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?<p>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?<p>Could the manufacturer start charging me subsribtion for some functionality that was previously 'included'?<p>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 almost bought today a Shimano DriveTrain.
Very much thank you to Post this here.<p>I will switch now to another producer.<p>No money for customer hating companies.
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.<p>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.
This is a much better article that goes to the usual, high level of detail from a DC Rainmaker post: <a href="https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2022/05/shimano-forces-hammerhead-to-remove-all-di2-related-functionality-from-karoo.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2022/05/shimano-forces-hammerhea...</a>
I don't know. Maybe if you were concerned about this, the solution isn't to sell your company that depends on access to one company, to their direct and biggest competitor. Hammerhead bears responsibility for not doing things that have their customer's interests at heart.
There is no reason for a bicycle to have a computer. It seems like a simple or innocuous idea but it leads down the path toward "bicycle as a service" and let's be honest - recurring payment models impoverish large segments of the economy.