Doug Schneider:

Upgradeability used to be important to me, but it isn’t so much anymore. This is mainly due to some bad past experiences I’ve had with products that were supposed to be upgradeable. In my case it was mainly with digital-to-analogue conversion products. When it came to doing the upgrade I found out quite quickly that the cost of the upgrade was sometimes near the price of the newer version piece (or very close to the used market price). Furthermore, sometimes all the new features could not be added -- it was, then, only a partial upgrade.

Although the promise of upgradeability is appealing, the reality is far from it. That said, the audio/video industry should not be singled out. Computers, for example, are upgradeable -- but only to a point. There comes a time when it is simpler (and cheaper) to just go ahead and buy the new model. Therefore, until the product is truly upgradeable at a very competitive price, it's not a high priority for me.

Doug Blackburn:

Upgradeability generally comes at a price. Components that are upgradeable usually cost more than something with the same functionality that is not upgradeable. The difference, the actual cost of the upgrade capability, is generally not easy to determine because there is no comparable non-upgradeable version of the product to use as a reference. It is hard to know, therefore, whether the capability is cost effective or not.

Upgradeable sounds really cool, and it can be cool up to a point. The problem is that you can't anticipate all the possible functionality you might need to have control over for a product to truly be upgradeable. Some things that might be upgradeable end up not being so due to the inability to address some portion of the product, or because a new chip is needed in addition to software changes. Upgradeability always has limitations, which may not be easy to evaluate before the first upgrade opportunity comes along. For example, one upgradeable receiver can be updated to perform DTS-ES decoding, but only the matrix version of it, not the discrete version, which requires a different chip. As a result, you may find yourself in one of those "yeah! - booo!" situations. Other products that offer open "slots" to add features later often incorporate add-on boards that are so expensive you could buy a replacement standalone component for not much more money. Unfortunately, this has more to do with economies of scale than with the actual performance of the add-on board. It is incredibly expensive to make a limited number of specialized circuit boards, but relatively cheap to make thousands of them in a more mainstream product.

John Potis:

Of course price is a factor! It's always a factor! Unfortunately, I'm not all that confident that there is a way to guarantee upgradeability. Even highly respected companies, who in the past have made a real effort to achieve upgradeability, have been caught behind the eight ball. Sometimes something just comes out of left field that catches the industry flat-footed.

So certainly, when all else is equal (is all else ever equal?), the component that went further to ensure upgradeability would have the scales tipped in its favor. But I'm not really sure just how much extra cash I, or most of the buying public would be willing to shell out. Let's also keep in mind that most people make these purchases with the intent of keeping them for years and years. I'm not sure how many of them would be all that interested in keeping up with the Joneses anyway; price is a huge factor for these people. 

Then there are those people who would buy the cheaper product and then invest the savings. When the upgrade bug bites, they can sell their piece on the used market and pool the proceeds with their invested money. Who can say who will come out ahead?

Wes Phillips:

When I worked as an audio salesman, I found an upgrade path was an important selling point, even if most consumers never took advantage of it. Consumers really dislike feeling trapped by a buying decision.

That said, I suspect that more of them might employ the extra channel capabilities offered by some home-theater products instead of the power supply/extra processing options offered in older audio products. And some upgrade options, such as multichannel inputs that bypass the built-in processors on receivers, just make a lot of sense in a rapidly changing technology.

Roger Kanno:

When I purchase a piece of equipment, I make sure that it is exactly what I want, and I do not depend on receiving any future upgrades to it. There are so many products that have been said to be upgradeable with expansion slots, socketed chips, removable circuit boards, modular drive mechanisms, etc. which have never been supported by the manufacturer once that product left the company's premises. As a result, I am wary of anything that is purported to have future upgradeability when no specifics are given. To me this means that the manufacturer may or may not support the product in the future with upgrades. If a product like an amp has slots for additional channels of amplification, or if a processor has provisions to add a phono board or some other similar upgrade that has been announced or is currently available, then it might influence my decision. You never know, however, when a company might cease operations, abandon a project due to complications in the design, or simply stop producing a particular product. I would urge anyone to be very cautious when purchasing a component and relying on its future upgradeability.

Jeff Fritz:

I like the idea of upgradeability in theory. The reality, however, is sometimes quite different than what some manufacturers would have you believe. While we know that "future proof" is an impossibility, being prepared for a processing mode or standard already under development makes sense. It would be fair, at the time of purchase, for the manufacturer to state "we have an upgrade to ‘surreal-surround 10’ already close to completion, and it will cost a current owner $300, guaranteed." In this instance, the customer can have some assurance that the upgrade will be available and can plan based on the price of the upgrade. An informed buying decision can then be made. Overall, I think consumers should buy based on what their current and short-term needs are, rather than bank on the long-range viability of a product. Realistic expectations will yield more satisfaction with a purchase. And remember, if you have no space for that ceiling-left-of-center speaker, you may not want to pay for the capability.