HomePod No Longer Available for Launch Day Delivery From Apple in U.S.

[Chupa Chupa]

Are you really recommending buying a receiver just to use as an adaptor for your existing audio gear?

It's great if you've already got one but I think he was suggesting a small and inexpensive plug in adaptor.

No, I'm not suggesting anything, just looking for clarification on what the OP was saying and using my receiver as an example of a two-way AirPlay conduit. That said, if you have other a/v components, you need a receiver anyway. Might as well get one with AirPlay so you can extend audio to remote locations in the house. I stream all over the house and use the Remote app to select what's playing. It's great. Also, basic 5.1 A/V receivers are really inexpensive these days. It's more a matter of space than $.

 

[ersan191]

OK, but 3/5 and similar is favorable rankings. That's 3 points for and only 2 against.

And based on my reads of these HP pre-release "reviews", I don't read that "Siri sucks", nor do I get "best sounding speaker under $1000" (did I miss any of them actually writing that down like that? And was that speaker, as in ALL speakers, or just smart speakers as a subset?).

Yes, it does seem to be getting some punches that Siri is not "as smart" but that's different than "sucks." For "sucks", I'd expect a 0/5 rating. For not "as smart", it might get a 4/5 if smarter alternatives would be rated a 5/5 for smarts. 4/5 still looks stellar in such circumstances.

But bigger picture: what's it matter? If you see enough here to like it, buy it. If you don't see enough here yet, there will be more objective reviews coming very soon now. Maybe they will be even more flattering... or not. But they may drive some less enthusiastic potential buyers to buy... or not.

Our little side conversation here started because someone said Apple paid for these reviews. You claimed they didn't are you are very, VERY likely right about that. My counterpoint though is that they were still paid, via ad revenue and thus carry a fundamental motivation to stay on Apple's good side to get more of the same in the future.

It's a speaker - you can't buy it based on how it looks. The reviews so far are the only insight into how well it functions and sounds. Unless you're patient enough to wait until you can hear it in the Apple Store first (I'm not) it's really all you have to go on. If you're patient enough to wait for release day reviews you might as well wait for an in store demo, independent reviews aren't going to tell you a whole lot more about how it sounds than professional ones, you have to judge for yourself. The fact that we're even discussing it right now means we are all impatient. Most of us will know tomorrow whether we really like it or not, and Apple has a 14 day return policy.

I think the exact quote was "A single HomePod, for the size and price, slaughters most [bookshelf] speakers under $1000". Almost every review has said it sounds better than a Home Max ($399) and a Sonos Play:5 ($499). Most haven't compared it to anything more expensive because I'd assume most sane people aren't considering spending $1000 on a bookshelf speaker.

Siri doesn't "suck", that was an exaggeration, but it obviously falls short of the other assistants.

And those companies would make the same amount of money in ad revenue whether their review was positive or negative.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

No, I'm not suggesting anything, just looking for clarification on what the OP was saying and using my receiver as an example of a two-way AirPlay conduit. That said, if you have other a/v components, you need a receiver anyway. Might as well get one with AirPlay so you can extend audio to remote locations in the house. I stream all over the house and use the Remote app to select what's playing. It's great. Also, basic 5.1 A/V receivers are really inexpensive these days. It's more a matter of space than $.

These points are valid and really good points. I think a lot of us are practically hypnotized into seeing the Airplay use of HP as a huge thing. However, if one has a fairly modern receiver, it's probably got Airplay in it already. All of that Airplay-driven functionality we covet in HP may already be in that box in our homes.

No receiver? Do you have an TV? Guess what it can do too? And it has Siri voice controls, AM music, etc baked in as well... PLUS all of the video benefits... PLUS full home sharing... PLUS the flexibility of third party apps so one could opt to play Pandora, Tidal, etc without having to lean on Airplay. Since one must have an iDevice to set up an HP, the few parts of HP not already baked into TV are likely available- perhaps even more capably- in the iDevice we already have.

