robbyx

foregoneconclusion said:

robbyx said:  Anyone who seriously cares about audio quality isn’t buying a HomePod. That person is buying a Sonos Connect Amp, an Echo or a Google Home and connecting actual high end speakers.

In how many rooms of the house are they going to put in a large scale audiophile quality component system? It's like TVs...most people will typically have a larger primary system that they might sink serious $$ into, then some more compact and less expensive models in other parts of the house/apartment. 

A Sonos Connect box is much smaller than a HomePod. Echo and Home can both connect to powered speakers.  I’m not talking about a large scale audiophile setup.  But I agree that most people have a mix. I use Sonos with my built-in speakers so I stick with Sonos for the rooms that don’t have built-ins.  I tried HomePod. It was ok. Not as good as my Play5, but definitely a great sounding speaker.  I think Apple is kidding themselves, though, if they think HomePod is for audiophiles and that its audio chops are its distinguishing feature.  As others have said, smart speaker consumers aren’t exactly audiophiles. They care about price more than anything. Audiophiles want better speakers than any of these products offer. At least with Echo and Home, audiophiles can pick their speakers. Sonos still offers the best of all choices because the consumer can mix Sonos speakers with speakers of their choice. I hope Apple makes a speaker-less HomePod like the Sonos Connect. 

StrangeDays said:

robbyx said:

DAalseth said:

blastdoor said:

DAalseth said:

SJ once said something about skating to where the puck will be. That's fine, but occasionally even Gretzky skated to where he expected it to be but the play went somewhere else.

Apple thought the point of a Smart Speaker was the speaker. The market is going for smart. This means that comparatively lousy sounding entries from Amazon and Google with better AIs and a cheaper price are beating out Apple whose product may have great sound but is crippled by a poor AI and very high cost.

Apple just messed up, that's all. It happens.

I agree they messed up, but I don't think they messed up by having a high quality speaker. I think that was the right thing to do (it's why I bought a HomePod). They messed up by having a crappy AI. If they fix that, then I think they can get their usual 10 to 15% of the market, skimmed right off the top (where all the profit lives). 

As I've said since they first released then HomePod the market for top quality $350 speakers is not that big. Most people want noise. Something that will play that movie for the kids, or that TV show while I make dinner. Fidelity isn't that important to the majority of households. Heck, most people use the speakers that came with their TV, and $10 ear buds. So for not much money they can get a speaker that sounds maybe marginally better than the ones in the TV, but they can ask it questions, or Apple's offering is much better in the realm of what most people don't care much about, but costs a lot more. It should not be a surprise that the HomePod is stuck in the low single digits of the market. Unless we want to say that the HomePod is not competing with Google and Amazon and is just a top end speaker. If that's the case we should stop worrying about the HomePod's market share among smart speakers at all. 

Anyone who seriously cares about audio quality isn’t buying a HomePod. That person is buying a Sonos Connect Amp, an Echo or a Google Home and connecting actual high end speakers.

Apple focused on the wrong product attributes. Siri is weak compared to Google and Amazon. Everyone knows this. Why spend a lot more for marginally better sound and the worst assistant?  It makes no sense. I wish Apple had waited a year or two and really blown us away with a seriously upgraded Siri.

Ah “everybody knows”, except poor, poor Apple. So sad. 

Nah. I did a gimmicky “assistant”. I need to play good sounding music and control my home automation. I’m not going to be asking for toilet paper, movie tickets, or any other gimmicky crap. 

I don’t think Apple knows what it’s doing when it comes to home audio. HomePod is a me-too product, the first Apple product in a long time that didn’t improve upon the category, much less reimagine what that type of product should be.  Siri is less capable and while the hardware might be good, it’s not that special. The real opportunity to innovate lies with Siri and Apple is woefully behind there.

I agree with the comment to which I replied. Most people who buy this type of product don’t care too much about audio quality. Good enough is more than fine. And my comment stands. People who care a lot about audio quality aren’t buying HomePod. They buy higher end speakers and connect them to things like Sonos Connect or an Echo or Home via a receiver.

Apple tried to distinguish HomePod with its audiophile chops and it didn’t work.  The assistant is what matters. 

DAalseth said:

blastdoor said:

DAalseth said:

SJ once said something about skating to where the puck will be. That's fine, but occasionally even Gretzky skated to where he expected it to be but the play went somewhere else.

Apple thought the point of a Smart Speaker was the speaker. The market is going for smart. This means that comparatively lousy sounding entries from Amazon and Google with better AIs and a cheaper price are beating out Apple whose product may have great sound but is crippled by a poor AI and very high cost.

Apple just messed up, that's all. It happens.

I agree they messed up, but I don't think they messed up by having a high quality speaker. I think that was the right thing to do (it's why I bought a HomePod). They messed up by having a crappy AI. If they fix that, then I think they can get their usual 10 to 15% of the market, skimmed right off the top (where all the profit lives). 

As I've said since they first released then HomePod the market for top quality $350 speakers is not that big. Most people want noise. Something that will play that movie for the kids, or that TV show while I make dinner. Fidelity isn't that important to the majority of households. Heck, most people use the speakers that came with their TV, and $10 ear buds. So for not much money they can get a speaker that sounds maybe marginally better than the ones in the TV, but they can ask it questions, or Apple's offering is much better in the realm of what most people don't care much about, but costs a lot more. It should not be a surprise that the HomePod is stuck in the low single digits of the market. Unless we want to say that the HomePod is not competing with Google and Amazon and is just a top end speaker. If that's the case we should stop worrying about the HomePod's market share among smart speakers at all. 

Anyone who seriously cares about audio quality isn’t buying a HomePod. That person is buying a Sonos Connect Amp, an Echo or a Google Home and connecting actual high end speakers.

Apple focused on the wrong product attributes. Siri is weak compared to Google and Amazon. Everyone knows this. Why spend a lot more for marginally better sound and the worst assistant?  It makes no sense. I wish Apple had waited a year or two and really blown us away with a seriously upgraded Siri.

nunzy said:

I guess HomePod hadn't been invented yet. Otherwise they would have have simply plugged one in to the wall socket in each room of the SpaceShip.

They claim to have been working on HomePod for many years. They could easily have chosen to use it.  Deploying a HomePod based system on that scale would have been most impressive.

Soli said:

I feel like Google is far too profitable to have such bad marketing, by which I mean all their name changes. Are their first run name just trial versions until they work out the inks and then go with the name that most closely resembles Apple's naming convention?

What are you talking about?  Google News has existed since 2002, long before the iPhone.

news.google.com