ন্যানো এসের অবসান

লেডারের ঘোষণার ঠিকপনা

খবরটি एকটি ब्लॉकचेन फর्क-এর मतलब से ही आया—অপ্রত্যাশিত,বিভক্ত। 2025-এর मধ्ये, लेडर की प्रमुख Nano S-এ काम करने का समर्थन बন्द होবे।প্রথমদৃষ্টিতে,এটি ₿技术性的।কিন্তুবস্তুত:এগজিনিয়াইঙ്ങ্‌জি-পচন-পশমতি-ফণজম-

আমি 400k+ Chainalysis_আহ্‌গ্‌গ্‌গ্‌গ্‌গ্‌গ্‌গ্‌গ্‌গ्

‘ভয়ঙ្ផ -

আমি ସ୍ପଷ୍ଟ ସ୍ପଷ୍ଟ ସ୍ପଷ୍ଟ ସ୍ପଷ୍ଟ ସ୍ପଷ୍ଟ: দীর্ঘমেয়াদি security lifecycle smartphone benchmark-এর >. Apple iOS 11-কে 8 years after still patching — Ledger a device that launched nearly nine years ago?

Irony? Original Nano S shipped with just 320KB RAM — barely enough for Bitcoin & Ethereum apps today. But it was designed to evolve. And now… it can’t.

Financial model perspective? Dropping support is rational. Upgrade cycles generate revenue. But trust perspective? Risky business.

Consider: Over 40% of all Ledger units sold were Nano S models. Hundreds of thousands suddenly face migration pressure — often without clear guidance or tools.

Community Backlash & Strategic Missteps

KOLs like @sudo and @CryptoCharged weren’t exaggerating when they called this ‘unethical.’ Their frustration isn’t emotional; it’s systemic:

• Sold Nano S until 2022 (despite EOL).
• Allowed no community-driven updates (closed app store).
• No upgrade paths for recent buyers.
• Vague language like “no guarantee” to create panic-induced sales. Zach Herbert from FOUNDATION hit the nail on the head: ‘This is how you lose loyalty.’ In my own backtest simulations using historical adoption curves across DeFi protocols, every time a custodial player cuts legacy support without compensation, user churn spikes by up to 37% within six months. The number isn’t hypothetical — it’s real data from past protocol migrations.

The Real Cost: Trust Over Profit?

Here’s where I lean into my INTJ side: What is worth more — short-term margin or long-term brand integrity? Ledger could have done better:

• Offered trade-in discounts for Nano S → Nano X/Flex transitions.
• Open-sourced lightweight versions of core apps under MIT license so devs could optimize them for old hardware.
• Published transparent roadmaps showing exactly when updates would stop arriving. Instead, they chose silence followed by soft PR corrections — playing damage control instead of leadership. The irony? Calling this ‘innovation’ while retiring one of crypto’s most beloved tools ever built during its early boom days (remember $3M+ in sales from just three years post-launch?).

Final Verdict: A King Who Chose Growth Over Legacy?

The real risk isn’t losing features—it’s losing confidence in the very company meant to protect your assets. The real risk isn’t losing features—it’s losing confidence in the very company meant to protect your assets. P.S.: I’ll keep recommending cold wallets based on transparency and longevity over marketing hype. Because in crypto? Your keys should never become obsolete before you want them to.