The point is that there are options here. One could buy a HP or two... or perhaps cover this base with Apple hardware we already own... or buy an TV for most of these and other options... or buy a receiver with Airplay and a lot of flexibility to enjoy speakers OUTSIDE of the ecosystem. Consumers should think about their options and choose wisely.

 

[Jesse Waugh]

This is one of those products that in 10 years you will see a video in youtube about "Apple products you never knew existed".

Let's hope so - one less 1984 device in our homes.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

And those companies would make the same amount of money in ad revenue whether their review was positive or negative.

I guess you are missing- or just ignoring- that point. YES, they would make the same ad revenue either way (maybe even more for being the outlier?). But let one of them write a terrible pre-release "review" and see if they get to make the ad revenue in any future pre-release "reviews" of Apple products.

 

[ersan191]

I guess you are missing- or just ignoring- that point. YES, they would make the same ad revenue either way. But let one of them write a terrible pre-release "review" and see if they get to make the ad revenue of any future pre-release "reviews" of Apple products.

Except I already made the point that all of these publications aren't exactly unflinching Apple supporters to begin with, and big places like the New York Times and USA Today really don't care about getting prerelease products from Apple. Apple gets more than they do out of the relationship.

If the NY Times and USA Today and Forbes and Wall Street Journal reviews were bad but all of the tech blog reviews were stellar then I would be screaming foul just like these other whackos. But they aren't. There isn't a conspiracy going on here.

 

[Dave245]

Again, you're missing my point.

At the beginning we had a few early listening tests done by people invited to controlled demos by Apple. People claimed this isn't good enough because Apple could have cheated by modifying the tests to make the HomePod sound better and the competitors worse. They said wait for the reviews.

Now we have lots of independent reviews done by all the same organizations that Apple typically sends review units to (and a few new ones). People claim this isn't good enough because A) they are given early review units so are biased towards Apple or B) none of these people are audio experts and aren't qualified to judge the HomePod. Now we have to wait for reviews from A) people who have no stake in needing to impress Apple or B) audio experts who know how to review speakers.

What excuses will people make when real users get their HomePods and rave about how good they sound? When "non-biased" sites also state the HomePod sounds great?

It's always a moving target when it comes to Apple. We see this everywhere and now we're seeing it with the HomePod. It's about the only that's consistent when it comes to reviewing Apple products.


And why the comment about being a massive Apple fan? Is that supposed to imply that my opinions don't count? Why do people always play the "fanboy" card?

This x1000, you are wasting you time tho because some people just won’t accept it just like with the AirPods, Apple Watch, iPad and iPhone, there are people like that who just can’t accept that Apple are good at what they do. I for one don’t listen to these types of people anymore and plan on using my HomePod tomorrow when it arrives and enjoying it, just like I do with AirPods, iPad, iPhone and Apple Watch and all the Apple products I own.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

If I'm "some people", you should try reading more of my posts. I'm sitting on the fence about this product. Earlier in this thread, I offered strong counterpoint to someone that just ripped HP but I'm also offering counterpoint to just blind-faith trusting these pre-release "reviews" too.

I've explicitly written down that I think it will sell very well and that I'm generally leap-of-faith trusting that it will sound very good. I hope you enjoy yours tomorrow. I can wait a few days to help me decide if I want to buy one or not. Neither of our timing choices nor opinions affect the other in the least.

 

[Matz]

The next few weeks should be interesting. Actual home user reviews!

 

[ocnitsa]

It’s even stranger given there’s practically no negative reviews about HomePod anywhere on the internet... Just dozens of positive ones.

New York Times said "Don't rush to buy it" in the title of their review. Not exactly positive. But, most people have said sound quality is good...but Siri is dumb and it's inconvenient if you don't use Apple Music.

 

[Kermit262]

Let's hope so - one less 1984 device in our homes.

That might be true of Amazon's or Google's smart speakers, but Apple goes to great lengths to protect the user's privacy through anonymity and encryption. It's one of the reasons I'm buying the HomePod and not an Echo or Home Max.

