HomePod Struggling to Gain Market Share Alongside Cheaper Amazon Echo and Google Home Speakers

[Shanghaichica]

Yeap, get an Echo Dot, want better sound? Just stream over bluetooth to anything you like or plug it in with its output jack, hey presto insta would wuality massively better then a HomePod. If you have a home system worth thousands this is easy to do, you cannot do this with a HomePod though, instead you have to buy a system compatible with Apple’s protocols...

I still plan on getting a B&W Zepalin to connect to my Echo Dot. Not cheap, but not much more then a HomePod with the flexibility of using any music service I like. This is what Apple cannot understand, flexibility and smart AI that works is what people want.

Smart speakers is an area Apple just seems completely out of its depth in, the total opposite to smart watches in fact IMO. In fact I can stream from my iPhone to Google Cast easily from apps that support it, it works great, yet you can’t connect the HomePod to your own system?

Using a separate Bluetooth speaker is a pain in the bum. I had a second gen echo dot in my kitchen and the sound quality was so awful to it wasn’t even fit for listening to audiobooks or podcast whilst doing the dishes. I had it connected up to a Bluetooth speaker and that was annoying having to keep the thing charged. Having to turn the speaker on and off. I bought the 3rd gen echo dot to replace it with which sounds much better.
[doublepost=1549396213][/doublepost]

Yep the voice control will work for anyone. What you can't do is stream music from a device other than an Apple device.

Yes my husband can’t use his Apple Music subscription on his note 8 with our HomePods but there’s always an iPad in the house that he can use if he wants to airplay something.

 

[goldbuffalo]

So let me get this straight Amazon sells 1,000,000 at $25 piece for $25 million and Apple sells 100,000 and they make $34 million.

 

[Shanghaichica]

I wouldn't say it's marketing fluff, it's creating a different product than everyone else on the market with a unique value proposition. They do leverage pop culture, sure, but so does every large brand. And if you read any other companies reports to shareholders or press releases, they are all "boasting" about some metric that is skewed to make the company look better.

The HiFi was absolutely a failure as a commercial product, but it was (in my opinion) a very similar take as the HomePod: Market is flooded with cheaper speakers. Create a niche, high quality speaker that focuses on integration and sound. Leverage brand affinity and ease of use to sell. HiFi misjudged (or was just a subsidized experiment of) the # of iPod users who would pay for that experience.

None of this is "bad" for Apple, because they built (and priced) the product for lower volume, higher margin sales. If they went the cheap route, they'd simply be playing Amazon/Google's game and be late to the party. Better to start your own path and be distinct, than fade into the pack.

I think that Apple’s ecosystem is much more developed now than it was in the Hifi. Apple also have a much larger user base and marketing presence. They also have Apple Music which is growing rapidly and now has more subscribers in the US than Spotify.
[doublepost=1549396671][/doublepost]

The problem with the HomePod, outside of price, is that you just cannot trust Apple to NOT render it completely useless with updates. Apple does not listen to or care about customer's past purchases. I am not in any way interested in buying a new HomePod every 2 or 3 years just to keep Apple happy so I can keep getting updates. A speaker is a speaker and it should last a lot longer than 2 or 3 years. At $25 who cares how long it lasts.

Next year the non-compatible HomePod2 will be released and thereafter all software updates only apply to the HomePod2. The following year you be real happy to have that half working door stop in your living room. Apple was great as an innovator, but now that all of Apple's products are commodities, they have no DNA to handle them or their users correctly.

I think Apple will support it for a few years at least. They are known for supporting their devices for a long time. Even more recent first gen products like the first Apple Watch still got supported for a few years.

 

[Khedron]

So let me get this straight Amazon sells 1,000,000 at $25 piece for $25 million and Apple sells 100,000 and they make $34 million.

Amazon have a range of devices for £30, £80, £120, £140, £220.
[doublepost=1549396791][/doublepost]

I think Apple will support it for a few years at least. They are known for supporting their devices for a long time. Even more recent first gen products like the first Apple Watch still got supported for a few years.

