Shimano has received widespread criticism for its decision to force cycling computer brand Hammerhead to remove Di2 functionality from its Karoo cycling computers. The power struggle between Shimano and SRAM furthers the decline of open standards within sports tech, and it looks like this will simply have a negative impact on the consumer.
> Review: Hammerhead Karoo 2
Thursday 2nd June is going to be a bad day for Hammerhead Karoo users that also use a Shimano Di2 groupset. Shimano has requested that Hammerhead removes all connectivity for its electronic gear systems, meaning that Hammerhead users will no longer be able to see information such as battery status and gear indicators. Nor will they be able to change their computer screen via the Di2 hood buttons.
This removal of Di2 functionality might seem like a small feature to lose, and it certainly won’t affect every owner of a Karoo or Karoo 2 head unit, but it will leave many frustrated with Shimano as the move could be construed as a way of reducing competition from what is a SRAM-owned brand.
The announcement has not gone down well on social media, with many voicing their displeasure at Shimano’s decision.
As a Hammerhead Karoo 2 user and also a Di2 user, I would like to say #shimano you suck thanks for ruining it for millions of shimano user. #sram #hammerhead #karro2 is time for you guy to run a trade in program to get rid of this #shimanodi2 scrap. #srametap
— Cycling Conquistador (@Rubirosa_Fx) May 26, 2022
@ShimanoROAD all you are doing is driving your customers away. Reverse this stupid hammerhead decision. I’ll never buy shimano again.
— Kevin Klein (@kevindkleined) May 26, 2022
Shimano not wanting to play nice with the Hammerhead/SRAM, go figure… pic.twitter.com/TBx3oUu1In
— Neil Beltchenko 🚲 (@Neil_Beltchenko) May 26, 2022
In a statement, Hammerhead said: “Here at Hammerhead, we are committed to constantly improving in ways that benefit riders. With each update and integration, we chart an intentional path of continuous improvement.
“Unfortunately, we don’t always have the ability to supply every product integration we want for our riders. At the request of Shimano, effective with next Thursday’s software update on June 2nd, riders who utilized Di2 integration will lose access to a small subset of features. The update 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.”
With the above statement, Hammerhead confirms that Shimano has requested this and it doesn’t take long to realise that the move follows closely on the heels of Hammerhead being brought under the SRAM umbrella.
The statement continues: “Important note: all other Karoo 2 functionality will continue to work for Shimano riders, it is this small subset of Di2 features that Shimano has withdrawn permissions for until we are able to forge a new agreement.
“We remain hopeful in pursuit of a new path to provide more software features to Shimano riders in the years ahead.”
With the final line, it seems that there is plenty of willing from Hammerhead’s side to work to find a solution that will benefit Di2 users. But whether there is also willing from Shimano’s end is yet to be seen, and it appears the ball is firmly in its court…
52 thoughts on “Shimano forces SRAM-owned Hammerhead to remove Di2 connected features”
This is bad…the next step
This is bad…the next step is to stop Garmin accessing power data from Shimano power metres, becasue Garmin do power metres. It would seem odd if they did not do it.
Basically someone in the organisation is being an ar$e.
I hope the backlash will result in a reversal of such a stupid decision.
There is the question as to why Di2 are not “open ANT+” but still “private Ant+” which allows them to pull stupid stunts like this!
Pedal those squares wrote:
The answer to that (according to Shimano) will be that tight control of their protocol allows them to guarantee the reliability of the shifting, whereas others have (anecdotally?) been subject to ‘issues’.
Open protocols for shoving out data is another matter of course.
Pedal those squares wrote:
Don’t give them ideas! Although I do agree, this is madness.
So basically Shimano is
So basically Shimano is making life harder for its own customers who have spent a fair bit of money on Di2 groupsets? Sounds like a very smart business move!
Only the ones with Karoo
Only the ones with Karoo headsets. It would be interesting what the market shares are for that make anyway compared to Garmin / Wahoo AND with Di2.
Since Shimano does not make
Since Shimano does not make headsets, the rationale is still hard to fathom. Just to spite SRAM – at the expense of Shimano Di2 users?
