Can't believe people are comparing a $30 piece of trash that is literally included as a freebie with SO many tech products, etc, to a $300 audiophile grade, ultra high quality speaker as if theyre even remotely comparable.
“Amazon maintains massive lead over Apple in US smart speaker market” ... until you exclude AM-radio quality spyware devices under $200. You know, the category the HomePod isn’t competing in at all.
...Rakin and Jobs didn’t bite tho. Instead of trying to appeal to everyone, they narrow-casted for their use cases. Hard not to see HP the same way — it’s not a piece of general home theater equipment, it’s a solution for within the walled garden.
We have two and use them daily for movies, TV, and home automation primarily. Music secondary.
Ah Alexa devices. Big Brother Bezos's personal spy in your homes. Always listening in on your conversations and phoning home to the Amazon Mothership.
Perfect but we are not living in a '1984' world just yet.
I'm not in the market for any devices like this. I do know one thing and that is I would never have an Amazon or Google device in my home.
If you want to give up what is left of your private life to Big Business then by all means go ahead but leave me out. I've resorted to telling people whom I visit (as part of my charity work) that have these bits of tat in their homes to turn them off before I can start my work. If they refuse, I leave.
Ah Alexa devices. Big Brother Bezos's personal spy in your homes. Always listening in on your conversations and phoning home to the Amazon Mothership.
Perfect but we are not living in a '1984' world just yet.
I'm not in the market for any devices like this. I do know one thing and that is I would never have an Amazon or Google device in my home.
If you want to give up what is left of your private life to Big Business then by all means go ahead but leave me out. I've resorted to telling people whom I visit (as part of my charity work) that have these bits of tat in their homes to turn them off before I can start my work. If they refuse, I leave.
Knock on my door and tell me what to do in my own house and you would definitely leave .. probably with a lot of help.
This would be the second Apple speaker that has failed to get traction. If I was advising them, I would probably kill the HomePod and acquire a company (Sonos would be my first choice) assuming they still want to compete in this category. Just my 2 cents...
Apple built a business with HomePod in a year and a half that is pulling in about the same revenues as Sonos in its fifth year. Not clear how buying Sonos would further Apple's HomePods/AirPlay2 business. Would it kill existing models? Does Apple need to destroy or remove from the market a minor competitor to build its own product?
But more importantly, why would Apple build a Sonos-sized business, then throw it away to ACQUIRE Sonos, which doesn't further Apple's goals, delivers less to customers, and is less profitable? That doesn't make sense on any level.
As for emarketer, the company publishes these oddly precise numbers that tell us absolutely nothing of interest. We know Amazon is shipping out the most WiFi speakers at around $30. We know Google is also shipping its own, with less success even giving them away. The only thing of interest is how well other rivals are doing in the real business of selling speakers people pay money for, and emarketer provides nothing here but a BS placeholder number for the entire group. That's clearly because it has no real idea and can't make up any numbers with any sort of supportable, defendable knowledge. Either that, or it is withholding data to prevent anyone else from knowing. Either way, totally worthless PR to publish.
The same firm did this with Apple Pay, generating extremely precise numbers that were totally made up, then a few months later published new numbers with zero correlation and which had nothing to do with its previous PR headlines and analysis and predictions. The main thrust of its Apple Pay PR was to attempt to make headlines that the "Starbucks app" was more popular than Apple Pay for making purchases, which is pure asinine rubbish on its face.
This would be the second Apple speaker that has failed to get traction. If I was advising them, I would probably kill the HomePod and acquire a company (Sonos would be my first choice) assuming they still want to compete in this category. Just my 2 cents...
Apple built a business with HomePod in a year and a half that is pulling in about the same revenues as Sonos in its fifth year. Not clear how buying Sonos would further Apple's HomePods/AirPlay2 business. Would it kill existing models? Does Apple need to destroy or remove from the market a minor competitor to build its own product?
But more importantly, why would Apple build a Sonos-sized business, then throw it away to ACQUIRE Sonos, which doesn't further Apple's goals, delivers less to customers, and is less profitable? That doesn't make sense on any level.