The lifetime of premium speakers is measured in decades not years.

 

[Shanghaichica]

Amazon have a range of devices for £30, £80, £120, £140, £220.

I would imagine that the vast majority of echo devices they are selling are the echo dots which they regularly put on sale for £25.

I bought the echo when it was reduced to £60 but the rest are echo dots. I don’t see them selling that many echo pluses or echo shows.

 

[alfonsog]

Compare the sales to the Bose version at the same price.... not to the echo

 

[Shanghaichica]

Amazon have a range of devices for £30, £80, £120, £140, £220.
[doublepost=1549396791][/doublepost]

The lifetime of premium speakers is measured in decades not years.

Well this is a piece of technology and will be governed by the same rules just like all of Apple products. It’s the same thing that happened with the Apple Watch Edition. People were comparing it to Rolexes but it’s no longer supported. However as it’s already been pointed out the HomePod will still work when it’s no longer getting updates. I have an Apple TV3 which hasn’t been updated in years but it still works.

 

[EdT]

You can use HomePod with Apple TV but the Airplay lag means there's a 2 second delay on the user interface as it keeps the sound in sync with the video.

That may be a necessary consequence. I would rather that the sound was in sync with the video.

 

[Shanghaichica]

Why should I (or anyone I welcome into my home) need an Apple device just to use a speaker? Needless barriers.

The HomePod is for people with at least one iOS device as an iOS device is required to set it up. If you don’t have any iOS devices then the HomePod isn’t the right speaker for you.

 

[nt5672]

I don’t think the HomePod will stop working just because it doesn’t receive any further updates.

I agree, but there will be something, like Airplay 3 that will handle more than 2 channels and you'll be out of luck. Or, there will be a security problem, that does not get updated. Or whatever. Apple decides all too often to just move on with no affinity for anyone's past purchases. These are still just toys that Apple expect one to just throw away in a couple of years. I can surely afford them, but I cannot (or I guess will not) replace them every 2 or 3 years for whatever reason Apple dreams up.

 

[Khedron]

Well this is a piece of technology and will be governed by the same rules just like all of Apple products. It’s the same thing that happened with the Apple Watch Edition. People were comparing it to Rolexes but it’s no longer supported. However as it’s already been pointed out the HomePod will still work when it’s no longer getting updates. I have an Apple TV3 which hasn’t been updated in years but it still works.

Exactly. Watches and speakers both have long established companies delivering premium products. Apple can't be considered in the same way and customers need to be aware they're just buying a highly priced disposable product.

 

[mrochester]

I agree, but there will be something, like Airplay 3 that will handle more than 2 channels and you'll be out of luck. Or, there will be a security problem, that does not get updated. Or whatever. Apple decides all too often to just move on with no affinity for anyone's past purchases. These are still just toys that Apple expect one to just throw away in a couple of years. I can surely afford them, but I cannot (or I guess will not) replace them every 2 or 3 years for whatever reason Apple dreams up.

Luckily Apple is not like that at all . You are speaking of an Apple that doesn’t exist!

 

[Shanghaichica]

Luckily Apple is not like that at all . You are speaking of an Apple that doesn’t exist!

I know Apple are well known for their long term product support.

 

[Coconut Bean]

I don’t think they will abandon the market. It’s just obvious they aren’t trying to compete with the cheaper devices. I’m sure eventually they will release a smaller less expensive HomePod however I’m sure it will be above the $100 price range.

The name of the game is data. And they might be getting a ******** of profit from the margins, but as their market penetration is so shallow Siri will just fall further back.

 

[JRobinsonJr]

I think this is sort of a mixed comparison. The Echo’s primary mission was to be a front-end for Alexa. The HomePod’s primary mission was to be an audiophile-quality speaker system. Different goals, different technology, different price points. They happen to be lumped into the same smart speaker segment so we now have these graphs.

Clear. Concise. Correct. Well said!

