Because environmental activists are trying to ban THOSE sorts of bulbs.
They may never issue another firmware upgrade for these particular hubs; simply, the next version of the hub will be marketed as "for Friends of Our Wallet Certified Partners Only" and will be incompatible to non-partner devices from the get-go. It is absolutely conceivable that this was truly a UX decision - trying to tamp down the level of complaints from consumers who bought third-party bulbs that don't quite work right. However the fact is that this is a nascent (many might say, unnecessary luxury) market and people who buy this stuff are almost exclusively bleeding edge technology buffs and tinkerers, or people who simply throw a blank check at an integrator and say "make it work". The latter category of people isn't generating these support calls, because their integrators buy the expensive bulbs to avoid tech support, and the former category - which is the enthusiast category that could grow these devices into the mainstream - demands interop.
Absolutely - and, since this belief is never true because it would also require a double digit growth in personal disposable income, the tech industry is constantly under pressure to create new product categories of things people don't want, so that this new category can have a temporary growth spurt. 3D TV and smartwatches are two recent examples.
At one time there were "home computers". These were basically appliances. You inserted the cartridge or diskette for the program you wanted
Eh, not many people would agree with that characterization of "home computers" (in the sense that it was meant in the 1980s, which your mention of cartridges implies). Most people who owned a home computer in that era learned at least a little BASIC, and pretty much all of them learned at least some "command line" skills (even if the "command line" in question was using the BASIC interpreter in direct mode).
That whole change of subsidy philosophy on the carriers' part could very easily make a sea change in the hardware market. Even the people who can afford to drop $650 on a premium phone upfront experience sticker shock, especially since there are now many very credible phones on the market, unlocked, for $200 or less. It may be that we're going to see a combination of "purchase me on an instalment plan offered by the hardware vendor" a la Apple, plus a significant contraction of the flagship phone market in favor of devices in the middle of the price spectrum. Similarly to the PC market, not everybody actually *needs* a high end flagship, and if the "how much do I have to extract from my wallet to walk out of the store with a new phone" question gets rearranged with a much higher sticker on the flagship vs. midrange, more people may contemplate that fact before plunking down cash.
And this is why I didn't bother to reply to the rest of your message. This is activism. Some people - many people - WANT trucks and SUVs. And it's their right to buy them. You need to realize that you're part of a tiny minority of people who cares about this thing - what exactly you care about I can't say for sure, but it's not something the majority of people care about. Most people - I may say, NORMAL people - want a thing, and that is a valid commercial end in itself. Proselytizing them into buying your particular flavor of holy grail needs to be recognized for a religious conversion activity it is. I repeat what I said in my original post: activists think that the population will find these devices magical IF ONLY THEY CAN BE MADE TO BELIEVE. Problem is, there is no reason for anyone to believe what you want them to believe.
This irrelevancy is the crux of the problem here. That's true. But people don't JUST use their car for commuting and therein is the issue. Electric cars are unusable for anything *OTHER* than your daily commute. They can't be used for the family road trip, for hauling purchases from that exciting little Amish sale 200 miles away, or for anything else. Hence my comment that they are not general-purpose vehicles. They are very specialized hive vehicles.
Gasoline vehicles are available in a huge variety of styles and capabilities, such that a consumer can make an intelligent selection of a vehicle that will cover most of his/her use case decently well - as opposed to the one or two EVs on the lot, which can do a fairly good(ish) job on one use case, and are totally useless for all others.
Electric vehicles are activist novelties.
This whole bleating rant is a lot of noise from a tiny minority of vociferous hippies who think that alternative cars would JUST BE MAGICAL if only PEOPLE WOULD BELIEVE. They want dealers to *proselytize* electric running shoes, not simply be knowledgeable about them.