The HomePod seems pretty straightforward to me. It’s basically a smart speaker for consumers who are already using an iPhone and subscribed to Apple Music. Its role is to provide the best Apple experience for users already invested in the Apple ecosystem (since no other smart speaker used Siri, and even the echo didn’t support Apple Music until recently, and it’s still an extra step), while serving to further entrench them in the Apple ecosystem.
It may be straight forward, but the fact still remains that the HomePod is a limited use device that requires a very strict set of requirements to be useful. If you want a very good speaker, only subscribe to AppleMusic, don't care too much about Home automation (or only buy HomeKit), and are willing to pay more than the completion, then maybe the HomePod is right for you. But, if you subscribe to any other music service, want to connect to devices other than an Apple device (i.e. a TV, Roku, or (heavens!) an Android phone), the HomePod won't work.
Or maybe music is NOT the primary function you are looking for in the smart speaker. People keep posting how the "$30 dots" are the reason for Amazon's market share. So, what if they are right? Maybe most people want the "smart" part of Smart Speaker and not the "Speaker". Too many people seem to assume that their needs match the general public.
As with everything Apple does, you cannot just evaluate each item in a vacuum without also considering the role it plays within the larger ecosystem.
Sure you can, because the success or failure of a device is about how while it works within a customer's life. The HomePod is not a device designed to drive other sales. It is not the razor that drives blade sales. Unlike the AirPods or even AppleWatch, which both enhance the iPhone experience, the HomePod is essentially a standalone device (that just happens to need an iPhone to setup.) But, it doesn't have seem to have enough to appear to a mass market.
That said, I am still not convinced that the smart speaker market is something that Apple needs to compete in. When you think about it, nearly every other task or role given to a stationary smart speaker could also be given to an Apple Watch. The wrist ends up being a better solution given the presence of a screen. The Apple Watch also has greater mobility than even smartphones and tablets as it is literally strapped to our wrist at all times, compared to smart speakers which tend to be confined to a single room and thus require you to purchase multiples of them to place in every room.
I agree with you that the Smart Speaker is probably not the right place for Apple, because, as many have stated, Apple has little to no interest in competing at the low end of the market. But, most people don't see the value in a $300 smart speaker. Multiple that by 3 - 5 devices to cover a "Smart" house and it is expensive. Most people don't need a high quality speaker in every room in the house. A Echo Dot (or even a slightly better Echo) is more than adequate.
I would disagree that the watch is a good substitute. It is a very personal device? How can my wife turn the lights on in the bedroom with my watch? Doesn't work. The watch may be fine for a single person, but multi-person households want/need a device in the room.
IMO, the smart speaker market is a mirage. Companies like amazon are pushing smart speakers and voice computing like no tomorrow for no other reason that they have virtually no smartphone presence. Apple has won the smartphone wars, and as such does not need to do the same thing that amazon has done.
So you are criticizing Amazon for trying to get in a different market when they failed to compete against Apple? Talk about damned if you do, damned if you don't. What should Amazon do, close the doors and give all the money to the stockholders? You may call it a mirage, but based on what? You don't see a need? I am guessing that Amazon & Google have a much better understanding of the value of the market considering they are continuously expanding their reach. (Even it they probably over extend at time, Toaster with Alexa, yea that is a hard pass for me too.)
This is a halo market for Amazon, they are expecting users to buy "works with Alexa" devices. And, yes, they are using the data they get to build better AI.
And critics continue to make the age-old mistake of homing in on an industry, then comparing it to what Apple is (or isn’t) doing, because then they are not allowing Apple’s unique strengths and traits to speak for themselves. Rather than starting first with Apple, then looking outwards.
Of course people are going to compare other companies against Apple, that is what you get when you are largest (or 2nd largest depending on what Microsoft stock closed at today) company in the US. I don't get why people get so bent out of shape when others criticize Apple (or even express an option that Apple is not the best option for some things.) At some point there will be the "Next Big Thing". Let's be real, the last "game changer" really was the iPhone. Who knows what the next game changer will be? Smart speakers, probably not. But, when new industries, do come in to play, it is fair to ask is this something that Apple is looking at. Because, when the "Next Big Thing" happens, someone is going to become the next Apple, even if it is Apple.
