I have been waiting for updates to my BM5 and I have also read a lot about the BV7 continuous SW updates (and the following problems).

I have therefore just been wondering, can B&O really keep the SW features up to date with their current technical structure? Especially if they want to let the end users make the updates themselves, i.e. like with the DVB-HD and BlueRay.

I have been told that the reason why the BM5 software update takes so long time (delayed for 3 months now) is due to communications issues with other/older B&O products.

And if we look in the crystal ball, where B&O want to use more SW technology for their products (BM5/BS5 is a great example), how will they be able to continue to support very old products (and versions). And will the needed support for the old products not keep B&O miles away from the competitors?

I think B&O has a VERY big challenge here, what do you think?

i agree

they need to do an os-x not a windoze cludge

clean break to the future !!!

Flappo The Grate:

they need to do an os-x

an interesting point ...

so you are suggesting that under the covers the BM5/BS5 would run Mac OSX with a full screen front end ?

why not use a slimmed down Unix variant ? or do you see value in leveraging native Mac OSX applications like iTunes, Safari, Front Row, etc ?

or would you favour something like the APple TV running inside the BM5/BS5 ?

I think B&O are well aware of their past technological choices & that they are still late with the current products:

BeoCenter 2 with no HDMI output, no BD player

BeoSound 1/9000/3200 can't play MP3 CDs

BeoVisions sold in France still have an optional DVB-T tuner, when it should be factory-fitted

HDR2 is still on their website, and is fitted with .....SCART connections??

and the list goes on...

It would be so simple to fit all their master products with a USB or Ethernet input, so that you can flash-update/upgrade the products, as most other manufacturers do.

And I do hope the USB and Ethernet sockets at the back of the new BeoVisions are for that purpose..

beolion:

I think B&O has a VERY big challenge here, what do you think?

Overnight I have given this question more thought.

The key challenge that B&O management face is to carefully define their "core competencies" and the market and market segments they want to pursue and therefore invest in.

In the past we (and B&O) have seen a core competence as being their expertise in shaping aluminium - give us beautiful product finishes and enabling the realisation of the acoustic lens technology.  But does this competency still have a place at the core of the company as 'media sources" disappear into the "cloud") (see the other thread running at the moment). The BeoCentre 2 is wonderful engineering as is the BeoSound 5; but perhaps we (and the market) only need these kind of products once a decade?

Another clear competency is audio as in loudspeakers: the BeoLabs as well as their inclusion in the luxury car market.  Clearly this is a place where B&O must continue to operate.  But the speakers are not sufficient to create a design presence - the BL5s for example can only be loved after one has heard them, I think only the BL5000s, BL6000s and BL8000s are true works of art as well as sound.

So this brings us to the realm of AV technology - I continue to be amazed how much today is now driven by software.  The more I read of improvements and glitches with BeoVision software updates the more I realise that B&O has to move to creating stronger competencies with software and more importantly INTEGRATION.

B&O will never have the economies of scale to compete with the panel manufacturers.  Low cost product is not a core competency of B&O.  But B&O can be superb at integrating panels to create works of art.  The BV10 is clearly one of those.  B&O has a core competency in the aesthetics of design. The current practice/virtue of having this living outside of the company in a symbiotic relationship is perhaps a strategic concern - how to protect the David Lewis studio from being poached, and how to build a transition/succession plan must be a major concern for management.

So B&O needs to expand its integration competency to survive.  That is integration of components into works of design art, AND integration into the AV fabric of people's lifestyles: their homes, their cars.  I think luxury boats are a distraction, but luxury hotels are important for revenue and for exposure.  And perhaps some form of B&O on cruise ships and on key "luxury" airline carriers in business and first class would be equally important exposure.

But the key AV fabric integration has to take place in people's homes.  And here the challenge of software as a core competency really comes forward.  Superb software engineering and integration is extremely difficult. To move forward on this front B&O needs to make some hard management decisions:

1. simplify the integration challenges by excluding certain heritage products -- if there is a particular problematic area, then B&O need to cut their losses, perhaps compensate the installed customer base, but rather than have R&D and testing taking 3 years to produce a product that fits imperfectly into all existing products produce a "Selected Product List" that is the target space and produce solutions that integrate perfectly with less R&D/testing effort and greater customer delight and satisfaction.  The "SPL" should also be made know to the customers: this would simplify their purchasing decisions, as well as create opportunities for integration partners that could address heritage niches.
    
2. simplify the R&D process by settling on a platform and a target set of open and market standards; in reality we should not mind that the BM5/BS5 is Windows based, but we should mind our audio and visual investments can not be accessed.  B&O used to be about simplifying their customers' lives, (right now I feel that my life is being made complicated (but to be honest I am not too sure how much that is the market's "fault").

Above all B&O needs to get closer to its core customers that push the limits of B&O adoption and usage - I think the recent UK/Benelux CEO interview was excellent since it shows there is an intent to do so.  

An interesting post and one I will digest for a little longer replying fully,but on point 1 I think B&O have started that process by pulling out of developing new landline phones or mobiles after current product lifecyles have been completed.

