It'll probably be a flop but if they can push the smart speaker category forward just a little, I'm all for it. More likely they'll integrate Assistant and Alexa into a fairly average speaker and just be one of many boxes out there. At least they already have the customers, the online channel, and the billing relationship. They could even lock people in on a one year contract for music+speaker.
Samsung probably should buy Spotify although they'll mess it up anyway. They already own Harman and well, they have Bixby, so in theory they's have all the pieces they need. I do worry about the future of Spotify as they probably can't last on their own and they'd be ruined by whoever buys them.
There is no chance Apple will make a competing service native to their hardware. HomePod is all about that subscription fee.
Despite the fact that it works perfectly fine...without a subscription fee? Ignoring for a moment that voice playback controls work with your iTunes purchases for free, the fact remains that "AirPlay wifi speakers" are an entire product category that has existed for years, and the HP is simply the most recent. *None* of them offer voice playback controls, because all of them are simply AirPlay endpoints for audio playback. HP is exactly the same as all those speakers, except with much better sound. Nobody gave two shits about voice playback controls until this month.
You're trying to ignore that Apple really does promote Siri voice control as a major feature on the HomePod. The very first paragraph of their product page makes that clear:
"HomePod is a powerful speaker that sounds amazing and adapts to wherever it’s playing. It’s the ultimate music authority, bringing together Apple Music and Siri to learn your taste in music. It’s also an intelligent home assistant, capable of handling everyday tasks — and controlling your smart home. HomePod takes the listening experience to a whole new level. And that’s just the beginning."
That's why people keep bringing it up. ...and before you start in yes Siri on HomePod can do exactly what Apple says it can. Less careful readers could come away with the impression it can offer voice control of music other than just Apple Music since even in the footnote Apple is less than clear Siri works ONLY with Apple Music. From the fine print:
Siri works with Apple Music. Subscription required for Apple Music.
I'm trying to ignore nothing of the sort. I'm trying to correct the new made-up narrative that the AirPlay HomePod speaker "doesn't work" with Spotify. That's what was claimed, and that's nonsense. All AirPlay speakers in the entire market "work with" Spotify. EOS.
As for voice playback control, it may be the new speaker talking point, but in all the years iOS has supported it I've never used it IRL. It's always browsing my music in iTunes or Music app and initiating playback once I find what I'm in the mood for. The cognitive load of browsing is lighter than trying to recall my entire library from memory.
Good to see you're still on your agenda tho. Must...muddy...the waters...
This is an area they don't need to go in. They need to focus on their music service, not a speaker. Spotify is in no position to develop and sell a speaker, or any piece of hardware for that matter. Let others do the speaker and you focus on making Spotify the best service out there. There is nothing to gain by Spotify doing this.
How are they gonna market this? How are they gonna sell it? Who is going to support issues? What will they do to make me want to buy this over HomePod or Sonos? This is just stupid IMO.
There are rumors that Facebook is getting into the smart speaker business to. I don’t understand why other than tech sites and journalists are obsessed with gadgets.
I wouldn't doubt it. It seems like every time Apple either enters or creates a new space the "me too" crowd is enormous. Then slowly fades away with just a couple left (Apple and someone else).
There is no chance Apple will make a competing service native to their hardware. HomePod is all about that subscription fee.
Despite the fact that it works perfectly fine...without a subscription fee? Ignoring for a moment that voice playback controls work with your iTunes purchases for free, the fact remains that "AirPlay wifi speakers" are an entire product category that has existed for years, and the HP is simply the most recent. *None* of them offer voice playback controls, because all of them are simply AirPlay endpoints for audio playback. HP is exactly the same as all those speakers, except with much better sound. Nobody gave two shits about voice playback controls until this month.
You're trying to ignore that Apple really does promote Siri voice control as a major feature on the HomePod. The very first paragraph of their product page makes that clear:
"HomePod is a powerful speaker that sounds amazing and adapts to wherever it’s playing. It’s the ultimate music authority, bringing together Apple Music and Siri to learn your taste in music. It’s also an intelligent home assistant, capable of handling everyday tasks — and controlling your smart home. HomePod takes the listening experience to a whole new level. And that’s just the beginning."
That's why people keep bringing it up. ...and before you start in yes Siri on HomePod can do exactly what Apple says it can. Less careful readers could come away with the impression it can offer voice control of music other than just Apple Music since even in the footnote Apple is less than clear Siri works ONLY with Apple Music. From the fine print:
Siri works with Apple Music. Subscription required for Apple Music.
