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's Echo-Like Smart Speaker With Siri and AirPlay Could Debut as Early as WWDC
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think one of the features of wwdc will be that siri will go icloud, and have a few offline features, so some airpod functions will still work offline.
About a standalone speaker? I think it would be wise from apple to release an add on to the apple tv, so an advanced microphone unit, and a seperate speaker unit, and perhaps even a router/timecapsule unit. That you can stack on top of each other, so a more modular approach. I just don' t need the speaker, just an advanced microphone.
About a standalone speaker? I think it would be wise from apple to release an add on to the apple tv, so an advanced microphone unit, and a seperate speaker unit, and perhaps even a router/timecapsule unit. That you can stack on top of each other, so a more modular approach. I just don' t need the speaker, just an advanced microphone.
I would get one, simply by virtue of it being available in Singapore but not the Echo or Google Home.
And knowing Apple, they will find a way to make this device integrate with my other Apple products on a level that the competing alternatives can't.
As always, people think Apple's market is only the US and nowhere else.
someone says something they want to, that Siri can't, and you ask them why they would want to do it, versus why Siri can't/Apple won't do it. It's the textbook definition of "attacking the messanger". But yes, you were not being mean, it's just an expression.
Just like how Alexa only plays Amazon music and only manage Alexa enabled devices?
Won't be at all surprised if this device is 'HomeKit' only and therefore NOT compatable with Nest thermostats etc etc
Yes. If you're willing to just use Apple products and just use Apple services then Siri Speaker will likely be alright.
You do know more than twice the AM number uses Spotify Premium, though, right?
[doublepost=1493561312][/doublepost]
The biggest advantage of the Echo is having an outrageous number of microphones.
Edit: Obviously I mean from a hardware perspective.
[doublepost=1493561594][/doublepost]
https://www.spotify.com/us/amazonalexa/
https://help.pandora.com/customer/en/portal/articles/1980942-pandora-on-amazon-echo
It used to be in some high-end systems, but not anymore. Most speakers that are released now do not include Airplay, while previous generations did. So it is being phased out by third party manufacturers. Most likely because nobody knows about it and wants it when buying speakers. And your remarks on Bluetooth are not valid anymore. Version 4 has great audio quality.
I do like Airplay, especially the feature where you can play music on multiple speakers at once. But unfortunately it's only supported in iTunes, and not on iOS. Another example how Apple doesn't care about Airplay.
Still, when I bought new speakers last year, I did want them to support Airplay, but the once I liked didn't. So, now I connect them to an old ATV. Hardly efficient, but it does work.
I definitely see Airplay as a neglected technology. Hopefully the next iteration of iTunes, iOS and macOS bring new life to it, otherwise it will remain a niche technology for the happy few that own an iPhone and ATV.
Really, you obviously have Never used an Echo! Alexa play my workout play list on Spotify. Answer getting your play list workout from Spotify. Alexa turn on Apple TV. Answer, Ok. Turns on TV and changes the input, Apple TV, changes volume on Sonos. Using skills via a Harmony hub. Third party integration something Apple struggles with. Might want to try Echo, you maybe surprised at how many things this little box can do.
They can already do this through TV's, unless you unplug that and/or cable box after use.
[doublepost=1493565031][/doublepost]
Kids of the future will have had a much different environment than we had, however I don't think it will be as grim as described.
Sometimes the ones that display the most hate are actually the truest fans.
[doublepost=1493565199][/doublepost]
Child: "Hey mom, what's for din..."
Parent: "Shhh!! The government's listening"
Child: "Oh :\ sorry mom"
This is sad actually. i used to be the biggest Apple fan that would upgrade to each new iPad and iPhone when they came out. I'm tired of waiting on Apple and when they do release something it's restricted as usual. This will be another restricted device and it will probably cost $229 or more. My house which used to be filled with Apple only, now has 4 roku devices, 3 google homes, 3 chrome casts, 1 chrome cast audio and i've even switched away from iTunes. Too little too late Apple.
Yes, I am also aware that Spotify has been around a lot longer and Apple Music is relatively new by comparison. However, Apple is more interested in keeping their ecosystem as a major selling point, so it makes sense to make Apple Music the better option (if you want to use Siri) on their platforms. They aren't conceding the market to Spotify at this point and there really isn't much reason to do so with the growth of AM being what it is.
