Apple looks to reinvent home music with $349 HomePod, an Amazon Echo and Sonos competitor

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 43
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,936member

    [...]


    This badly needs a subwoofer.  And when it does get one, you potentially have a fantastic home speaker system. Just buy as many as you want. Get 7 plus a subwoofer.
    It has a subwoofer....nobody knows what it sounds like so until then we don't know what it does or doesn't need. 
    edited June 2017 patchythepiratewatto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 43
    ibillibill Posts: 392member
    Wall Street yawned.
  • Reply 23 of 43
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,448member
    ibill said:
    Wall Street yawned.
    For now.
  • Reply 24 of 43
    ibillibill Posts: 392member
    eightzero said:
    ibill said:
    Wall Street yawned.
    For now.
    Yes. They have no imagination over there. I think it looks pretty good, will be interesting to see what all it can do over time.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 43
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,390member
    ibill said:
    eightzero said:
    ibill said:
    Wall Street yawned.
    For now.
    Yes. They have no imagination over there. I think it looks pretty good, will be interesting to see what all it can do over time.

    Hopefully it does better than last time Apple tried to reinvent home audio
  • Reply 26 of 43
    I feel $350 is way way to expensive.  I would think that would greatly shrink the potential market interested in one.  I thought at first it would cost maybe $150-$200 at most. I don't see many people buying one at $350. Wow.
  • Reply 27 of 43
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,048member

    [..]


    This badly needs a subwoofer.  And when it does get one, you potentially have a fantastic home speaker system. Just buy as many as you want. Get 7 plus a subwoofer.
     In addition to the A8 chip, it has 7 tweeters and a dynamic modeling subwoofer.


    watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 43
    redhotfuzzredhotfuzz Posts: 298member
    What I would like to see is an Apple center-channel speaker with built-in amp and AppleTV plus the new Siri functionalities. Give it multiple HDMI inputs and speaker/ subwoofer output. Make it dead easy to use. Also, automatic sound processing based on your preferences. I like 7.1 for video but 7-channel stereo for music. Let me set it and forget it. A/V receivers are a pain in the butt. That market is in desperate need of a revolution. 
  • Reply 29 of 43
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,273member
    I feel $350 is way way to expensive.  I would think that would greatly shrink the potential market interested in one.  I thought at first it would cost maybe $150-$200 at most. I don't see many people buying one at $350. Wow.

    There will be enough people that purchase.    The high volume price point is $199 for a multi-room capable wifi speaker but the speakers don't start sounding good until you get to the $299 price point.    Provided Apple's boasting of quality is met with consumer approval and considering that each speaker has the same multiple microphone setup that a $50 Echo Dot has I say Apple's right on target or even a superior deal because no other vendor has as much processing power (A8) behind their product. 
  • Reply 30 of 43

    Apple has been notoriously poor at audio products. This one is no different.

    Years ago, self-promoter audio charlatan Tomlinson Holman went to “work” at Apple – hired by Steve Jobs when Holman was retained to advise Jobs on an audio system for his new yacht. 

    This is the best Holman could come up with after all these years?

    And why doesn't it have "Dolby Atmos"?  This new so-called surround sound format is being stuffed into all sorts of devices (actually, it's just the logo that's being stuffed into them).  

    I hope this "direct/reflecting" Bose-type speaker qualifies for THX approval.

  • Reply 31 of 43
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,048member

    Apple has been notoriously poor at audio products. This one is no different.

    Years ago, self-promoter audio charlatan Tomlinson Holman went to “work” at Apple – hired by Steve Jobs when Holman was retained to advise Jobs on an audio system for his new yacht. 

    This is the best Holman could come up with after all these years?

    And why doesn't it have "Dolby Atmos"?  This new so-called surround sound format is being stuffed into all sorts of devices (actually, it's just the logo that's being stuffed into them).  

    I hope this "direct/reflecting" Bose-type speaker qualifies for THX approval.

    This post does not contribute anything important besides whining. Oh, it's her/his second post? OK, got it.
    radarthekat
  • Reply 32 of 43
    bestkeptsecretbestkeptsecret Posts: 3,366member
    Eric_WVGG said:

    I disagree here. This is not something intended for home theatre audio systems. Apple is partnering with Bose and other third party manufacturers to provide HomeKit compatibility for home theatre systems and other large speakers…
    That's a good point.

    I've long been flummoxed by the lack of support for "Airplay 1" by home stereo systems, so I suppose I'm a little skeptical of Bose picking up the slack… but bravo if it comes together this time around.

    Denon and Yamaha seem to support Airplay.
  • Reply 33 of 43
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,309member
    Eric_WVGG said:

    I disagree here. This is not something intended for home theatre audio systems. Apple is partnering with Bose and other third party manufacturers to provide HomeKit compatibility for home theatre systems and other large speakers…
    That's a good point.

    I've long been flummoxed by the lack of support for "Airplay 1" by home stereo systems, so I suppose I'm a little skeptical of Bose picking up the slack… but bravo if it comes together this time around.