I'm trying to ignore nothing of the sort. I'm trying to correct the new made-up narrative that the AirPlay HomePod speaker "doesn't work" with Spotify. That's what was claimed, and that's nonsense. All AirPlay speakers in the entire market "work with" Spotify. EOS.
As for voice playback control, it may be the new speaker talking point, but in all the years iOS has supported it I've never used it IRL. It's always browsing my music in iTunes or Music app and initiating playback once I find what I'm in the mood for. The cognitive load of browsing is lighter than trying to recall my entire library from memory.
Good to see you're still on your agenda tho. Must...muddy...the waters...
Could we try being intellectually honest for just two seconds? HP does not support Spotify any more than my 40 year old passive, external film projector speaker does, both relying on brains elsewhere to relay the data. I don't think most people's expectation from a $350 "smart" speaker is that it's just a peripheral for their phones.
There is no chance Apple will make a competing service native to their hardware. HomePod is all about that subscription fee.
Despite the fact that it works perfectly fine...without a subscription fee? Ignoring for a moment that voice playback controls work with your iTunes purchases for free, the fact remains that "AirPlay wifi speakers" are an entire product category that has existed for years, and the HP is simply the most recent. *None* of them offer voice playback controls, because all of them are simply AirPlay endpoints for audio playback. HP is exactly the same as all those speakers, except with much better sound. Nobody gave two shits about voice playback controls until this month.
You're trying to ignore that Apple really does promote Siri voice control as a major feature on the HomePod. The very first paragraph of their product page makes that clear:
"HomePod is a powerful speaker that sounds amazing and adapts to wherever it’s playing. It’s the ultimate music authority, bringing together Apple Music and Siri to learn your taste in music. It’s also an intelligent home assistant, capable of handling everyday tasks — and controlling your smart home. HomePod takes the listening experience to a whole new level. And that’s just the beginning."
That's why people keep bringing it up. ...and before you start in yes Siri on HomePod can do exactly what Apple says it can. Less careful readers could come away with the impression it can offer voice control of music other than just Apple Music since even in the footnote Apple is less than clear Siri works ONLY with Apple Music. From the fine print:
Siri works with Apple Music. Subscription required for Apple Music.
I'm trying to ignore nothing of the sort. I'm trying to correct the new made-up narrative that the AirPlay HomePod speaker "doesn't work" with Spotify. That's what was claimed, and that's nonsense. All AirPlay speakers in the entire market "work with" Spotify. EOS.
As for voice playback control, it may be the new speaker talking point, but in all the years iOS has supported it I've never used it IRL. It's always browsing my music in iTunes or Music app and initiating playback once I find what I'm in the mood for. The cognitive load of browsing is lighter than trying to recall my entire library from memory.
Good to see you're still on your agenda tho. Must...muddy...the waters...
Could we try being intellectually honest for just two seconds? HP does not support Spotify any more than my 40 year old passive, external film projector speaker does, both relying on brains elsewhere to relay the data. I don't think most people's expectation from a $350 "smart" speaker is that it's just a peripheral for their phones.
The intellectually bankrupt here is you buddy with specious analogy.
1. Spotify simply doesn’t have the money to make and support a quality speaker and out-market Apple. 2. If they make a mediocre-quality speaker, they will join the race to the bottom by the non-Apple companies. 3. Spotify only has music in their ecosystem, and the profits are too thin and tenuous to support #1 (and getting thinner by the week). Apple has a robust ecosystem that does not rely on music. 4. Spotify has no advanced AI. Sure, they can purchase an SDK or license an AI from someone, but they can never hope to outperform their competitors by renting the competitors’ AI. 5. I see absolutely no marketing advantage for them to offer a speaker. They may offer something like lifetime free Spotify if you buy (and use instead of selling on eBay) their speaker in a misguided effort to create a tiny ecosystem. If so, that strategy will fail before it takes off, they will stop supporting the speakers, and the people who bought them will ultimately have the restriction of using their hardware lifted (and will keep lifetime free service). 6. This product failure will significantly cheapen the Spotify brand. It will also reduce confidence in investors and will ultimately increase their rate of descent into bankruptcy. 7. All competition, however brief, is good for consumers, as it trends toward better products.
Apple has created a very high quality speaker that, despite their enormous buying power, is still expensive for them to build. It would be more expensive for smaller companies to build since they lack the economy of scale that Apple does. Apple is taking a relatively small profit per unit in a strategy designed to increase their product adoption at a price point impossible for their competitors to achieve with a similar quality product.
