robbyx

mike1 said:

robbyx said:

StrangeDays said:

somebody’s worried about being fitbitted...

the Sonos One is a single-channel speaker. funny nobody had panic attacks about it being mono...yet now people are upset at the multi-channel HP and its seven drivers!

Sonos has nothing to worry about. Apple doesn’t offer a range of speakers like Sonos.  Everyone is comparing the entry level Sonos offerings to HomePod, but Sonos offers far better speakers than the Sonos One or Play:1. I guarantee the HomePod doesn’t come close to a Play:5, much less two Play:5 speakers linked together, a feature Apple promised and delayed.

Of course none of these speakers will satisfy a true “audiophile” (I’m not talking about the sudden crop of overnight “audiophiles” eagerly awaiting HomePod as if no other good speaker exists). Thankfully Sonos has true audiophiles covered with the Connect and Connect:Amp options. One connects to your existing home stereo systems to play music through legitimate high end speakers. The other provides an amp so no home stereo system is necessary.

Apple can’t compete with Sonos. They simply don’t offer what Sonos does, no matter how good HomePod sounds.  Discounting and bundling the Sonos One is a smart move. It steals a bit of Apple’s thunder (not that there’s much thunder around HomePod’s delayed and feature incomplete release), plus highlights just how weak Apple’s offering is compared to Sonos.

Let’s see, I can get one speaker with a half-baked voice assistant that supports a single music service...or two speakers that can link to create true stereo output, that work with numerous music services (including the only one supported by HomePod), and allow me to use a variety of voice assistants.  Seems like a no brainer to me. 

"Apple can’t compete with Sonos."

Hah! Famous last words. Just ask Blackberry and Amazon how well the phone biz is working out for them now. What was the market share of every MP3 player compared to the iPod?

It's good that Sonos appears to not share your opinion. They do have a lot to worry about. The industry's best-run and most successful HARDWARE company just decided to play in their sandbox. So, this is probably a smart defensive move to keep their dealers happy for a few more minutes.

As they've done before, I'd bet Apple opens up HomePod to 3rd parties gradually. I believe you'll see more music and other services offered soon. Maybe even announced at WWDC this year.

That said, I believe Sonos doesn't think this is a "no-brainer" and may or may not survive or grow by going in directions that Apple is not. Can their "better" stuff support the business with decreased sales of their entry-level product? I don't know, but it looks like they may find out.

Hate to break it to you, but Apple already tried to play in the high end speaker sandbox and we all know how well the iPod HiFi sold.  Don’t be so cocky. Everything Apple touches isn’t a guaranteed success and HomePod offers no stand out features.

And no, Apple can’t compete with Sonos.  I’m not saying that HomePod is a bad product. I’m sure it sounds great. But it’s one product. Sonos offers a range of products from simple Wi-Fi speakers like HomePod to soundbars and subs for home theater setups to speakerless boxes that either connect to an existing home stereo or drive TRUE high end speakers of the consumer’s choice. Apple offers none of this. So no, they can’t compete with Sonos. 

StrangeDays said:

somebody’s worried about being fitbitted...

the Sonos One is a single-channel speaker. funny nobody had panic attacks about it being mono...yet now people are upset at the multi-channel HP and its seven drivers!

Sonos has nothing to worry about. Apple doesn’t offer a range of speakers like Sonos.  Everyone is comparing the entry level Sonos offerings to HomePod, but Sonos offers far better speakers than the Sonos One or Play:1. I guarantee the HomePod doesn’t come close to a Play:5, much less two Play:5 speakers linked together, a feature Apple promised and delayed.

Of course none of these speakers will satisfy a true “audiophile” (I’m not talking about the sudden crop of overnight “audiophiles” eagerly awaiting HomePod as if no other good speaker exists). Thankfully Sonos has true audiophiles covered with the Connect and Connect:Amp options. One connects to your existing home stereo systems to play music through legitimate high end speakers. The other provides an amp so no home stereo system is necessary.

Apple can’t compete with Sonos. They simply don’t offer what Sonos does, no matter how good HomePod sounds.  Discounting and bundling the Sonos One is a smart move. It steals a bit of Apple’s thunder (not that there’s much thunder around HomePod’s delayed and feature incomplete release), plus highlights just how weak Apple’s offering is compared to Sonos.

Let’s see, I can get one speaker with a half-baked voice assistant that supports a single music service...or two speakers that can link to create true stereo output, that work with numerous music services (including the only one supported by HomePod), and allow me to use a variety of voice assistants.  Seems like a no brainer to me. 

docno42 said:

appex said:

I am using an Apple Cinema Display 22-inch purchased almost 18 years ago and it works great. And it has been on an average of 15 hours a day, 356 days each year.

Only because you don’t know any better.  If you had a brand new,  identical one and placed it next to your well used 18 year old one the difference would be startling.  Never mind the advances in display technology in the last 18 years.  Even if you just deal with text and surf the web, Retina displays are a LOT easier on the eyes.

Now, I still prefer to have my display seperated from my computer - but claiming that most people should still be using the same display 18 years later or your trashing the planet is more than a little hyperbolic.

Not to mention power consumption. I’m pretty sure today’s displays use a lot less energy than an 18 year old dinosaur. 

One of the things that drives me absolutely crazy about the iPhone is how it holds on to Wi-Fi networks with a weak signal and network connectivity just fails. It won’t switch to LTE but the Wi-Fi signal is too weak for anything to work. So I have to manually turn off Wi-Fi and wait for it switch over. It’s been this way for years.  I don’t understand why iOS doesn’t drop these weak Wi-Fi signals sooner or at least give the user a setting to drop Wi-Fi and switch to LTE when signal strength is less than x. 

gmgravytrain said:

All I know is those who want the iMac Pro will pay for it. I don't know why there are always these people who keep saying Apple is overcharging. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head who walks into an Apple store and buys one of their products. Who is being forced to buy an Apple product? Those who buy Apple products must think they're worth the price. I'm not sure why there are people constantly calling Apple product owners fools. That's like saying a person who buys a Porsche is a fool because they can buy a cheaper car with similar specs. If you want a Porsche, then you buy a Porsche and don't want to accept substitutes.

All my Macs have lasted five years and some are running longer than that. For me to pay $5000 for the base iMac Pro is great if I can use it well for five years. That's just $1000 a year and will likely be maintenance free for that time as all my other Macs (except one) was. To me, that's the type of service I'm looking for. I don't care if my specs are slightly lower than some other computer that's cheaper. I honestly want a trouble-free, long-lasting product. People can call me stupid but that's the type of product I'm looking for. Although I could, I'm definitely not going to buy a bunch of components to build my own Windows workstation. I want to run OSX and I'm going to have AppleCare just in case something does go wrong.

Time is money.  If you enjoy building a computer and fiddling with everything to get it working, great. But if that's not your idea of fun, you might as well buy what you need and spend your time on things that matter to you. I agree 100% with your assessment. I feel the same. I'd rather buy a more expensive machine and have time to bill enough hours to make up the difference than waste a weekend building a computer.