    Denon and Yamaha seem to support Airplay.
    Pioneer has it.
  • Reply 34 of 43
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,979member
    I feel $350 is way way to expensive.  I would think that would greatly shrink the potential market interested in one.  I thought at first it would cost maybe $150-$200 at most. I don't see many people buying one at $350. Wow.
    People whined the same way with Apple Watch. Guess what happened 3 years later. BTW, Apple doesn't make cheap stuffs but premium gadgets with higher quality than the rest of the industry. If you compare this HomePod with Amazon Echo or Google Home, you only touch the functions of the device not the hardware quality because the speaker from this HomePod is, by miles better those cheapshits in Echo or G-Home.
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 35 of 43
    boboliciousbobolicious Posts: 597member
    jSnively said:
    Eric_WVGG said:
    If anyone here is at WWDC, could you check and see if it has some sort of audio line-in? 
    Dan is there. Says no line-in.
    No hardware line in? Does Apple want your data...?
    Seven horn loaded high frequency drivers gets my attention...
    No line out for subwoofer, not so much... It used to be simpler...
    Drivers, caps, coils, a resistor or two - I hope this fulfills the promise...

    edited June 2017
  • Reply 36 of 43
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,071member
    fallenjt said:
    I feel $350 is way way to expensive.  I would think that would greatly shrink the potential market interested in one.  I thought at first it would cost maybe $150-$200 at most. I don't see many people buying one at $350. Wow.
    People whined the same way with Apple Watch. Guess what happened 3 years later. BTW, Apple doesn't make cheap stuffs but premium gadgets with higher quality than the rest of the industry. If you compare this HomePod with Amazon Echo or Google Home, you only touch the functions of the device not the hardware quality because the speaker from this HomePod is, by miles better those cheapshits in Echo or G-Home.
    You seem to have missed his point:

    "I would think that would greatly shrink the potential market interested in one."

    Your Apple Watch comment doesn't counter his statement. The Echo Line and Google Home were designed to be affordable and focus on smart assistance while doing other things too. From there you can add features and move up into higher tiers. This is happening but clearly the main goal was to get as many as possible into homes first. Price helps with that goal.

    While the OP is perfectly correct with his opinion, I feel that Apple will also want to get as many of these into people's homes too, so at some point I think we could see a basic version without the same audio quality for music.

    Of course they couldn't do that now as people would say they were copying Amazon, the device is still in development and Siri isn't up to the task of competing with Amazon in this space.

    Come December, when the product actually ships, we will see if there is much audio difference with other speakers and how Amazon/Google respond.

    $349, on the face of it seems valid but if the final price, including sales taxes etc is over 350€ for example in Europe, I think it might struggle somewhat. 


  • Reply 37 of 43
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,767member
    fallenjt said:
    I feel $350 is way way to expensive.  I would think that would greatly shrink the potential market interested in one.  I thought at first it would cost maybe $150-$200 at most. I don't see many people buying one at $350. Wow.
    People whined the same way with Apple Watch. Guess what happened 3 years later. BTW, Apple doesn't make cheap stuffs but premium gadgets with higher quality than the rest of the industry. If you compare this HomePod with Amazon Echo or Google Home, you only touch the functions of the device not the hardware quality because the speaker from this HomePod is, by miles better those cheapshits in Echo or G-Home.
    I think that Apple could easily sell a $600 HomePodPlus that was a little bigger and also included inputs for optical audio, Ethernet, and an audio in port.  Maybe in a couple years.
  • Reply 38 of 43
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,608member
    Apple says it will know your playlists and the music you like, but how does it deal with a family of four with a family plan? And which device will be prioritized when someone in the room says 'hey Siri'? I am sure Apple has this in hand but I am curious. 

  • Reply 39 of 43
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,608member
    k2kw said:
    fallenjt said:
    I feel $350 is way way to expensive.  I would think that would greatly shrink the potential market interested in one.  I thought at first it would cost maybe $150-$200 at most. I don't see many people buying one at $350. Wow.
    People whined the same way with Apple Watch. Guess what happened 3 years later. BTW, Apple doesn't make cheap stuffs but premium gadgets with higher quality than the rest of the industry. If you compare this HomePod with Amazon Echo or Google Home, you only touch the functions of the device not the hardware quality because the speaker from this HomePod is, by miles better those cheapshits in Echo or G-Home.
    I think that Apple could easily sell a $600 HomePodPlus that was a little bigger and also included inputs for optical audio, Ethernet, and an audio in port.  Maybe in a couple years.
    The way I imagine myself using it is to pick the music on my iPhone and then tell Siri to play it through the pod. If I always knew what I wanted to listen to then the pod alone would be good, but that doesn't work for me. I like to browse and I like to select. 
  • Reply 40 of 43
    Eric_WVGG said:
    If no line-in, that's a pity. A lot of folks will be weighing a Sonos vs this; Sonos will do their TV audio without latency. I'm sure this'll work with AppleTV, but that's useless for other boxes, Playstations and Xboxen, etc.

    Regardless, I'm one of the rare fans of the Apple HiFi, nice to see it live on in some kind of form.
    Aren't there enough speakers with audio line in?

    Why can't we just have a nice wireless speaker? The best wireless speaker for Apple households.
Sign In or Register to comment.