As for emarketer, the company publishes these oddly precise numbers that tell us absolutely nothing of interest. We know Amazon is shipping out the most WiFi speakers at around $30. We know Google is also shipping its own, with less success even giving them away. The only thing of interest is how well other rivals are doing in the real business of selling speakers people pay money for, and emarketer provides nothing here but a BS placeholder number for the entire group. That's clearly because it has no real idea and can't make up any numbers with any sort of supportable, defendable knowledge. Either that, or it is withholding data to prevent anyone else from knowing. Either way, totally worthless PR to publish.
The same firm did this with Apple Pay, generating extremely precise numbers that were totally made up, then a few months later published new numbers with zero correlation and which had nothing to do with its previous PR headlines and analysis and predictions. The main thrust of its Apple Pay PR was to attempt to make headlines that the "Starbucks app" was more popular than Apple Pay for making purchases, which is pure asinine rubbish on its face.
Where the heck is your source about the same revenue?
Not really in the market for a speaker, smart or otherwise. But if I was, there is no way I'd have one of those Amazon listening devices in my home.
I personally cannot fathom why anyone would willingly pay to have literal spyware in their homes. Speakers, videocameras, video doorbells: all beautifully designed to get people to build out mass surveillance infrastructure. George Orwell was wrong on one point: It's not Big Brother doing the dirty work, it's the people itself shelling out the dough and doing the installation.
I'm starting to feel bad enough having an always-on listening and tracking device in my pocket wherever I go. Honestly, if it weren't for Apple's push to up the ante on privacy mesures, I don't think I'd even have a smart phone. (And for anyone who thinks I just need to take my tinfoil hat off, at the very least we should be have a debate front-and-center on the potential for surveillance by public and private entities that think they're above the law on these matters.)
Not really in the market for a speaker, smart or otherwise. But if I was, there is no way I'd have one of those Amazon listening devices in my home.
Same here!
People debate the cost and functionality of these
devices while ignoring the fact that, with one of them (or two if you
include Google) you are paying a company to spy on you. Plus, with
potential hacking, it could be any number of others listening in as
well.
Are people not aware of that? Or are they intentionally ignoring that inconvenient truth? Or maybe they just don't care?
Of course if you count the ‘speakers’ on all the iPhones, iPad, Watches, Macs and Apple TV’s you find that Apple’s assistant is everywhere and with a much broader international and multi-lingual reach.
Personally, we love HomePod. It sounds great and interacts beautifully and effortlessly with all the other Apple stuff we have.
For example, with the new lyric feature in Apple Music, one of our favorite things is to play music from the Apple TV with the HomePods as a source. This is also a great setup for Music Videos. I can adjust playback from any iPhone or iPad in the house or even Apple Watch. This kind of integration is awesome!
I can’t believe I had to get this far down for someone to call this to the comment community’s attention. DED would be ashamed of us.
The “smart” speaker is in nearly every Apple device. The only reason the Echo is what it is is because the Fire phone failed and Amazon wanted Alex in peoples home at the cheapest price possible. Never mind google assistant and Siri already on everyone’s phones.
Was it a successful pivot from Fire Phone to Echo Speaker? We know that Amazon barely makes any profit on them given they are never NOT on sale. I’m sure they bring in a fair amount of revenue, but they definitely aren’t profit drivers.
If you can't win sales, change the definition of Smart Speaker. That does sound like DED.
Apple invented Siri and Homekit and for these companies to steal these and outsell Apple is a shame.
Of course these numbers aren't accurate but Alexa is becoming a household name in a market that should have been absolutely dominated by Siri and Apple.
Of course if you count the ‘speakers’ on all the iPhones, iPad, Watches, Macs and Apple TV’s you find that Apple’s assistant is everywhere and with a much broader international and multi-lingual reach.
Personally, we love HomePod. It sounds great and interacts beautifully and effortlessly with all the other Apple stuff we have.
For example, with the new lyric feature in Apple Music, one of our favorite things is to play music from the Apple TV with the HomePods as a source. This is also a great setup for Music Videos. I can adjust playback from any iPhone or iPad in the house or even Apple Watch. This kind of integration is awesome!
I can’t believe I had to get this far down for someone to call this to the comment community’s attention. DED would be ashamed of us.
