Apparently a lot of samsung employees are posting in this thread...
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.
HomePod No Longer Available for Launch Day Delivery From Apple in U.S.
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
What a difference one little standardized port can make! We consumers used to "think different" and covet such utility... or Apple wasn't so maximizing-focused that it would release products so narrowly locked in (so flexibility was "forced upon us"). In any event, do you still have a working iPod to use that thing in it's primary way? If not, the port gives you backup utility that is probably fundamental to why it can still "get daily use 10 years later."
If you DO have a working iPod still in use with it, what happens when that finally conks out? No problem, because at least one standardized port gives you the utility to continue to get great use out of that device for years and years to come.
Imagine how much more flexibility & utility could be had with HP if it had built in the very same AUX port. Of course, that would undermine the lock in, so we can't have (and apparently a lot of us don't want) that. I miss the Apple that at least seemed to put consumer utility/flexibility above "but who makes the most profitable _______" drivers.
Speakers don't generally degrade much. They do not need to be replaced every year or two. Make it possible for long-term usage and speakers can do their whole job for 5, 10, 15+ years. This thing's primary selling point right now is the quality of it's speakers. It's weakest link- it's relative smarts- will beg to be replaced in only a few years at most. Since the "smarts" are married to the speaker hardware, a HP2 probably becomes the necessary path to a smarter HP (yes, Apple could potentially do this in software, but we know how the drive to sell overrides the drive to give aging Apple tech big new features via software upgrades).
I'm hopeful HP2 will bring on an AUX port though I doubt (the modern) Apple would do that. I'm also hopeful that when people can crack these open, they find an iDevice platform inside such that someone will find a way to MOD an HP to basically add a AUX port. As crazy as that sounds, I bet that comes to pass and someone might even have a HP MOD business offering such a service not too far down the road. Though it would bypass the lock-in, one standardized port could substantially expand the usefulness & utility of this product.
Apple has essentially declared a war on wires - they are removing as many ports as they can from all of their products. They want people to use AirPlay, not cords. They aren’t going to release a HomePod with an auxiliary port.
HiFi wasn't a technology platform for Apple. It was just a well-designed shelf speaker. It didn't run an Apple OS. It didn't have an Apple SoC inside. It didn't connect to the internet or an Apple music service. It didn't have a virtual assistant. It also listed for $50 more in 2006, which adjusted for inflation is more like the current price of the Sonos Play 5 at $500.
Last edited:
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
And yet, how does this thing get power?
And Airplay- as nice as it is- is proprietary, part of the very lock-in limitation referenced.
If they could wirelessly feed it power they absolutely would.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Great. Until then, an AUX port would affect nobody negatively. You could use it exactly as Apple has decided you should and those wanting additional easy connection of other stuff could get what they want too. Ever use the wired ports on ANY of the other Apple hardware you have? No? I do... and I bet I'm not the only one.
If you do have anything connected via wires to any other Apple hardware, then you too enjoy the benefit of such utility. Why put down a consumer want that wouldn't affect you either way?
If you do have anything connected via wires to any other Apple hardware, then you too enjoy the benefit of such utility. Why put down a consumer want that wouldn't affect you either way?
Not saying it’s a bad idea, just saying it won’t happen.
Besides I think a lot of the beamforming trickery they’re doing is from analyzing the music file ahead of time - I don’t think it would work as quickly on a live analog or digital source. Apple recently said that every song gets different EQ settings on the HP for example.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
It’s a lot more likely that someone could make a device that has analog input and sends audio over AirPlay instead. You can actually do this with a Raspberry Pi already.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Personally, I love the idea of such a device too. BUT, as mentioned in some of the pre-reviews, as soon as one interacts with HP, any airplay link is broken and has to be manually reconnected again. This was a gripe in the pre-release reviews about trying to use these with 
TVs. It works via Airplay, until the HP is used for anything else, which breaks the TV airplay connection. To resume involves the steps of going into the airplay setup in TV to reconnect the two.
This hypothetical third party device leaning on airplay would likely have this very same issue.
Airplay is great and all but it IS proprietary and having more than ONE way is better than having ONE way.
TVs. It works via Airplay, until the HP is used for anything else, which breaks the TV airplay connection. To resume involves the steps of going into the airplay setup in TV to reconnect the two.This hypothetical third party device leaning on airplay would likely have this very same issue.
Airplay is great and all but it IS proprietary and having more than ONE way is better than having ONE way.
