Digital Obsolescence and the Question of What Brands Must Stand for in the Transition to the Platform Economy
It rarely begins with a big bang.
Usually it’s an update. An app that changes. A function that disappears. A feature that is suddenly no longer supported.
And at some point an unsettling realization sets in:
A product that was purchased as “smart” suddenly feels surprisingly dumb.
The recent case surrounding Bose, whose smart speakers have lost noticeable utility due to restricted app functionalities, is not a technical slip-up. It is symptomatic. Similar to Sonos, where software-level decisions led to significant losses of trust and tangible economic consequences.
What becomes visible here is not an isolated product issue- but a systemic issue for smart brands.
From Product Promise to System Dependency
For decades, the relationship between brand and consumer was clearly defined.
You bought a product- and you owned it. Its capabilities were fixed, its limitations known, its aging expected.
Digitalization has fundamentally changed this relationship.
Smart products are no longer closed goods but ongoing promises. Their value no longer lies solely in hardware but in software, services, updates, and ecosystems.
That sounds like progress – and it is.
But it also changes the psychological logic of ownership. When functions are controlled by software, they are, in principle, revocable. And this is where a new, often underestimated risk for brands emerges: digital obsolescence.
Not because something breaks – but because something is taken away.
Why Digital Obsolescence Is More Dangerous Than Physical Aging
A defective product creates frustration. An devalued product, however, creates distrust.
For customers, digital obsolescence does not feel like natural wear and tear but like a retroactive change to the contract. The emotional reaction is correspondingly stronger -shaped by a sense of lost control, paternalism, or even expropriation.
For brands, this is highly risky. Trust is not a feature; it is the foundation of long-term value creation.
Anyone selling products that can noticeably deteriorate after purchase is putting far more at risk than short-term satisfaction. Experiences like this undermine credibility, weaken advocacy, increase price sensitivity, and lead customers to look for alternatives much faster.
OTA Updates: Progress with a Dark Side
Over-the-air updates – particularly in the automotive industry – are a clear example of this tension. They are among the most powerful levers of modern product development and at the same time one of the most powerful tools of control.
At their best, they extend product lifecycles, improve safety, enhance quality, and keep products relevant for years.
At their worst, they shift control entirely to the brand- at the expense of users.
The difference lies not in the technology but in the mindset with which brands deploy it.
Those who primarily see updates as a business model undermine trust.
Those who see them as a responsibility strengthen it.
Echoing Steve Jobs’ famous line, “People don’t know what they want until you show it to them,” one thing becomes clear: customers rarely miss what they never had – but they react all the more strongly when something is taken away that has long become part of their daily lives.
When “Smart” Is Truly Smart: Customer Perspective Instead of Feature Inflation
The key question is not what is technically possible but what people actually perceive as progress.
From an outside-in perspective, it quickly becomes clear: not every digital add-on creates value. Many features look impressive on paper but fail to solve a meaningful job-to-be-done and instead create complexity rather than benefit.
Smart functions only create value when they genuinely make users’ lives easier, more reliable, meaningfully expanded, and at the same time safer and longer-lasting. Without this concrete benefit, even impressive technologies quickly become unnecessary digital ballast. Leaving them out is then not a step backward – it is service to the customer.
Customers do not evaluate technical complexity; they evaluate experienced value. Based on that, digital restraint can strengthen a brand just as much as digital innovation– provided it follows a clear, customer-centric logic.
The Real Brand Question: What Do We Stand for When Control Becomes More Important Than Ownership?
In the transition from physical products to digital platforms, brands must answer a central question:
Are we providers of products – or managers of dependencies?
This decision directly shapes perception. A brand is either seen as a reliable partner or as a system primarily focused on short-term optimization.
Customers accept complexity.
What they do not accept is opacity.
Where Brands Must Create Clarity and Orientation
In the future, differentiation will arise less from adding more specifications butmore from delivering a consistent, responsible experience. Brands that want to secure their future viability therefore define not only what their products can do, but how using them feels throughout their entire lifecycle.
They make transparent which functions are permanent components of the experience, which are deliberately optional or time-limited, and they visibly assume responsibility for existing customers- even when further development requires trade-offs.
More decisive than maximum feature density is a curated, reliable experience.
Digital restraint thus shifts from being a technical limitation to a strategic quality: it protects the core of the brand experience, sharpens positioning, and strengthens trust in the brand as a long-term companion – not just at the moment of purchase, but in every moment of use.
What Brands Should Stand for in the Digital Transformation
At its core, this is about a contemporary definition of brand integrity.
Strong digital brands stand not only for innovation but for reliability beyond the purchase moment, for respect toward customers’ sense of ownership, for protection against functional devaluation, and for a balanced relationship between business model and customer relationship.
Or put differently:
The intelligence of a brand is not shown by how much it can change – but by what it consciously chooses not to switch off.
Smart Products Require Mature Brands
Digital products will continue to evolve. Platforms will become more dominant. Services and subscriptions will increase.
But brands that want to endure in the long term must accept a simple truth:
Trust cannot be updated.
When smart products become dumb, customers become suspicious.
And suspicious customers are rarely loyal.
To discuss how these insights apply to your organization, get in touch with our team.