There are already devices, like the Echo, that work with Spotify, so this device will probably be aimed at people that are interested in getting more from the Apple ecosystem. The Apple Watch has been pretty successful living in that same environment (though it only works with the iPhone), so it is what it is. The upside to this for Apple is that it will get more people to use Apple Music and be an option for people that already use AM. As I mentioned, for me, the main selling point will be how it works with AirPlay, which combined with AM would make it worth moving my Dots to less trafficked parts of my home. By the way, I am really happy with the Dots, but they don't work with Apple Music or Airplay, which is a shortfall compared to what Apple could offer.
Airplay is still a standard feature on many (most?) receivers. Just a quick search on Cruthfield has 78 options:
https://www.crutchfield.com/S-NAtx5B93RYa/shopsearch/airplay.html?XVINQ=SX3&XVVer=CME&awcp=1t1&awcr=50495402262&awdv=c&awkw=airplay receivers&awmt=e&awnw=g&awug=9013539&pg=2
If you want to search Airplay speakers on that same site, you get 29 products:
https://www.crutchfield.com/shopsearch/airplay_speakers.html?&pg=1
Keep in mind, that Airplay has lost a lot of the low end to Bluetooth, but you can still find numerous Airplay devices at audio enthusiast stores like Crutchfield. Amazon would have a lot more options, but I didn't bother with them since their searches don't do a very good job of segregating Airplay from Bluetooth.
As for your comment about Bluetooth. I don't know what you are trying to say, but Bluetooth is still a lossy technology. This means that you will lose information from the file you are streaming. Airplay is bit perfect with CD quality files...in other words, there is no data loss. Therefore, Airplay is better for audio quality than Bluetooth.
Also, the Whaale app has shown that you can send Airplay from iOS to numerous Airplay receivers at the same time with audio volume control over each device. This is less about the technology behind Airplay and more about Apple choosing not to make multi-zone Airplay possible over the control center in iOS. I am hoping this new device has the capability turned on, but we don't really know how the thing will work based on the rumors.
As a side note, Bluetooth is awesome. I use it everyday in my less than stellar setups...at work, in the car, with my Echo Dot sending Bluetooth to my vintage Marantz receiver, etc. It is just limited...both in the inability to send and receive a bit perfect signal for ideal sound quality and in its inability to handle multi-zone in-sync audio (though, I am sure it will eventually handle that better).
Personally, I hope the Apple device handles audio in several different ways. I want it to work with Apple Music and be able to play the music directly, send it to one or more Airplay devices on the network, have an optical and analog output for a direct connection to any stereo, have a bluetooth receiver so you can use the built in speaker to listen to any audio from an iOS/Android device, and a Bluetooth transmitter for sending audio to a Bluetooth receiver/speaker.
I don't get all the negativity, but it is life at MacRumors these days. If it doesn't have the features I want, I will just stick with the Echos. Not really a big deal, I can still use Airplay from my iOS devices and Macs, but I am sure it will do well because there are a lot of people that trust Apple to keep their everyday activities safe and secure that do not trust Amazon or Google with that same information. I also believe there are a lot of people with Airplay devices like receivers, Airport Express units, AppleTVs, stand alone Airplay speakers, Chinese knock-off Airplay/DLNA units, Nvidia Shields running apps like Airpin lite, etc. that would benefit from having bit perfect audio being sent to their systems...assuming this device will be able to do that. (all speculation based on rumors)
And I'm only pointing out that a Siri Speaker would be inferior to the competition. Siri itself is inferior to the competition. Apple could fix this, but they haven't done much in six years because of what you're talking about (ecosystem play).
Even look at where they've opened up and realize it's all areas they make little to no money.
I want Siri to be great, I want Siri Speaker to be great, but Apple is holding it back.
For my needs, Siri does what I need it to. It adds reminders, alarms, plays music on demand, looks up photos, tells me sports scores, tells me when games will be played, launches apps, turns on and off lights, sending texts, making calls, adding calendar appointments, etc. I have Alexa and I just don't see a big difference between the services....other than Alexa is geared toward Amazon services and Siri is geared toward Apple's.
It will most likely be inferior if you don't use or don't plan to use Apple's ecosystem. If you use their ecosystem it has the same type of advantages as the Apple Watch vs Brand X Android watch. Apple isn't interested in boosting up competitors, as you mention, they are in business to make money.