I still think that Apple purposely creates "artificial demand" by limiting stock on some newer products. I just don't see any appeal in the Homepod since Google Home and Alexa have been around for years and they do a much better job than Siri. Kind of the same thing with iPhone X, it wasn't going to sell very well so they limited stock to create a perception that everyone wants one but they are hard to get. Maybe I'm wrong though...
[doublepost=1518097469][/doublepost]
I just posted that haha!
[doublepost=1518097469][/doublepost]
I just posted that haha!
It really isn’t trying to compete with Alexa or Google at the moment - in the future with a revamped Siri perhaps. They are clearly gunning for Sonos’ market share with the HomePod.
If you’re not someone that would ever consider buying a Sonos system then you really aren’t the target here.
[doublepost=1518097750][/doublepost]
Yeah and they better fix that nonsense with the Apple TV in the next couple firmware updates or my HomePod is getting returned.Personally, I love the idea of such a device too. BUT, as mentioned in some of the pre-reviews, as soon as one interacts with HP, any airplay link is broken and has to be manually reconnected again. This was a gripe in the pre-release reviews about trying to use these with
This hypothetical third party device leaning on airplay would likely have this very same issue.
Airplay is great and all but it IS proprietary and having more than ONE way is better than having ONE way.
This is really on the client (ATV) side though not on the HomePod. The Apple TV doesn’t attempt to reconnect after it has been disconnected. In a stand-alone device (or a Pi) you can configure it to attempt to reconnect.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
If one OBJECTIVELY reads the pre-release reviews, apparently HP is exceptional at sound quality but lacking in relative "smarts." If one prioritizes "smarts," the established competitors appear to bring more intelligence. If one prioritizes sound quality, HP appears to bring that benefit. HP can "win" over the people that covet better quality sound with "good enough" smarts. That's likely a LARGE number of people.
Besides, it has an Apple logo on it. Apple could box air and sell millions of 'em. The brand halo is strong here.
[doublepost=1518098073][/doublepost]
I know we are imagining that auto-connect airplay as a "just one software update away" is an easy answer to that problem but I'm not thinking that is so. How would HP know which Airplay source around a house is the one with which to auto-connect? How would- in this example-TV know that the interruption was meant to only be temporary and that it should reconnect to HP as soon as whatever is being done with HP has completed?
Conceptually, there could be some kind of household prioritization code that drives auto-airplay connections (prioritizeTV first, my iPhone second, the roommate's iPad third, etc?) but that would seem to conflict with the basic use of Airplay- which is, individuals opting to "throw" something to something else on demand.
I'm not saying a solution can't be worked out. I'm wondering if Apple even sees this as a problem (with Airplay). My guess is that Airplay is supposed to work that way and that auto-connect would get in the way of a fundamental connection philosophy for Airplay. But we'll see about that.
Besides, it has an Apple logo on it. Apple could box air and sell millions of 'em. The brand halo is strong here.
[doublepost=1518098073][/doublepost]
I know we are imagining that auto-connect airplay as a "just one software update away" is an easy answer to that problem but I'm not thinking that is so. How would HP know which Airplay source around a house is the one with which to auto-connect? How would- in this example-
TV know that the interruption was meant to only be temporary and that it should reconnect to HP as soon as whatever is being done with HP has completed?Conceptually, there could be some kind of household prioritization code that drives auto-airplay connections (prioritize
TV first, my iPhone second, the roommate's iPad third, etc?) but that would seem to conflict with the basic use of Airplay- which is, individuals opting to "throw" something to something else on demand.I'm not saying a solution can't be worked out. I'm wondering if Apple even sees this as a problem (with Airplay). My guess is that Airplay is supposed to work that way and that auto-connect would get in the way of a fundamental connection philosophy for Airplay. But we'll see about that.
Last edited:
The more I think about Apple's decision to only support Apple Music, the more I think it makes perfect sense. Sure, it limits the size of potential customers—a happy Spotify user has no reason to even consider buying a HomePod—but Apple is OK with that. They have always been OK with that. The original iPhone was only available to AT&T customers. The original iPod required a Mac at a time when far fewer people had Macs.
With a V1 product, Apple's goal has always been to deliver the best experience possible, even if it means delivering that experience to a smaller number of people. They have always been willing to eschew 3rd party integrations and standards in order to stay laser focused on the first party experience. Apple's famously small engineering teams don't have the bandwidth to craft a great first party experience if they also have to worry about integrating with 3rd parties in the first version.
