bitmod

Hey Mike, 
I totally disagree with your analysis of the number of people upgrading RAM. I know for a fact that number is much much higher. 

Apple charges 3x the price for RAM upgrades. Your numbers make sense when you look at the data Apple has - which shows people are smart enough to not order ram from Apple. 
I think a better way to determine the true number is to ask a company like OWC how business is? Determine their market share, extrapolate sales / new machines sold etc... 

I've upgraded the RAM on my own for every Mac I've ever owned (40-50 computers). 
On top of that, I've upgraded all of my friends Mac's with ram (100+ computers).
On top of that, I upgrade all of my clients computers with RAM or direct them to OWC (300+ computers).

Thats about 450 computers with upgraded RAM that Apple, or anyone else, has zero data on... and I'm just 1 guy. 
I have many peers who do the same for their friends and clients. 
I could easily estimate over 3000+ computers. 

I would argue the type of people answering your poll here are 'unlikely' to be upgraders. 
If you ran the same poll on Barefeats - it would probably be close to 100% upgrade their RAM on their own. 

"Siri, play me something I'd like"
Siri: "Ok, here's what I've found about a lake"

freerange said:

bitmod said:

Man, surprising news - considering people can get the equivalent of a $50,000 audiophile system for $350 - plus the added bonus of a smart system (according to the usual AI fanboys). 
Meanwhile, back in reality - I think there are a few barriers:
- Privacy. Not a lot of people want an 'always listening' device. 
- Competition. There are better 'smart' systems out there.
- Sound Quality. It's good for a smart speaker - but audiophiles don't buy toys to listen to audio. If sound quality is your main priority - a smart speaker isn't on your radar. 
- Limitations. No Spotify or 3rd party native support. Extremely limited connection capabilities. 
- Requires Apple Music Subscription to take advantage of 'smart' functionality. 

But it sure fills a hallway with good sound... 

Utter nonsense...

Privacy: wrong! The reason Siri doesn’t work as well as some others out there in some situations only BECAUSE of Apple’s strong focus on privacy!
- Competition: wrong again. As said over and over, the main focus is on audio quality and that is where Apple nailed it. The others are the equivalent of AM radios of the past.
- Sound Quality: wrong again. Audiophile reviews give it the highest praise for sound quality, competing with exponentially more expensive speakers.
- Limitations: Spotify or third party support. Seriously? You can do that through your iPhone  or other Apple devices that support AirPlay. And no telling what Apple has in store for the future.
- Airplay also solves your last point.

- Privacy: Wrong. Snowden. History. Don't be naive. 
- Sound Quality: Highest praise for sound quality for a 'SMART SPEAKER'. Again, a smart speaker. Smart Speaker... smart speaker. Get it? 
- The point of this device is that it is a 'Smart Speaker'... yes it has Airplay, but it is just a speaker if using anything other than AM for streaming services. 

foggyhill said:

bitmod said:

Man, surprising news - considering people can get the equivalent of a $50,000 audiophile system for $350 - plus the added bonus of a smart system (according to the usual AI fanboys). 
Meanwhile, back in reality - I think there are a few barriers:
- Privacy. Not a lot of people want an 'always listening' device. 
- Competition. There are better 'smart' systems out there.
- Sound Quality. It's good for a smart speaker - but audiophiles don't buy toys to listen to audio. If sound quality is your main priority - a smart speaker isn't on your radar. 
- Limitations. No Spotify or 3rd party native support. Extremely limited connection capabilities. 
- Requires Apple Music Subscription to take advantage of 'smart' functionality. 

But it sure fills a hallway with good sound... 

Blah blah blah, show the receipt or you're just blowing wind. At the end of the first year of sales, when Cook will give a hint at actual sales numbers (like he did for the Watch and airpods) I'm sure you'll be here to let me beat you up with that hmm. Not counting on it of course.

Nothing to "beat me up" about... the HomePod is a fine product for some people I'm sure. 
I'm just saying it's not for a lot of people - not with the barriers I've listed.
It's a confusing product, and definitely not Apple's best foot forward out of the gate. 

I'm just not sure where the market is for the HP? It's not reference sound, it's not as smart as the competition...
Admit it... it's kind of in an awkward spot at the moment. 

It's a perfect dorm-room toy for some kid who wants something other than headphones thou. 

Will it get more than 3% of the smart speaker marketshare? Probably a bit more. It just came out. 

Man, surprising news - considering people can get the equivalent of a $50,000 audiophile system for $350 - plus the added bonus of a smart system (according to the usual AI fanboys). 
Meanwhile, back in reality - I think there are a few barriers:
- Privacy. Not a lot of people want an 'always listening' device. 
- Competition. There are better 'smart' systems out there.
- Sound Quality. It's good for a smart speaker - but audiophiles don't buy toys to listen to audio. If sound quality is your main priority - a smart speaker isn't on your radar. 
- Limitations. No Spotify or 3rd party native support. Extremely limited connection capabilities. 
- Requires Apple Music Subscription to take advantage of 'smart' functionality. 

But it sure fills a hallway with good sound...