I suspect the overlap of
I suspect the overlap of Karoo and Di2 is quite large – them both essentially being premium products, with only the Garmin 1030 being a more expensive head unit.
It just seems an incredibly
It just seems an incredibly petty move, and not one that will particularly benefit Shimano themselves – I’d have thought Garmin or Wahoo were the immediate likely beneficaries. And, longer term, it might make someone considering what groupset to go with avoid Shimano because they are worried about future similar actions causing compatability issues. I really don’t see what Shimano gain from it.
Steve K wrote:
Exactly. One of Di2’s competitive advantages was the extra buttons that could be programmed to scroll screens on your head unit. What Shimano has demonstrated today is that they are willing to retroactively revoke access to that function by any head unit manufacturer they have a spat with. Today its Hammerhead. But who’s to say it won’t be Wahoo or even Garmin at some later date?
What am I missing here?
What am I missing here? Shimano don’t make head units, so there’s no commercial advantage to them in dissuading people from buying Hammerhead products; one would have thought the only possible influence on the market from doing this is that someone who already owns a Hammerhead unit might decide to go with SRAM for their new bike for compatibility, to Shimano’s detriment. The only other effect I can see is that Shimano will lose a lot of goodwill. What’s in it for them?
They don’t make head units..
They don’t make head units…yet. They used to make a computer that integrated with buttons in hods. I suppose we’ll just have wait and see.
Yes I guess that could be a
Yes I guess that could be a motivation. Bit niche just going for the bricklayer market though…
Rendel Harris wrote:
Licensing payments. At the end of the day, this will be all about commercial licensing – i.e. how much SRAM were willing to pay their arch-rival for rights to use DI2. Garmin obviously came to an agreement and, I would bet, SRAM probably dug their heels in and refused to stump up.
You can certainly argue that this is why closed-standards are bad (and they are), but at the end of the day, you can be sure that it’s financials that are at the bottom of this. Look at Google / Sonos – Google lost their patent lawsuit with Sonos regarding functionality that they used in their speakers. Did they pony up and pay the licensing fee to Sonos? No, they released new firmware that removed functionality from users instead, preferring to irritate paying customers than put a hole in their own (extremely well-filled) pocket.
daern wrote:
Thats unlikey imo. The licensing deal and payments would have been negotiated by Hammerhead and the closeness of the SRAM acquisition counts against that theory, unless the license was due to expire soon.
My bet would be that Shimmy activated a withdrawal clause in the License. Coz they are cnuts.
Even if Shimano did make a
Even if Shimano did make a head unit, ducking the competitive pressure instead of innovating to stay ahead only makes a product sclerotic in the longer term. If it has to be sheltered to survive then it will eventually fail.
Or it could just be that
Or it could just be that Shimano don’t want their IP in the hands of a rival (no pun intended). Especially one whose products are substandard by comparison. And I say that as a long time Sram user who is delighted to be back in the Shimano fold albeit with a Karoo 2
That might make some sense.
That might make some sense. Although the IP must already be in their rival’s hands at this stage? Unless Shimano are about to make some big change in how Di2 works?
As you can tell, I’m well beyond any expertise here!
Steve K wrote:
It’s not so much that it is secret technology, but that an agreement has to be entered into to use it. Shimano have pulled the agreement, so Hammerhead would probably find themselves in court if they continued using it.
The difference here is presumably the difference between something being patented and something being a trade secret. If you find out a trade secret, you can then use it, but with a patent, the information is freely available but the owner can require a licence for it to be used.
These kinds of shenanigans are why I hate proprietary protocols etc. They’re just artificial barriers and it usually ends up being to the detriment of the paying public.
It’s not “IP”. It’s a bloody
It’s not “IP”. It’s a bloody API. That’s all it is. They’ve just removed access to that api. It’s petty.
nosferatu1001 wrote:
I thought it was just that they pulled the agreement, which is why Hammerhead have a little while to push out the new firmware. I don’t think Shimano removed any API as surely that would involve updating all Di2 systems.
hawkinspeter wrote:
You’re both right. Its IP because it’s a non-standard API implimentation sitting on top of the standard Ant protocol. Essentially the payload and the methods for using the API are the IP. Though I suspect that differs in parts of the world depending on what their guidelines on software patents are. This is probably based on US law though.