A  issue for me is how B&O will come up with products that will make existing customers want to replace what they have as (excluding televisions) much of the current range has been availabe for several  years now and there seems no pressing reason to upgrade much of it.

Simon

Flappo The Grate:

clean break to the future !!!

Here is what Apple did:

1999 - started to incorporate technologies in OS 9 that would ease a migration to OS X

2001 - released OS X with an interpreter able to run OS 9 stuff

2002 - 2004 - OS X technologies were backwards compatible to OS 9 stuff

2005 - "buried" OS 9 in a ceremony, advised new OS X features would no longer be compatible with OS 9 legacy

2009 - the OS 9 interpreter is no longer installed by default- you must install it if you want to run legacy stuff

Most people were able to adapt and leave behind their old stuff, even if it meant leaving behind equipment and software that had originally cost thousands of quid.

Might I suggest that there's a more important question as to whether B&O can keep pace with the rest of the industry, and that's whether we can keep pace with ourselves. 

In the old days it seems that the "torture chamber" was sufficient to ready a product for market. I suppose if it could withstand a 4" drop and cigarette smoke it could handle anything the big wide world could throw at it. But these days it's not the physical components that seem to be giving the most headaches. With very few exceptions (I can actually only think of the BeoSound 3 controls, but I'm sure there are others), the issues seem to be with software and interoperability. 

I suppose that it warrants frustration when BeoVisions require updates to fix updates that fixed updates and all to run an internal software system that's as visually interesting as a graphing calculator (I'll allow that it may do some sophisticated stuff behind the scenes, but blocky white letters on black background leaves something to be desired). What's even more frustrating is that many of the issues associated with the software manifest IMMEDIATELY! It's not like you install the software and then something pops up weeks in. It leads one to believe that a software engineer hit the save button and posted the thing to BeoWise without even subjecting the code to cigarette smoke!

Now there is going to be a soup-to-nuts revision of the video line in the coming few years and there's a possibility that, with a skeleton crew, most of the big brains are working to get this ready to go to market as fast as possible leaving few resources for maintaining current products. I'd just say, as a retailer, that I'm trying to sell some $15,000 televisions and could use a few less headaches while the new engine's being cooked up.

Happy New Year!

I have a certain amount of confidence that B&O will figure this out, particularly with the oft-occuring examples of software start-ups producing excellent software products with few employees. It can happen; now, the question is, will it? If not the road shall be rough for B&O.

Part of the frustration with the B&O SW updates is the required physical interaction of B&O personnel with the device. My ATV is updated automatically from the web and I see no reason that B&O should not be able to employ this technology. As a B&O user with multiple households, some in remote areas, it will become increasingly important to me that the increasingly SW-dependent devices be updatable w/o any physical interaction from B&O. I expect that many in other specific situations have similar expectations.

I agree ... that is the sort of clearly announced strategy and execution of it that I think is needed.

By contrast one can look at the agony of Microsoft's Windows family (and what a dysfunctional family that is!) and IBM's OS/2.

For any one interested in lessons on how not to develop software and how not to have partnerships take a look at this ... I stumbled across it last week and found the personal views of an insider a very entertaining read ... PC Disasters

Chrisreunion:

...And I do hope the USB and Ethernet sockets at the back of the new BeoVisions are for that purpose..

Unfortunately I found out that my latest B&O purchase, the BV10, does not has an ethernet socket at all. Strange enough it is mentioned on the back panel and in the specs, however, no RJ45 connector... I will ask my dealer next week why it is missing... 

Another strange decision I think is the inclusion of 3 SCART connections and only two HDMI (although extensionable). 

elephant:

So B&O needs to expand its integration competency to survive.  That is integration of components into works of design art, AND integration into the AV fabric of people's lifestyles: their homes, their cars.  I think luxury boats are a distraction, but luxury hotels are important for revenue and for exposure.  And perhaps some form of B&O on cruise ships and on key "luxury" airline carriers in business and first class would be equally important exposure.

But the key AV fabric integration has to take place in people's homes.  And here the challenge of software as a core competency really comes forward.  Superb software engineering and integration is extremely difficult. 

I tend to agree with the points you are making here, as well as those by Affineur where he points to the capability to update via the internet. I believe they are already moving that road with the BeoMaster 5 which gets its updates unnoticed via the web. I have to experience this my self yet, but lets assume they got this right. 

What wonders me however on the integraton part is that I have to put IR emitters to non B&O hardware to control them while most of the equipment I have support RS232 ports to integrate with domotica networks. I wonder why B&O does not support such established functionality out of the box. And yes I know they seems to have a gateway, however I can not get a clear answer regarding capabilities, availability and pricing. (see: http://www.bang-olufsen.com/masterlink_gateway ). Maybe TripEnglish can say something about this "product"?

In respect to SW development, it is hard to get things right. Real world testing is complex and takes quite an effort. However given time, I assume B&O will learn to manage that and hopefully support local differences as well