Gurman: Apple Considering Updated HomePod Mini Alongside New High-End HomePod

[B/D]

I don't think AAC has enough bitrate to stream lossless.

Apple needs to develop a whole new codec dor wireless transmission, if they don't want to pay royalties to better systems.

@JippaLippa

Homepods are not bluetooth speakers, they use Wi-Fi for all the audio playback. They support FLAC and ALAC streams up to 24/48, and can indeed play lossless Apple Music streams natively without any issues. They can also play Deezer lossless streams natively if you are subscribed to that service and have it setup on the Homepods.

Airpods, however, use bluetooth, and are currently limited to AAC 256.


Two different things.


From Apple:

How to listen to lossless on your HomePod​

What you need​

• A HomePod or HomePod mini updated to the latest software version
• The Home app on the iPhone or iPad that was used to set up your HomePod

How to turn lossless on or off​

1. On your iPhone or iPad, open the Home app.
2. Tap the Home button
   
   .
3. Tap Home Settings.
4. Under People, tap your name.
5. Tap Apple Music.
6. Turn Lossless Audio on or off.

 

[cjbryce]

I've long wanted Apple to up their game with HomePod and give me a wholly wireless surround sound speaker system, then I'd probably sell all my other kit.

As it happens, my Denon A/V receiver became faulty last Thursday, so I'm currently using Samsung ARC (not eARC)->Apple TV->Stereo paired HomePod OGs instead.

For me, it's probably just good enough to persuade me that getting the Denon repaired and reconnected to B&W floor-standers/KEF Egg surrounds isn't a priority at all and can wait.

I might just get the Denon repaired and sell all the wired kit anyway.

 

[SBlue1]

I’d so much love to try out the HomePod, but you can’t get me to use Apple Music. As long as there is no real way of using other streaming services (in my case Amazon Music), I won’t give the HomePod a chance.

This is something that has been teased for a year now. Come on!

I got two HomePod minis and I use them with radio mostly, sometimes to play something out of my own library and sometimes to play from Spotify. Never had Apple Music and never will.

 

[CyberBob859]

Add Z-Wave, control of WiFi outlets and switches, and simple if/then logic programming and you might have something. Otherwise you just have a speaker, which no matter how good is supposedly sounds, can not match the sound of even the cheapest bookshelf speaker.

They will probably add Matter support. In fact, I think this is the reason why they will be bringing new HomePods to market,

 

[Mr. Nice]

I would prefer Sonos instead of this Apple Hobby products.

 

[chucker23n1]

I would prefer Sonos instead of this Apple Hobby products.

And yet here you are, in a thread about "Apple Hobby products".

 

[ric22]

I'm still enjoying my two Homepods (full size) that pair to my Apple TV. Don't really need anything else at this point.

Do they pause and skip songs simultaneously, or do you just ignore that slight delay?

 

[B/D]

Do they pause and skip songs simultaneously, or do you just ignore that slight delay?

The delay is only present for me if I have lossless on. If not, there is none.

 

[centauratlas]

I’d so much love to try out the HomePod, but you can’t get me to use Apple Music. As long as there is no real way of using other streaming services (in my case Amazon Music), I won’t give the HomePod a chance.

This is something that has been teased for a year now. Come on!

Perhaps we are using it wrong, but it would be nice if it could access your iTunes library on your Mac too. Maybe it can, but if so it isn't intuitive how to do it.

 

[centauratlas]

A redesigned HomePod with screen and same audio quality as original, would be an instant buy for me. It would also need to function as a hub.

It would be nice if it was a hub AND an airport (time capsule too?) replacement with current wifi standards plus mesh like they are doing with thread (with the capability for an ethernet backhaul).

 

[cocky jeremy]

If it plays audio from the AppleTV, count me in.

 

[compwiz1202]

Reading this comment made me trigger so many bad memories with Siri...
Yes, you made me angry for the rest of the week-end.

Me too. Why doesn't she just answer the question anymore??? If I wanted to use my iPhone, I would have used it!

 

[DocMultimedia]

Do they pause and skip songs simultaneously, or do you just ignore that slight delay?

I've had no problems other than one firmware update a year or two ago that caused video syncing to audio when airplaying. They fixed it with the following update (although I did find a workaround after a week).

 

[Mr Todhunter]

I was always interested in HomePod and Siri so I could play my own music on demand (tons of ripped CDs and various downloads) but it's not doable. I want nothing to do with Apple Music, and it just bugs the hell out of me that I can't say "Play Bob Dylan" and have it figure out that I want it to play from my own music collection. Epic fail.