 

[The Game 161]

New York Times said "Don't rush to buy it" in the title of their review. Not exactly positive. But, most people have said sound quality is good...but Siri is dumb and it's inconvenient if you don't use Apple Music.

Depends what you want out of this thing

If it's quality sound and basic siri tasks then it fits a need. If you aren't all in on apple music it's not a must buy.

Looking forward to mine for music/podcasts/to switch lights on and off and for things like reminders. I'm not buying this thing for amazing smart answers

 

[duervo]

These points are valid and really good points. I think a lot of us are practically hypnotized into seeing the Airplay use of HP as a huge thing. However, if one has a fairly modern receiver, it's probably got Airplay in it already. All of that Airplay-driven functionality we covet in HP may already be in that box in our homes.

No receiver? Do you have an TV? Guess what it can do too? And it has Siri voice controls, AM music, etc baked in as well... PLUS all of the video benefits... PLUS full home sharing... PLUS the flexibility of third party apps so one could opt to play Pandora, Tidal, etc without having to lean on Airplay. Since one must have an iDevice to set up an HP, the few parts of HP not already baked into TV are likely available- perhaps even more capably- in the iDevice we already have.

The point is that there are options here. One could buy a HP or two... or perhaps cover this base with Apple hardware we already own... or buy an TV for most of these and other options... or buy a receiver with Airplay and a lot of flexibility to enjoy speakers OUTSIDE of the ecosystem. Consumers should think about their options and choose wisely.

I bought a receiver in 1997. In the end, I only had the optical audio input used for the TV. My TV at the time (which I bought in 2008 and was upgraded 2 months ago) had 4 HDMI ports in it, which I used for all of the video devices. Finally upgraded the receiver in early 2017. I have a set of Polk speakers that I paid several thousand dollars for in 1997 hooked up to it. Supports 4K, has 8 HDMI inputs, supports Chromecast, AirPlay, and some other stuff I’ll probably never use. Combine that with the Apple TV that’s connected to the receiver, I have zero use for a HomePod. In fact, I can’t help but have a heavy scepticism about the longevity of this new product, at least in its current state. It seems ok for something to slap in the bedroom on the nightstand, or on a desk in an office, but to think it could replace the core of a home theatre setup is kinda nuts, IMO.

This seems like Apple’s form of a #metoo product with regard to “smart speakers.”

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I happen to be comparably equipped. My big hopes for HP was that Apple WOULD make Siri significantly smarter, and then distribute a smarter Siri to all the rest of the Apple products. For the rooms where my speakers are now, perhaps there's a market for people like us for a Siri-Dot-type product on down the road, especially if Apple does get around to making Siri much smarter.

I can see a "smart speaker" application beyond the reach of my receiver (already set up for 3 zones AND hooked into a whole-home speaker system built into the home). I do have a garage with no speaker and the whole-home speaker quality is not very great, so a few rooms could have their speaker upgraded with a HP or similar product.

So I can see places to work in a HP(s) but I do not seem to see it as some kind of "one speaker to rule them all" option, nor likely to make me want to throw out all of what I have because 1 or 2 of these is obviously superior in every way. I also don't believe it can make me walk on water, bring on world peace of have super models knocking on my door every night.

What I perceive HP is is very simple: Apple's best cut at an Echo done as good as Apple can do it. WE (around here) have spun it up into being a home theater speaker, perhaps even surround sound in a box (one guy was wondering if it could be Dolby ATMOS in a box). And even Apple is not pushing it for that kind of application (in spite of them likely selling many more units if they would).

I think it will be a fine competitor for this "smart speaker" space. However, many of us already have most of the benefits in other Apple products and other AV setups already in place. Thus, it is NOT a situation where every possible person here must buy one... in spite of how hard some of us seem to be working to try to convince us of that.

 

[andresandiego]

The next few weeks should be interesting. Actual home user reviews!

You are so right! I ordered one and if it does not live up to my expectations an Apple Store is less than a mile away from me to return it.

 

[Jesse Waugh]

That might be true of Amazon's or Google's smart speakers, but Apple goes to great lengths to protect the user's privacy through anonymity and encryption. It's one of the reasons I'm buying the HomePod and not an Echo or Home Max.