The “smart” speaker is in nearly every Apple device. The only reason the Echo is what it is is because the Fire phone failed and Amazon wanted Alex in peoples home at the cheapest price possible. Never mind google assistant and Siri already on everyone’s phones.
Was it a successful pivot from Fire Phone to Echo Speaker? We know that Amazon barely makes any profit on them given they are never NOT on sale. I’m sure they bring in a fair amount of revenue, but they definitely aren’t profit drivers.
If you can't win sales, change the definition of Smart Speaker. That does sound like DED.
Apple NEVER intended to compete against Alexa and Google spy speakers. HomePod was in development before them. IDK why people think Apple invents their products in 3 months. Same with iKnockoff users who claim AirPods copied the first Galaxy Buds that released 3 months prior lol. Delusional.
I don’t know anyone with a HomePod. Sounds like the number 17.9% is a little high even with the sales they have had. I’m often surprised by the number of non-techie people have an echo. Has Apple published any numbers in the last year on the number of HomePods sold. I would not be surprised if a lot of them sold were stereo pairs at Christmas.
The 17.9% number isn't the HomePod market share number. It's the market share of the "Other" category. "Other" includes the HomePod and all the smart speakers that don't have significant enough market share to warrant a separate data point. Similar to the PC market share reports that lump the Surface devices in the "Other" category because the sales don't warrant a break out.
There are two products where there is a gap that Apple could fill 1. a good sound quality Atmos sound bar (nearly all are only 3.1), integrate AppeTV/Siri and you have a compelling product. 2. A universal remote that works! Even my Harmony fails to do the job - In 2020 I still have more than one remote - frustrating.
Not really in the market for a speaker, smart or otherwise. But if I was, there is no way I'd have one of those Amazon listening devices in my home.
Same here!
People debate the cost and functionality of these
devices while ignoring the fact that, with one of them (or two if you
include Google) you are paying a company to spy on you. Plus, with
potential hacking, it could be any number of others listening in as
well.
Are people not aware of that? Or are they intentionally ignoring that inconvenient truth? Or maybe they just don't care?
I think it comes down to what individuals consider to be “spying” and the perceived cost-benefit of opting into these services. I helped design and implement a customer loyal program more than 20 years ago and the goals of these programs were and still are: 1) to get customers to spend more money with the retailer, 2) to avoid having to compete on price, especially against the “everyday low prices” competition (yeh, Walmart), and 3) to acquire personalized spending habits data to feed targeted marketing campaigns. That’s about what you’d expect when the source data was acquired from transactions captured at point-of-sale terminals that is correlated to a customer loyalty identifier and its backing metadata. Would you consider this “spying” when the customer opted into the program?
I don’t see what Amazon does with Alexa to be any different than what retailers have been doing for decades, keeping in mind that every Alexa device is also a pervasive point-of-sale terminal. Sure, they throw in some bells and whistles like playing music and having Alexa sing songs and tell jokes. The retailers who have loyalty programs do the same thing, like a free turkey on thanksgiving or free check cashing. Is this spying?
Where things get fuzzy is when the data collected from these loyalty programs gets pushed or sold to third parties. Even way back in the earliest days of the customer loyalty and frequent shopper programs there were buyers out there willing to scoop up all the transaction information fro all point of sale transactions, e.g., Coca Cola. These companies would do additional processing and data mining on bulk data to drive their sales and distribution, and also to resell to other producers who sell into the same channels. I always likened it to an oil well, where the individual stores collect the raw crude at point-of-sale and several layers of refineries convert it into other products for different uses. Again, is this spying? Maybe it’s analytics?
I don’t consider any of this to be spying, but (a big but), it does create a vast surveillance network and the infrastructure that real spies, e.g., the NSA, can exploit for their purposes. I don’t believe that Amazon is spying on me through Alexa, but I do believe that real spies could coerce (or hack) Amazon and take advantage of the surveillance network that Amazon has put in place. This may sound scary, but every single personalized relationship that you’ve established with any vendor or service provider is equally at risk, be it your bank, cable TV provider, employer, college, mortgage company, electric utility, email, Facebook, etc. If real spies want to spy on you they have so many ways to do it already, so the incremental risk posed by interactive voice assistance from Echo, Siri, Google, etc., aren’t going to make much of a difference. If you’re a Facebook subscriber you’ve already setup a honeypot of rich contextual data that’s so easy to acquire, so why worry at all about Siri or Alexa?