It may be that the cynics are correct that Apple is only doing this to drive Apple Music adoption. But I wouldn't count on it. I wouldn't be suprised to see the HomePod support 3rd party streaming services a few years down the line once they've had a chance to iterate the first party HomePod experience a bit. The iPod eventually worked with Windows and the iPhone eventually was available on all carriers. Apple does eventually want everyone to use their products, it's just not their focus for the first version.
It's funny that this is the complete opposite of how most tech companies approach things. Google and Amazon think "music is one of the most important smart speaker features, so we better make sure we integrate with all of the music services as quickly as possible!" whereas Apple thinks "music is one of the most important smart speaker features, so we better make damn sure we control the entire experience and get it right before we consider opening up to third party music services!"
As always, Apple is the only major tech company that doesn't chase market share as its first and highest priority.
With a V1 product, Apple's goal has always been to deliver the best experience possible, even if it means delivering that experience to a smaller number of people. They have always been willing to eschew 3rd party integrations and standards in order to stay laser focused on the first party experience. Apple's famously small engineering teams don't have the bandwidth to craft a great first party experience if they also have to worry about integrating with 3rd parties in the first version.
It may be that the cynics are correct that Apple is only doing this to drive Apple Music adoption. But I wouldn't count on it. I wouldn't be suprised to see the HomePod support 3rd party streaming services a few years down the line once they've had a chance to iterate the first party HomePod experience a bit. The iPod eventually worked with Windows and the iPhone eventually was available on all carriers. Apple does eventually want everyone to use their products, it's just not their focus for the first version.
It's funny that this is the complete opposite of how most tech companies approach things. Google and Amazon think "music is one of the most important smart speaker features, so we better make sure we integrate with all of the music services as quickly as possible!" whereas Apple thinks "music is one of the most important smart speaker features, so we better make damn sure we control the entire experience and get it right before we consider opening up to third party music services!"
As always, Apple is the only major tech company that doesn't chase market share as its first and highest priority.
Does this apply to other smart speakers? You should see the processors they use. Makes the A8 look like a supercomputer.
There is no Step 3. That's been Apple's philosophy since before the beginning of this century. Possibly since the introduction of the Mac in 1984.
Remember when you opened a computer box to find a colorful "quick start guide" with a dozen steps to do before you turned it on?
You will have already chosen the target - it will reconnect when music is not playing (AirPlay 2 has a facility to query the speaker to see what is playing).If one OBJECTIVELY reads the pre-release reviews, apparently HP is exceptional at sound quality but lacking in relative "smarts." If one prioritizes "smarts," the established competitors appear to bring more intelligence. If one prioritizes sound quality, HP appears to bring that benefit. HP can "win" over the people that covet better quality sound with "good enough" smarts. That's likely a LARGE number of people.
Besides, it has an Apple logo on it. Apple could box air and sell millions of 'em. The brand halo is strong here.
[doublepost=1518098073][/doublepost]
I know we are imagining that auto-connect airplay as a "just one software update away" is an easy answer to that problem but I'm not thinking that is so. How would HP know which Airplay source around a house is the one with which to auto-connect? How would- in this example-
Conceptually, there could be some kind of household prioritization code that drives auto-airplay connections (prioritize
I'm not saying a solution can't be worked out. I'm wondering if Apple even sees this as a problem (with Airplay). My guess is that Airplay is supposed to work that way and that auto-connect would get in the way of a fundamental connection philosophy for Airplay. But we'll see about that.
Or if they do it the right way it won’t disconnect the Apple TV if something else is playing in the first place, just leave it connected and only play its sound when the HP isn’t playing anything else.
There are plenty of solutions, and Apple has people working for them that are more clever than I am.
Last edited:
That’s a good excuse. I’ve added it to my list for the next Apple product rollout.
But Steve Balmer was and still is an idiot. Who in their right mind would listen to him?
I remember before the iPhone was released everyone thought it was going to be a success. Even when one of my friends was considering buying a netbook and the seller said that the iPhone will be released soon and it'd make much more sense to buy the iPhone.
My earlier post in this thread was just deleted for suggesting that the conversation would now be shifting to that narrative, since the earlier narrative of the HomePod being a complete flop was no longer believable.
Last edited:
These speakers will be collecting dust on the shelves in a few months (when Apple decides to stop artificial shortages).
If they improve Siri to actually be competitive with Google Assistant *and* open the speaker up to other music streaming platforms *then* maybe it would be something. If that ever happens though it will take long enough for competitors to release an even better speakers.
If they improve Siri to actually be competitive with Google Assistant *and* open the speaker up to other music streaming platforms *then* maybe it would be something. If that ever happens though it will take long enough for competitors to release an even better speakers.