Anyway, those numbers in the
Anyway, those numbers in the picture make no sense. The current speed is higher than the max speed. And that’s a hell of a speed with a cadence on 51 and a heart rate of 119.
Well the distance is zero, so
Well the distance is zero, so no speed metrics make sense at that point.
Yes, that too. And the fact
Yes, that too. And the fact it is just sitting on a table.
Nah – that’s just a very
Nah – that’s just a very fancy bike basket.
Hypothetically, how hard
Hypothetically, how hard would it be for a Karoo owner to stop their firmware from updating until these companies work out an agreement? Surely that would stop any features from changing.
andystow wrote:
Usually that’s quite feasible for devices. It’s more problematic when the device needs an up-to-date firmware to access online services (e.g. games consoles) which happened when Sony pulled their Linux support from the PS3 (which I’m still annoyed at).
andystow wrote:
Possible, but one of the selling points of the Hammerhead devices is the very fast rate of product development and frequent iterations of software, sooner or later, a user holding back updates is going to see a feature or bug fix they need.
andystow wrote:
It’s very easy, and plenty of users are planning to do just that, but as others have said, Hammerhead release regular updates and the firmware has improvement enormously over the year and a half that I’ve been using mine. Would be a shame to have to forego that.
If SRAM/Karoo want to display
If SRAM/Karoo want to display gear info they could do an end-run around the whole issue by working it out in the head unit. You’d need a cadence sensor and a wheel rotation sensor, but once you have that data, working out the gear is a simple matter of arithmetic, and deriving the chainring/sprocket combination is just a matter of a look-up table and a small amount of ‘intelligence’ to help it differentate between 34/17 and 50/25.
For me, this is possibly the
For me, this is possibly the least useful of the features Shimano is taking away – I have a fair idea of the gear I’m in. Di2 battery level / shifting between screens with hood buttons, on the other hand, cannot be handled in this way.
John Stevenson wrote:
That’d introduce a bit of lag though as it’d need to have the wheel spin a bit to register the new gearing (also wouldn’t work if you weren’t pedalling).
They’re also removing the Di2 battery level indicator – that’s trickier to measure remotely.
Good point (as is chocim’s).
Good point (as is chocim’s).
Upside of calculating gear in the head unit is that it’ll work with every gear system there is.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I’ve got old school (2014) Di2 so I can check the battery level at the junction box, but I thought with the newfangled stuff you youngsters have you can check the system status through a mobile app? Is it something one really needs to monitor in-ride anyway, unless you’re on a very long multi-day trip with no access to charging facilities? I just check my battery about once a fortnight or so and don’t think about it the rest of the time.
Rendel Harris wrote:
If you’ve got bluetooth added to Di2, then I think you can do that (haven’t used the bluetooth app in a while as I found it problematic). The advantage of having the battery level displayed all the time is that you don’t have to remember to check it as you’ll just see when it’s dropped down to 1 or 2 bars and could do with being charged.
Fair enough, though I’ve only
Fair enough, though I’ve only forgotten to charge once in eight years – the experience of grinding through the High Weald in Kent in one gear whilst being laughed at by Di2-sceptic mates means I hopefully won’t ever do it again!
Rendel Harris wrote:
I’ve never gotten to the zero gears point, but I have twice been in a situation where is a limited to the small ring at the front.
wycombewheeler wrote:
Yes, it’s a good warning, unfortunately on this occasion I’d done nothing but London commute (about 200kms/week) the week before on which the steepest climb is about 3%, so I hadn’t come off the big ring at all, then got a train out to Kent, so the first I knew of it was approaching the second big climb when I found I was stuck on the big ring in front; I erroneously thought I’d remembered that meant one had about 50kms of rear derailleur left, in fact it failed about 10kms later – fortunately stuck in 50/30 but still not ideal on 10%+ climbs!