If you want a cheap sound device on par with a transistor radio (old folks know what that is) that can answer trivia questions buy or better get get a free Amazon speaker. If you want a really great sound system for a fraction of the price of a high end amp and speakers get a pair of HomePods. No reason not to do both if you trust Amazon with your chitchat.
The problem with these kinds of articles is that Amazon never entered this market to profit from selling hardware. They were hoping to gain sales from customers using these devices to buy products from Amazon on the spur of the moment. Is that actually happening? From what little info has been released in that area, it doesn't sound like it's moved the needle much for sales.
I have a HomePod for the downstairs TV. I am less than impressed. For the price, I have seen similarly priced Visio Sound bars that outperform the HomePod as used as an external TV speaker. In my use case, the HomePod was purchased to link with the AppleTV, to provide a better sound for watching TV.
As a single unit, the HomePod sounds pretty good, playing music - but does not do as well reproducing dialog as a primary speaker for TV/movies. The sound is muddled, and the vocals unclear - the build-in sound from my 2003 Panasonic Plasma TV does vocal and dialog sound from the shows better. This is disappointing.
Most Home Theater units, including every iPhone, iPod and iPad have a built-in equalizer, to set the levels for different types of music (i.e.. jazz, classical, rock, etc.) and a home theater will also include EQ settings for movies, sports, etc. The HomePod has no such setting at all. Why?
I have a HomePod for the downstairs TV. I am less than impressed. For the price, I have seen similarly priced Visio Sound bars that outperform the HomePod as used as an external TV speaker. In my use case, the HomePod was purchased to link with the AppleTV, to provide a better sound for watching TV.
As a single unit, the HomePod sounds pretty good, playing music - but does not do as well reproducing dialog as a primary speaker for TV/movies. The sound is muddled, and the vocals unclear - the build-in sound from my 2003 Panasonic Plasma TV does vocal and dialog sound from the shows better. This is disappointing.
Most Home Theater units, including every iPhone, iPod and iPad have a built-in equalizer, to set the levels for different types of music (i.e.. jazz, classical, rock, etc.) and a home theater will also include EQ settings for movies, sports, etc. The HomePod has no such setting at all. Why?
I have both HomePods and Visio sound bar and apparently very different hearing abilities. I find the clarity of the paired HomePods running from the Apple TV 4K astoundingly clear and boy that Netflix audio start up sound makes the walls shake. E.Q. is often used to compensate not only for the source but also the acoustics of the environment (the two are hard to separate). The HomePods do this automatically and in real time. Close the curtains and the HomePods adjust.
hodar said: As a single unit, the HomePod sounds pretty good, playing music - but does not do as well reproducing dialog as a primary speaker for TV/movies. The sound is muddled, and the vocals unclear - the build-in sound from my 2003 Panasonic Plasma TV does vocal and dialog sound from the shows better. This is disappointing.
Apple has never specifically marketed the HomePod for use as a home theater speaker. Look at the main product page for it on Apple's web site and try to find something promoting that type of use.
Comments
Slots! Ah yes that’s the answer. Same thing people said about Macs since before they came out — more slots!
https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Diagnostic_Port.txt
...Rakin and Jobs didn’t bite tho. Instead of trying to appeal to everyone, they narrow-casted for their use cases. Hard not to see HP the same way — it’s not a piece of general home theater equipment, it’s a solution for within the walled garden.
We have two and use them daily for movies, TV, and home automation primarily. Music secondary.
But more importantly, why would Apple build a Sonos-sized business, then throw it away to ACQUIRE Sonos, which doesn't further Apple's goals, delivers less to customers, and is less profitable? That doesn't make sense on any level.