Apple further has a large, diverse ecosystem within which the HomePod will play an increasing role, which will further differentiate it from the competition.
I don’t see how it is possible for a small (compared to Apple) company like Spotify to compete unless they make some cheap crap and hope that it becomes a cult hit. They will of course talk about their music expertise and will get some big recording names talking about how amazing their product is, but ultimately they will fail. I think that failure will be clear on their first generation speaker within a year.
If Spotify recognizes #1 and gets a large amount of capitol from investors to create and launch the speaker, their death in the bankruptcy courts will arrive as swiftly and relentlessly as an oncoming train.
I have a pair of Goldenear Tritons, which are serious high end speakers. The damn HomePod is better in a small area. I can’t believe how good it is. Game over. Apple wins!
I think this is Spotify’s way os saying their business model, while successful today, is doomed long term.
HAHAHAHAHA, how do you mean successful today? Do you know that Spotify hasn't made a profit since they first started? That they lose more and more money every year. I don't know about you, but to me, that's not very successful at all. Seems like a money pit. Getting into the hardware game is a faster way to end up out of business. Quite frankly, I can't believe anyone is still willing to give them money to keep the lights on.
Comments
Samsung probably should buy Spotify although they'll mess it up anyway. They already own Harman and well, they have Bixby, so in theory they's have all the pieces they need. I do worry about the future of Spotify as they probably can't last on their own and they'd be ruined by whoever buys them.
As for voice playback control, it may be the new speaker talking point, but in all the years iOS has supported it I've never used it IRL. It's always browsing my music in iTunes or Music app and initiating playback once I find what I'm in the mood for. The cognitive load of browsing is lighter than trying to recall my entire library from memory.
Good to see you're still on your agenda tho. Must...muddy...the waters...
Could we try being intellectually honest for just two seconds? HP does not support Spotify any more than my 40 year old passive, external film projector speaker does, both relying on brains elsewhere to relay the data. I don't think most people's expectation from a $350 "smart" speaker is that it's just a peripheral for their phones.
1. Spotify simply doesn’t have the money to make and support a quality speaker and out-market Apple.
2. If they make a mediocre-quality speaker, they will join the race to the bottom by the non-Apple companies.
3. Spotify only has music in their ecosystem, and the profits are too thin and tenuous to support #1 (and getting thinner by the week). Apple has a robust ecosystem that does not rely on music.
4. Spotify has no advanced AI. Sure, they can purchase an SDK or license an AI from someone, but they can never hope to outperform their competitors by renting the competitors’ AI.
5. I see absolutely no marketing advantage for them to offer a speaker. They may offer something like lifetime free Spotify if you buy (and use instead of selling on eBay) their speaker in a misguided effort to create a tiny ecosystem. If so, that strategy will fail before it takes off, they will stop supporting the speakers, and the people who bought them will ultimately have the restriction of using their hardware lifted (and will keep lifetime free service).
6. This product failure will significantly cheapen the Spotify brand. It will also reduce confidence in investors and will ultimately increase their rate of descent into bankruptcy.
7. All competition, however brief, is good for consumers, as it trends toward better products.
Apple has created a very high quality speaker that, despite their enormous buying power, is still expensive for them to build. It would be more expensive for smaller companies to build since they lack the economy of scale that Apple does. Apple is taking a relatively small profit per unit in a strategy designed to increase their product adoption at a price point impossible for their competitors to achieve with a similar quality product.
Apple further has a large, diverse ecosystem within which the HomePod will play an increasing role, which will further differentiate it from the competition.
I don’t see how it is possible for a small (compared to Apple) company like Spotify to compete unless they make some cheap crap and hope that it becomes a cult hit. They will of course talk about their music expertise and will get some big recording names talking about how amazing their product is, but ultimately they will fail. I think that failure will be clear on their first generation speaker within a year.
If Spotify recognizes #1 and gets a large amount of capitol from investors to create and launch the speaker, their death in the bankruptcy courts will arrive as swiftly and relentlessly as an oncoming train.
HAHAHAHAHA, how do you mean successful today? Do you know that Spotify hasn't made a profit since they first started? That they lose more and more money every year. I don't know about you, but to me, that's not very successful at all. Seems like a money pit. Getting into the hardware game is a faster way to end up out of business. Quite frankly, I can't believe anyone is still willing to give them money to keep the lights on.
https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7833686/spotify-2016-losses-financial-results-revenue
The more people that sign up, the more money they make, and the more money, in the end, they lose as they stay in the red.