Shimano needs to learn to
Shimano needs to learn to listen to the voice of the customer.
Across a number of issues their high handed and self serving approach will just result in consumers choosing sram.
Shimano’s customers are bike
Shimano’s customers are bike manufacturers.
Will this make any difference at all to the number of Di2 groupsets Trek, Specialized and Giant buy from Shimano? Nope.
John Stevenson wrote:
I doubt the numbers will be big enough to make a difference, but I can imagine a scenario where retailers are feeding back to the manufacturers that people are asking for non-Shimano bikes because they want something that works with their existing head units, and the manufacturers having a word with Shimano to sort it…but Hammerhead probably not popular enough for that to have an impact. If they pulled the same stunt with Garmin or Wahoo, however…
In a sese yes, but often the
In a sese yes, but often the same bikes are sold with either SRAM or Shimano so bike buyers may choose against Shimano. I’m not sure loss of connectivity would be sufficient motivation for me, but it may be for some people.
Of course in a climate where bike availability does not meet demand, it will have no effect on sales whatsoever.
Crazy decision
Crazy decision
Pushes hammerhead users to choose stam
Pushes shimano di2 users to choose garmin
Did nothing for the sale of shimano
What an absolute disgrace
What an absolute disgrace Shimano are, and penalising consumers to try to defend its market share is going to have exactly the opposite effect. As an owner of both Di2 and SRAM and a Hammerhead K2 this hits me hard. What they have removed is for example an important safety feature of being able to change screens without moving your hands to the screen…..well done Shimano! I was in the middle of replacing the Di2 bike and clearly Shimano’s decision means mine is now simple….specify SRAM on the new bike, it’s a no brainer, again well done Shimano and bye bye
I would guess that originally
I would guess that originally Shimano provided the required interface to Hammerhead under some agreement that is broken by the takeover – some clause that specifically disallows SRAM from using Shimano knowledge.
Hammerhead can reverse engineer an interface, but they will have to jump through hoops to prove they didn’t use Shimano proprietary information.
I don’t think we can tell from here who is doing what, and it would not surprise me at all that Shimano are responding to some other SRAM issue which Shimano aren’t inclined to go public on.
Seems to me like Shimano have
Seems to me like Shimano have made this move before the Karoo ownership base becomes too big. The chance of someone selling their Karoo and buying a GPS unit that works with Di2 (if that functionality is actually anything more than a gimmick) is bigger than a Karoo owner selling their groupset for one that works with a Karoo. 1, 2 maybe 3 years from now, the way Karoo have been selling it might have been different.
It also makes me wonder if Shimano know something else or are maybe about to release their own GPS unit?
Either way it seems a bit peevish and childish to just stop compatibility like this.
sparrowlegs wrote:
changing screens without moving hands from the hoods is pretty convenient.
Also having an indication/remonder of your Di2 battery level is also handy.
Is it critical? No, but it is definitely nice to have.
Petty, counterproductive and
Petty, counterproductive and a PR disaster.
I don’t know why this is a
No real surprise. Shimano Flight Deck wouldn’t work with Campagnolo ErgoBrain. Why would you expect SRAM Hammerhead to work with a competitor?
spokejunky wrote:
If Shimano was simply withdrawing support for new Hammerhead products, that would have some justification, even though it would still seem to be pretty petty from a company that doesn’t make head units itself. However, this move also removes functionality for those who bought their head units before January 2022 when SRAM acquired Hammerhead, so Shimano customers are being penalised for something completely outside their control and which they couldn’t reasonably foresee, which seems highly unfair.
I’m not arguing the aspect of
I’m not arguing the aspect of it being petty or unfair. That’s like arguing why Apple does what it does to its consumers. Consume or change the ecosystem.
spokejunky wrote:
That’s not really a good analogy, it’s always been clear to Apple customers that they’re locked in to certain aspects of Apple’s systems and they can make that choice or not. This is as if Apple suddenly changed the iOS so that no Apple user could use a Hewlett Packard printer any longer just because Microsoft bought HP.