As for emarketer, the company publishes these oddly precise numbers that tell us absolutely nothing of interest. We know Amazon is shipping out the most WiFi speakers at around $30. We know Google is also shipping its own, with less success even giving them away. The only thing of interest is how well other rivals are doing in the real business of selling speakers people pay money for, and emarketer provides nothing here but a BS placeholder number for the entire group. That's clearly because it has no real idea and can't make up any numbers with any sort of supportable, defendable knowledge. Either that, or it is withholding data to prevent anyone else from knowing. Either way, totally worthless PR to publish.
The same firm did this with Apple Pay, generating extremely precise numbers that were totally made up, then a few months later published new numbers with zero correlation and which had nothing to do with its previous PR headlines and analysis and predictions. The main thrust of its Apple Pay PR was to attempt to make headlines that the "Starbucks app" was more popular than Apple Pay for making purchases, which is pure asinine rubbish on its face.
I'm starting to feel bad enough having an always-on listening and tracking device in my pocket wherever I go. Honestly, if it weren't for Apple's push to up the ante on privacy mesures, I don't think I'd even have a smart phone. (And for anyone who thinks I just need to take my tinfoil hat off, at the very least we should be have a debate front-and-center on the potential for surveillance by public and private entities that think they're above the law on these matters.)
Same here!
If you can't win sales, change the definition of Smart Speaker. That does sound like DED.
Of course these numbers aren't accurate but Alexa is becoming a household name in a market that should have been absolutely dominated by Siri and Apple.
Apple NEVER intended to compete against Alexa and Google spy speakers. HomePod was in development before them. IDK why people think Apple invents their products in 3 months. Same with iKnockoff users who claim AirPods copied the first Galaxy Buds that released 3 months prior lol. Delusional.
I don’t see what Amazon does with Alexa to be any different than what retailers have been doing for decades, keeping in mind that every Alexa device is also a pervasive point-of-sale terminal. Sure, they throw in some bells and whistles like playing music and having Alexa sing songs and tell jokes. The retailers who have loyalty programs do the same thing, like a free turkey on thanksgiving or free check cashing. Is this spying?
Where things get fuzzy is when the data collected from these loyalty programs gets pushed or sold to third parties. Even way back in the earliest days of the customer loyalty and frequent shopper programs there were buyers out there willing to scoop up all the transaction information fro all point of sale transactions, e.g., Coca Cola. These companies would do additional processing and data mining on bulk data to drive their sales and distribution, and also to resell to other producers who sell into the same channels. I always likened it to an oil well, where the individual stores collect the raw crude at point-of-sale and several layers of refineries convert it into other products for different uses. Again, is this spying? Maybe it’s analytics?
I don’t consider any of this to be spying, but (a big but), it does create a vast surveillance network and the infrastructure that real spies, e.g., the NSA, can exploit for their purposes. I don’t believe that Amazon is spying on me through Alexa, but I do believe that real spies could coerce (or hack) Amazon and take advantage of the surveillance network that Amazon has put in place. This may sound scary, but every single personalized relationship that you’ve established with any vendor or service provider is equally at risk, be it your bank, cable TV provider, employer, college, mortgage company, electric utility, email, Facebook, etc. If real spies want to spy on you they have so many ways to do it already, so the incremental risk posed by interactive voice assistance from Echo, Siri, Google, etc., aren’t going to make much of a difference. If you’re a Facebook subscriber you’ve already setup a honeypot of rich contextual data that’s so easy to acquire, so why worry at all about Siri or Alexa?
I have a HomePod for the downstairs TV. I am less than impressed. For the price, I have seen similarly priced Visio Sound bars that outperform the HomePod as used as an external TV speaker. In my use case, the HomePod was purchased to link with the AppleTV, to provide a better sound for watching TV.
As a single unit, the HomePod sounds pretty good, playing music - but does not do as well reproducing dialog as a primary speaker for TV/movies. The sound is muddled, and the vocals unclear - the build-in sound from my 2003 Panasonic Plasma TV does vocal and dialog sound from the shows better. This is disappointing.
Most Home Theater units, including every iPhone, iPod and iPad have a built-in equalizer, to set the levels for different types of music (i.e.. jazz, classical, rock, etc.) and a home theater will also include EQ settings for movies, sports, etc. The HomePod has no such setting at all. Why?