The problem (IMO only) is the we - Apples customers - asked for a smart assistant in a speaker, but Apple delivered something different. The disconnect is between what the market (as a whole) wants versus what Apple delivered.

 

[apolloa]

Using a separate Bluetooth speaker is a pain in the bum. I had a second gen echo dot in my kitchen and the sound quality was so awful to it wasn’t even fit for listening to audiobooks or podcast whilst doing the dishes. I had it connected up to a Bluetooth speaker and that was annoying having to keep the thing charged. Having to turn the speaker on and off. I bought the 3rd gen echo dot to replace it with which sounds much better.
[doublepost=1549396213][/doublepost]
Yes my husband can’t use his Apple Music subscription on his note 8 with our HomePods but there’s always an iPad in the house that he can use if he wants to airplay something.

Ok, just use the jack on the Dot, point being you cannot do that with a HomePod.

 

[mrochester]

The name of the game is data. And they might be getting a ******** of profit from the margins, but as their market penetration is so shallow Siri will just fall further back.

The name of the game is definitely not data. The beginnings of a huge backlash against data collection has already started.

 

[Mydel]

I have to say I have a problem with HomePod. I mean apart from being available in very limited number of countries (you can't buy it in Scandinavia) the positioning is wired. I mean its quite an expensive device for what it is. I have no need for any assistant in my home. I don't want anyone listening...but I would gladly bought the HomePod as long as a sound quality was bit better. I mean Sonos5 blows it out of the water and is really close in price. Also if it allow me seamlessly used them as an external speakers for the multiple apple devices I have at home. So if Im in an office using my MPB it can serve as speaker and if I turn off computer and watch the movie i could use it as "surround" system.
Overall sound quality is not good enough for 350 plus VAT. OR its too limited in usage for 350 plus VAT...

 

[JRobinsonJr]

That may be a necessary consequence. I would rather that the sound was in sync with the video.

Of course, if the AppleTV still had optical out - and the HomePod had a variety of inputs - it wouldn’t be a problem at all.

 

[BradPDX]

I am one of those rare birds, I own 2 HomePods. I don't consider the Amazon Echo or Google Home products to be useful for music playback, they simply sound flat and unimpressive, like many inexpensive speakers. I own a Google Home Mini, but it mainly sits unused in the kitchen because no one in my family (except for me on occasion) likes to talk to any of the digital assistants for anything. Cooking timers are about it.

Siri's lack of whatever simply doesn't matter for us. The sound quality of the HomePod is terrific, and having them in 2 rooms of the house makes for an enjoyable audio system. We use Apple Music, of course, and don't care at all about Spotify. All that matters for Siri is that it understand music requests, which it does. The proper market comparison for the HomePod is Sonos, not so much the Amazon and Google products for which audio is a footnote.

I do agree that ultimately, Apple should open up HomePod to Spotify and some other services. A model with lower audio quality is not interesting to me, but since most people don't care and can't hear differences between products, it may be a good idea for Apple.

I'm old, and so don't think of $350 as "expensive" for a good audio product at all. When I was a college student, any halfway-decent dorm room "stereo system" cost well north of $2000 in today's dollars, adjusted for inflation. I do hear speakers that sound acceptable for under $200, but not many at all.

 

[Mabsport]

I bought the HomePod after having Alexi items around the home. At first I liked it and like all my apple stuff tried to justify to myself it was worth it. After hearing a pair of Songs Ones with Alexa I took the HomePod back and bought the pair at a bargain price of £349. These I feel are far superior than the HomePod in sound and also having Alexa on board I have best of all worlds. The HomePod is nice sounding but compared to what I gained with the 2 Sonos Ones I feel I now have the better set up of a comparable price.

 

[EdT]

Of course, if the AppleTV still had optical out - and the HomePod had a variety of inputs - it wouldn’t be a problem at all.

I’ve complained already about connecting to other devices, so I didn’t want to do it again. Apple thinks that every hookup can be done wirelessly today.