They don’t want you to play your own music. They want you to get Apple Music. I will not do it. Not now, not ever.

 

[deconstruct60]

Apple is reportedly considering an update to the HomePod mini as it plans a larger push into the Home devices market, which includes releasing an updated version of the full-sized HomePod in the early months of 2023, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.

Kind of mystery what this is suppose to be deeply an unexpected turn if the reports on the new "full sized" HomePod with a S8 chip in it. The Mini has a S5 ( the much holder full sized Homepod is a relatively ancient A8. ). If Apple is doing an updated tvOS for the full size Homepod, why keep ports around for the S5 longer than necessary? And if there is no S5 watch still on sale to pair the Mini with it ( to share economies of scale component costs ), then makes even less sense. [ The Watch SE currently has the S5. Also would not be very surprising if it also moves on from the S5 this year. And there is a SE2 with a logicboard only upgrade and no new external features(an S7 or S6? ). ]

The audio subsystems of the full sized and Mini Homepods would be different but the "smartspeaker" functionality shouldn't need to be much different at all. If use the same SoC in both get both, then Apple gets better economies of scale and simpler/cheaper overhead on the core operating system foundation. The full size Homepod needs it "Smart" costs driven down ( the old price was too expensive) leaving more bill of material budget differences just in the audio subsystem.


That wouldn't mean the Mini would get some revolutionary new features but at some point have to leave the old chip behind if stop using it for other Apple products. The Homepods can't generate enough volume to justify their own SoC.

Apple gets to distribution the "modem less" S8 development costs over the Watch (leading edge models) and Homepod aggregated volumes.


[ Also makes sense to bump the Mini to a S8 if more HomeKit (and Thread/Matter ) server workload is going to pushed to the Mini when it is the only server around (e.g., iPads dropped. ) ]

 

[JippaLippa]

@JippaLippa

Homepods are not bluetooth speakers, they use Wi-Fi for all the audio playback. They support FLAC and ALAC streams up to 24/48, and can indeed play lossless Apple Music streams natively without any issues. They can also play Deezer lossless streams natively if you are subscribed to that service and have it setup on the Homepods.

Airpods, however, use bluetooth, and are currently limited to AAC 256.


Two different things.


From Apple:

How to listen to lossless on your HomePod​

What you need​

• A HomePod or HomePod mini updated to the latest software version
• The Home app on the iPhone or iPad that was used to set up your HomePod

How to turn lossless on or off​

1. On your iPhone or iPad, open the Home app.
2. Tap the Home button
   
   .
3. Tap Home Settings.
4. Under People, tap your name.
5. Tap Apple Music.
6. Turn Lossless Audio on or off.

Interesting stuff!
I didn't know.

 

[ric22]

I've had no problems other than one firmware update a year or two ago that caused video syncing to audio when airplaying. They fixed it with the following update (although I did find a workaround after a week).

That is interesting.... hmmm...

 

[ric22]

The delay is only present for me if I have lossless on. If not, there is none.

I'll investigate. I do have it turned on at present. My HomePods have always been a pain in the ass as a pair, but one on its own seemed fine.

 

[rileyes]

The straw man argument is a fun way to rile up the hardcore types, but Apple's genius has always been in what they bring to existing products, both in terms of design and functionality.

It's not a strawman argument to say that apple doesn't innovate anymore. You proved my point actually. Waiting, watching the market, and then perfecting what is already out there is not innovation, and what they do now I personally find very unoriginal.

Whereas, think back to the iphone, there wasn't really anything like it AT ALL in the mainstream market. Mainstream is the keyword. Today they are Apply-ifying things that are already out with mainstream adoption, often for years. They took a big risk with the iPhone, and I remember initial responses were very skeptical from some outlets at the time. And my point is that this is exactly what they DON'T do now - take risks with new innovation.

I will 100% agree with you that Apple has perfected the art of waiting, watching, and improving on what is already out there. And that's also my biggest complaint, because, especially at times right now when supply chain issues are still not resolved, they are releasing their 'perfected' version of things and they are obsolete before they even hit the shelves. And in my opinion, this shines a big light on the fact that there is a serious flaw in their risk-averse, wait-and-see business model right now. They should be doing both. They certainly have the resources to take both approaches simultaneously. But they don't.