Sorry but you’ve drunk the Kool-Aid. If you think Apple is actually interested in your privacy and security, you’ve got another thing coming. I believe Jobs kept Apple user security real. But those days are LONG gone.

 

[Kermit262]

Sorry but you’ve drunk the Kool-Aid. If you think Apple is actually interested in your privacy and security, you’ve got another thing coming. I believe Jobs kept Apple user security real. But those days are LONG gone.

If by “Kool-Aid” you mean actual facts/specifications regarding the HomePod, then yes. Why you choose to ignore it or spin your own narrative is beyond me.

 

[TheTruth101]

The 50 units they had for sale just sold out.

Yeah, they are cautious with this one and not make the fool of themselves as they did with the Apple Watch.

 

[xterratop]

Indeed... like this one...

Apple is repeating history, with the iPod Hi-Fi speaker they focused on the glorious sound quality, but the product was too expensive and too niche, ie only worked with iPods.

Similarly, Homepod is too expensive and only works with Apple music and within Apple's ecosystem. Plus it misses the point on the most important feature which should be AI.

[doublepost=1518135680][/doublepost]What sucks is that the Apple Hi Fi speaker back in the day was sold at $350 when it was released on Feb. 28, 2006. 12 years later, Apple makes the Home Pod but priced it exactly the same price as the Hi Fi. Come on Apple! Give us a break! They should have priced it way less.

 

[The Game 161]

[doublepost=1518135680][/doublepost]What sucks is that the Apple Hi Fi speaker back in the day was sold at $350 when it was released on Feb. 28, 2006. 12 years later, Apple makes the Home Pod but priced it exactly the same price as the Hi Fi. Come on Apple! Give us a break! They should have priced it way less.

Why? high quality sound speakers this is about par price wise.

 

[artfossil]

The HomePod reminds me of a passage from "The Design of Everyday Things" by Don Norman:

"Most companies compare features with their competition to determine where they are weak, so they can strengthen those areas. Wrong... A better strategy is to concentrate on areas where they are stronger and to strengthen them even more. Then focus all marketing and advertisements to point out the strong points. This causes the product to stand out from the mindless herd. As for the weaknesses, ignore the irrelevant ones... The lesson is simple: don’t follow blindly; focus on strengths, not weaknesses. If the product has real strengths, it can afford to just be “good enough” in the other areas.

Good design requires stepping back from competitive pressures and ensuring that the entire product be consistent, coherent, and understandable. This stance requires the leadership of the company to withstand the marketing forces that keep begging to add this feature or that, each thought to be essential for some market segment. The best products come from ignoring these competing voices and instead focusing on the true needs of the people who use the product"

Spot on, and terrific book, by the way.

 

[ErikGrim]

[doublepost=1518135680][/doublepost]What sucks is that the Apple Hi Fi speaker back in the day was sold at $350 when it was released on Feb. 28, 2006. 12 years later, Apple makes the Home Pod but priced it exactly the same price as the Hi Fi. Come on Apple! Give us a break! They should have priced it way less.

Should they? As far as the reviews go they sound far better than most speakers in this price class.

 

[iMi]

It's probably just because tomorrow is the launch day. Too late to ship them. Looks like they are quoting the next available arrival date which would be February 12th.

I don't see any issues here.

 

[TallManNY]

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 HomePod is like the iPhone, iPad, Mac and Apple TV it will be open to third party apps including music streaming services. I'd say that is likely to be the case next year. I doubt it will ever use another parties AI assistant though. But I suspect Siri is going to be better and will ultimately be better than Amazon Alexa but not as good as Google.

 

[Mac... nificent]

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.

Yep, that's spot on. The first iteration of pretty much every new Apple product was limiting, but as the product grew it became open to other things. Apple is smart because they are focusing on sound quality, and not how many cooks they can fit in the kitchen. HomePod is going to be Retina for your ears. Later this year when they allow for stereo pairing this product will be in a league of its own, even with all its other limitations.