In the long term they are probably right, most things will communicate wirelessly. But unless Apple is going to start making a lot of electronics that they currently don’t make and don’t have expertise in that leaves a lot of gaps in connectivity between devices.

 

[christophermdia]

Siri is the big issue here ... while competition is good for a business it is in this case a hinderance. Apple should look back and see that they have a greatly inferior product in Siri and its variability of devices. A partnership with Google or Amazon would be a nail in the coffin. Sometimes I just don't get it ... these are 3 completely different companies with very minimal overlapping products, yet they compete tooth and nail with each trying to enter a business they have very little competence in and / or create nothing but crap products. Its like an identity crisis.

 

[Beck Show]

Control it - only if you’re using Apple Music?

That is correct. That’s exactly what it is designed for. If you are erroneously using something else to Airplay to it, then you can use that service’s app to control it.

 

[TonyC28]

I'm not necessary defending Apple here, so bear with me:

An acquaintance of mine paid over £500 for one of these: https://www.whathifi.com/naim/mu-so-qb/review

Here's another £500 bluetooth speaker: https://www.whathifi.com/bw/zeppelin-wireless/review

Another example: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07GBR9HG4/ref=asc_df_B07GBR9HG458353556

You don't need to look too far to find "audiophile" wireless speakers priced at anything from $300 to infinity.

Now look at the HomePod page on the Apple site - first, its under the Music tab. Then the first 3/4 of the page is about music and sound quality. Then about using Siri to play music - the "smart home assistant" bit about getting weather forecasts, checking your calendar etc. is literally at the bottom of the list.

What Apple have done is produced - and marketed - a wireless audiophile speaker, designed primarily for music, at a price that is (was) highly competitive with the likes of Bose, Naim, B&W etc.

The "smart speakers" from Google and Amazon do offer music as a selling point, yes, but the marketing gives equal emphasis to the 'smart assistant' side and (in Amazon's case) a lot more emphasis on the shopping side. Looking at the reviews, seems like the audio quality of the HomePod thrashes everything from Amazon/Google except the Google Home Max... which costs more than the HomePod!

Its common knowledge that Amazon and Google's main businesses are shopping, data mining and advertising rather than hardware sales so it is very plausible that their cheaper smart speakers are subsidised loss-leaders - whereas Apple still make nearly 90% of their money from hardware (and their services tend to be designed to promote their hardware rather than vice versa) so its likely that they're looking to make money selling HomePods (sorry - you can tell nothing by trying to guess the cost of the components - Apple doesn't buy its parts in quantities of 10 from the RS catalogue).

Apple's problem is the industry and customers are comparing the HomePod with Amazon and Google's (probably subsidised) cash register/living-room-spy products - but as long as they're making money, they might not care.

Personally, the deal-breakers for me are not the price but :
(a) you need two of them for stereo - and both need to be plugged in to the mains.
(b) As I understand it, won't just play your iTunes library from a Mac - you have to Airplay from an iDevice
(c) No audio input - If I ever feel the urge to play a real CD or old cassette tape - and what do hipsters do if they have an irrational craving for vinyl?
(d) Everybody says that the sound is incredible... but is that incredible in absolute terms, or just incredibly impressive from a tiny speaker? I know my iPad and Mac have astonishing sound quality - for minute speakers apparently sealed in ultra-thin devices with no obvious grilles - but that doesn't mean that my $100 Behringer studio monitors (themselves hardly the acme of audiophillic perfection) don't blow them away.

I've never heard one so I can't speak to the sound. Come to think of it, I've never even seen one in person. But, for the sake of discussion let's assume it is the best sounding speaker that has ever been produced. If that were the case that would be great, and price be damned. But, it't not just a speaker. It's also (or simply "is") a smart speaker. I think if Apple already had a speaker that was designed purely for sound and it had been out for a a few years and then they added Siri to it, then it would all make more sense. But given the timing of when they jumped into the market of smart speakers, and not just speakers, their entry into the market feels awkward. I'm probably not explaining this well but I hope you get my point.