Think about the big things that people are anticipating now from Apple: Apple Car? (Tesla), VR? (Occulus, among many others). I mean it will be cool that these things look like an Apple product, and it will be cool that they'll be part of the Apple ecosystem. But innovations, they are not.

 

[inkswamp]

It's not a strawman argument to say that apple doesn't innovate anymore. You proved my point actually. Waiting, watching the market, and then perfecting what is already out there is not innovation

You're moving the goalposts, and you don't get to change the definition of innovation while you're at it. I'll reiterate that Apple is not known for being first to market with any product. That's what you originally complained about which is a straw man argument. Apple tends to come at existing products with entirely new ideas and approaches that put the product in an entirely new light and sometimes, a new category. And that is innovation.

You mention the iPhone and that makes the point for me. Before the iPhone came out, smart phones existed with built-in keyboards and desktop PC-like interfaces and occupied very little of the cell phone market. Separately, multi-touch technology was being developed by Jeff Han. Most companies were envisioning multi-touch as something businesses could leverage (see Microsoft's original concept of Surface.) Apple saw these two things and brought them together in the consumer space and designed an entire OS around them that literally obsoleted an entire market of millions of phones overnight. Countless companies rushed in to copy it and several dominant phone makers went out of business or faded into obscurity within a year or two. It was a complete overturning of the market. And you're going to tell me that's not innovation? Really?

Apple didn't invent the smart phone and they didn't invent multi-touch tech, but they did bring the two together and designed an OS that went well beyond what anyone else imagined at the time. That is innovation whether it fits whatever narrow definition you've imposed on it.

 

[chucker23n1]

Waiting, watching the market, and then perfecting what is already out there is not innovation, and what they do now I personally find very unoriginal.

Whereas, think back to the iphone, there wasn't really anything like it AT ALL

“Waiting, watching, perfecting” is exactly what they did with the iPhone. They looked at their own Newton, the Nokia Communicator, Blackberry, and others, then figured out how to improve on that.

in the mainstream market. Mainstream is the keyword.

So your argument is “it’s only innovation if it’s hugely successful”?

 

[rileyes]

You're moving the goalposts, and you don't get to change the definition of innovation while you're at it. I'll reiterate that Apple is not known for being first to market with any product. That's what you originally complained about which is a straw man argument. Apple tends to come at existing products with entirely new ideas and approaches that put the product in an entirely new light and sometimes, a new category. And that is innovation.

You mention the iPhone and that makes the point for me. Before the iPhone came out, smart phones existed with built-in keyboards and desktop PC-like interfaces and occupied very little of the cell phone market. Separately, multi-touch technology was being developed by Jeff Han. Most companies were envisioning multi-touch as something businesses could leverage (see Microsoft's original concept of Surface.) Apple saw these two things and brought them together in the consumer space and designed an entire OS around them that literally obsoleted an entire market of millions of phones overnight. Countless companies rushed in to copy it and several dominant phone makers went out of business or faded into obscurity within a year or two. It was a complete overturning of the market. And you're going to tell me that's not innovation? Really?

Apple didn't invent the smart phone and they didn't invent multi-touch tech, but they did bring the two together and designed an OS that went well beyond what anyone else imagined at the time. That is innovation whether it fits whatever narrow definition you've imposed on it.

Innovation is creating something new, first of its kind. The iPhone, as you say, completely disrupted a market because they released something that did not exist in that space. I agree the iPhone was innovative, which I said before.

I said they don’t really innovate anymore.

For example, the Apple Watch. Unlike the iPhone, Samsung and other brands had already released touch screen smart watches years before, and they were doing quite well. This wasn’t a case of floundering technology that no one really knew what to do with, where Apple (Steve, innovator) came in and identified all these missed opportunities and put them all together into a totally disruptive and innovative product, the iPhone. Instead, Apple was fat dumb and lazy off the iPhone and their other successes and made the smart, savvy move for their investors (Tim Cook, operations) and waited to see how well these smart watches performed in an already established market. Then, on a timeline of years, finally released their own version, which was hardly innovative. It was just an Apple version of what was already in the market.

And that’s my problem with the Tim Cook era of apple. There is a fine line between seeing missed opportunities and creating something brand new and disruptive, which is what Steve Jobs did, and blatantly waiting and just creating Apple versions of completely established products, which is what Tim Cook does.

