Interesting that you go on the assumption of incompetence. I’m tending to think there’s reasoning behind it and from there try to figure out what that may be. For instance, maybe, for something so new and different, they wanted to wait until they were closer to having these to demo in their stores before ramping up the marketing. Or maybe they’re not talking to their Beats merchandise folks and trying to wing the merchandising of a different class of a device. Since it’s not something we can know right now, I find this a more fun way of dealing with it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Confirms HomePod's Supported Audio Sources in Tech Specs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
True. But do you actually believe Apple cheated in these listening tests? They optimized everything to make the HomePod sound great and everything else sound lousy?
+1
And besides, I can't imagine for a second that Apple envisioned people positioning multiple Homepods around in an attempt to gain the full surround sound experience of a movie theater.
At best, I can see Homepod being a substitute for a simple stereo sound bar.Why would you laugh at someone else’s decisions? And why are you trying to open the mono/stereo can of worms?
I did a Google search to find more comparison review of HomePod with other similar speakers. Here is one I found:
http://nymag.com/selectall/2018/01/this-is-what-apples-homepod-sounds-like.html
The observation in that article stands out that:
"
The most interesting comparison came between the Google Home Max — which currently retails for $400 — and the HomePod. I can’t say which sounded better, just that each had its strengths. The sound-staging on the Max — that is, its ability to trick your brain into thinking that different instruments and different sounds were coming from different parts of the room — is much more open and interesting. The HomePod creates a more filled-in soundstage that, in my opinion, makes it harder to pull individual parts of songs apart. Put more simply, on the live version of “Hotel California,” the Google Home Max gave the impression of a band playing with some physical distance between each player, while the HomePod put them much closer together.
".
You can digest that to what it's worth.
Maybe, maybe not. We'll soon find out when the real reviews are published.
Those songs will be uploaded to your Apple Music library and the HomePod will play those uploaded files.
According to the tech specs you will be able to ask Siri to play these songs in the same way that you can the music in the main Apple Music catalog. You can currently do this using Siri on your phone.
How it works in practice may not be quite so easy. I have quite a lot of music in my library by artists that aren't available in the iTunes store. Trying to get Siri to play tracks by them gives fairly mixed results (although that can be argued about artists that are in the store as well).
According to TechRadar review, adding second HomePod does not give any true stereo inaging. It just sounds a little louder and filling.+1
And besides, I can't imagine for a second that Apple envisioned people positioning multiple Homepods around in an attempt to gain the full surround sound experience of a movie theater.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I think people are reading Apple's own bolded copy saying it takes 2 HPs for stereo and people like you are trying to make them out to calling 1 HP mono. Apple clearly writes in their own words (right off of their website)...
Personally, I don't know how to read the word "second" there and still be calling 1 HP "Stereo" or more than stereo. Who is going to be first to call Apple a liar about this?
I would never use HomePod for TV but 8 watts is how much power it DRAWS during music playback. This is not the output of the speakers, which can vary depending on efficiency.
Apple’s strategy has never been to sell as many of anything as possible. Their strategy is to maximize their revenue, and not for a single product - for the brand. They are very good at that.
My guess is that they held off implementing Bluetooth to maximize new Apple Music subscriptions. The services area is practically pure profit after a core number of subscribers, which they’ve already reached. When new subscribers fall off, they will turn on BT in a firmware update and get a nice second wave of buyers, knowing that most people who signed up earlier for Apple Music won’t drop it.
I love Apple, but they are very adept at separating consumers from their money.
How would that equate to new Apple Music subscriptions rather than simply not selling to people who don't have AirPlay devices? Nobody in the Android ecosystem would want to add this device, it would simply be a dumb bluetooth speaker for them...and an expensive one at that. BT 5.0 does not have new audio codecs yet, the entire 5.0 stack isn't ready to match the sound quality of AirPlay, which is why I believe it's not included.
No one is talking about marketing though. They're doing just fine marketing the HomePod with cute ads and well placed mini-reviews. We're all talking about basic product information. Literally, reading the label information. For instance
, I want to be able to do X. Does this product do X? It should be simple to answer that question. It's not. You can think there's a reason behind it. It's your prerogative. No matter the reason, I can think it's being incompetently handled. That's my prerogative.All of that supposition you offered up is evidence of what I'm talking about. It shouldn't be necessary.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
They were NOT tests or reviews- they were product demos. WE have got to see many Apple product demos ourselves. When Apple products did NOT have some features they have now, did Apple shine much of a favorable light on those features? For example, when other phones had bigger screens, Apple would ridicule bigger screens per "one handed use" etc. NFC (payments)? wireless charging? Etc. Apple demos focuses on what is best about THEIR OWN product for sale now, sometimes ridiculing competing products NOT in their own product... until they add it... and then it might be the signature feature to drive upgrades.
In a good demo, you present your product as favorably as possible. If it's a head-to-head demo, that typically means to isolate your product's strengths and the other product's weaknesses.
Example: Some time ago I worked for a major CE retailer. Whichever TV manufacturer offered the best financial bonuses was the TVs to be sold. Competing TVs would get the weaker feed of the demo. Salespeople would go into the settings and tweak the competing TVs toward poorer showings but optimize the TVs to be sold to their MAX. Salespeople would enthusiastically push the TVs that paid the best commissions. People would come in, head-to-head compare and most would leave with the TVs the retailer wanted them to buy. If, in the next period, some OTHER TV manufacturer sweetened their deal such that their's became the TVs to move, settings were adjusted, demo feeds were shifted around, salesperson enthusiasm shifted accordingly... and then those became the best looking TVs and sold the most. That's the power of a demo- you can do a lot to make the one you want to move seem the best.
In reviews, there won't be such bias favoring any one product. AV reviewers will just pound away in their own labs, with their own audio selections, etc, striving to build a complete and clear pros & cons list. In a head-to-head review, all variables will be made as fair as possible and one of the products reviewed will be crowned best (hopefully overall, but maybe just best at various specific (bigger) features if it turned out that- say- one produced the best sound but another had the best versatility and yet another has the smartest "smarts").
Soon enough: we'll be able to read real reviews and/or even test one of these ourselves, in our own homes, put through our own paces. Then, we'll all get a real picture, including a solid sense of both pros & cons.
Last edited:
I've read some of these accounts. I don't remember in any instance where the HomePod was compared with another device.
As for optimizing the experience, sure, why wouldn't Apple optimize the experience? That's the essence of marketing.
The "truth" about HomePod's sound quality will come out in about a week.
You cared enough to post a reply.
Stereo/mono can of worms has been open ever since the HomePod came out as a Mono with stereo being a software patch later assuming you fork over another $349 for a second device..
You are right, efficiency means it will likely be outputing less than 8W then.