Apple loves customers like you that are perfectly fine with products hobbled simply sell you other products.
Amazon wants to sell you Amazon Music and Fire TVs. They don't even sell Chromecast or Appletvs in their store and Google Play Music is not available on the Echo. Type in Chromecast or Appletv on Amazon and they show you FireTVs. I guess Amazon is also hobbled. Last I checked, Amazon Music wasn't available on Google Home, either.
You have to pick the device that works with the services you chose the best. That isn't just an Apple issue because none of these stand alone assistants support every service under the sun.
Google Play Music could be on the Echo. If Amazon was stopping people from controlling third party music services with Alexa, you wouldn't be able to control Spotify or Pandora with the SoundCloud people saying they're going to be making a skill too.
And Google Home, while Amazon has decided to not let it control it, can control Pandora and Spotify.
I'm not saying every service now, I'm saying Apple is hindering their product in a way nobody else is on the basis that they don't want to "help the competition". They're actively working against a better UX because of that. And Amazon not selling Apple TV or Chromecast is crap as well, though I can at least buy Android TV all day every day.
[doublepost=1493605852][/doublepost]
If Apple can't work on all of that at the same time then they fail.
Amazon has issues with Google and Apple. It is no surprise we don't see them on the Echo. The product is hobbled. True it could be Google that has chosen to keep their music service off the Echo, but the same is true either way. The Echo is hobbled because it doesn't have every service people want to use. In fact, it doesn't support two of the most popular paid streaming services in the US. It is also hobbled by the fact that the Echo doesn't work with very many languages and it doesn't support DLNA, Casting, or AirPlay.
Once again, if it doesn't work with the services I use it is hobbled (at least by your definition) . Whether that is Google locking Amazon out or Amazon wanting to keep their service tied to their own device. It is the same difference. You have to chose products that work with services you use or pick services that work with your favorite devices. They are all leveraging that to one extent or another.
The only competition for iOS is Android. Just because Android allows something, doesn't mean Apple has to allow it. When Google allows use of Google Assistant, they are more interested in gathering as much of your information and leveraging that information to target ads toward you. They aren't just giving you a lot of "free" stuff with no strings attached.
Apple (currently) just wants to sell you services and hardware they make, so it is a different business goal. I am sure they could have made a lot of money following Google's model of gathering all your data and using it for targeted ads, but they decided that they would rather sell you stuff at a profit rather than hovering over the "creepy line".
Are you being will fully obtuse? Anyone can add an Alexa Skill, they're open to all. And then we have you arguing that the two choices are "handicapping your device with business choices" and "gathering all the information".
Seriously, your argument lacks coherency beyond "I'm okay with an inferior product for everyone because it's Apple and I really like Apple".
Or how about
"I choose the device which best suits my needs for whatever reasons are my own and you choose yours. I am happy with my chosen platform as are you. Everyone is happy and that's all which truly matters."
Seems your main beef here is people opting to use a product you don't like, and that to me is just so petty and sad on so many levels.
I was prepared to give this product a miss, but you know what? I think I just might pick up a couple of these. Just because I know it will irritate you. That to me is value aplenty.
Agreed that there is a significant trend toward negativity, but that is based on HISTORY rather than prognostication. Apple traditionally has a long time-to-market, rolls out products with limited features (adding new capabilities in small increments over time), and charges a giant premium for the privilege. Yes, in the end the products are better (IMHO) but in the short term they comparatively suck!
[doublepost=1493646336][/doublepost]
Nope. You're not.
That said, in my opinion that is not the major limiting factor of Siri. Even when she fully understands whatever I'm asking for she is frequently unable to do more than act as an automated search engine. If I ask a question in spoken language I expect a spoken response... not a list of websites.
While Apple can absolutely improve Siri to compete with Alexa/Google/Cortana/etc., the big question is will they? Apple has historically rolled out only incremental benefits over a long period of time. Fair enough **IF** you are building on a suitable foundation. The challenge (as I see it) is that Siri is not designed to be a fully interactive AI service, thus it will require rearchitecting the back end. Apple had better have a great long-term vision for Siri, otherwise they will be rearchitecting again next year.
Personally I still have high hopes and expectations that Apple will succeed in this endeavor. My family has a significant investment in the Apple garden and I would love to have it fully connected.