The former requires risk and a willingness to fail in order to truly innovate. It’s why Apple booted Steve Jobs the first time, because real innovation is risky and shareholders and board members don’t like risk. The latter, however, requires only patience and operational acumen, which is the Apple of Tim Cook.

Today, Apple is sitting on a mountain of cash with existing product lines that generate huge amounts of profit every year. They have every incentive NOT to take risks. And as long as Tim Cook is at the helm, they won’t. However, I will acknowledge he has been a great steward of the company from a shareholder perspective. Apple has been a money printing machine. Not innovative, but certainly profitable.

 

[HDFan]

I said they don’t really innovate anymore.

Jobs saw some holes and realized that the technology had advanced enough that they could be filled. At a given state of technology there are only certain innovations that are physically possible. horses-cars, telephone, air travel are innovations that happen just a few times a generation when the technologies are there, or almost there. The miracle of the Covid vaccines was based upon work dating from the 1960's but only came into prominence almost 50 years later.

Apple was "beyond the experimentation phase" with 100 engineers working on their watch in February 2013 before the Samsung watch was released that fall. As usual they didn't release their product until it was perfected a year later. Let's not forget the Samsung foldable fiasco where they released a product that wasn't ready. Rarely happens at Apple.

True Jobs was a visionary who looked at the techology future which probably isn't a Cook strength. It was exciting when the iphone was introduced, something no one had expected seemingly materialized out of thin air. But give Apple credit for the less spectacular things - the best support of a major corporation in the business, high quality products that they seem to be able to produce even in difficult manufacturing times. People complain about 3 months waits from Apple - I have multiple items which involved a year or more wait. One may take 18 months.

We have innovative products coming - the 2 AR/VR glasses, the car. Maybe not as exciting or out of the blue as what Jobs did but still are innovations that will make a different world once they mature.


Edited: Added "experimentation phase" reference.

 

[chucker23n1]

For example, the Apple Watch. Unlike the iPhone, Samsung and other brands had already released touch screen smart watches years before,

Touch screen phones existed before the iPhone.

and they were doing quite well.

Were they? Then why could Apple Watch quickly grab so much of the market?

 

[madeirabhoy]

Innovation is creating something new, first of its kind. The iPhone, as you say, completely disrupted a market because they released something that did not exist in that space. I agree the iPhone was innovative, which I said before.

I said they don’t really innovate anymore.

For example, the Apple Watch. Unlike the iPhone, Samsung and other brands had already released touch screen smart watches years before, and they were doing quite well. This wasn’t a case of floundering technology that no one really knew what to do with, where Apple (Steve, innovator) came in and identified all these missed opportunities and put them all together into a totally disruptive and innovative product, the iPhone. Instead, Apple was fat dumb and lazy off the iPhone and their other successes and made the smart, savvy move for their investors (Tim Cook, operations) and waited to see how well these smart watches performed in an already established market. Then, on a timeline of years, finally released their own version, which was hardly innovative. It was just an Apple version of what was already in the market.

And that’s my problem with the Tim Cook era of apple. There is a fine line between seeing missed opportunities and creating something brand new and disruptive, which is what Steve Jobs did, and blatantly waiting and just creating Apple versions of completely established products, which is what Tim Cook does.

The former requires risk and a willingness to fail in order to truly innovate. It’s why Apple booted Steve Jobs the first time, because real innovation is risky and shareholders and board members don’t like risk. The latter, however, requires only patience and operational acumen, which is the Apple of Tim Cook.

Today, Apple is sitting on a mountain of cash with existing product lines that generate huge amounts of profit every year. They have every incentive NOT to take risks. And as long as Tim Cook is at the helm, they won’t. However, I will acknowledge he has been a great steward of the company from a shareholder perspective. Apple has been a money printing machine. Not innovative, but certainly profitable.

i partly agree, but only partly.

Firstly, what apple has done has never been 'innovation' in some peoples definition, because it has very rarely been the first to do something, and has almost always been the first to do something really well.

Years before the iphone i had a palm treo, actually i had two, the flip cover one and then the 600. it had apps i could buy, did email and internet and everything else. this was what, 4 or 5 years before the iphone and actually the treos were in user terms more advanced than the original iphone. it came from the newton, apples only truely 'brand new product' i can think of, but it failed. then the iphone did what the ipad and apple watch and imac and airpods did, came into a market that already existed and did it so much better.

however your general point i agree, there's a lot less wowing these days.

tbh i like to be wowed by Apple, but id actually prefer they fixed the basics. autocorrect and siri being two big ones.