Siri and Alexa Battling to Become Go-To Voice Assistants in Hotel Rooms

[BvizioN]

The only time I've seen someone use Siri is in Apple TV commercials.

Oh, now that explains everything.
It's like.... I have never seen a man masturbating, therefore no one seem to ever do it.
Besides, how would you what people are doing to their phone when you see them out and about their business? I personally use Siri a lot for calendar appointments, reminders, SMS, etc. Saying no one uses a particular service simply because you don't or because you never seen one is simply idiotic and stupid.

 

[RainbowHurrican]

Hopefully this will kick Apple in gear and maybe they will release a smarter, more aware assistant.

Alexa wins this hands down if Apple doesn't start changing its approach to Siri.

After years of hoping we would see big improvements in SIRI, I've come to believe its just not going to happen.

SIRI is a voice. How do you come out with a model that's thinner? You can't and that's why IVE and Cook have no interest in SIRI and have let it languish.

Why do you think the SIRI/VIV guys were so desperate that they left Apple and went to Samsung. Because Apple really wasn't planning to do anything to substantially improve SIRI.

If Apple is going to release a ECHO competitor they have to go high-end. Think SIRI in a networked/wireless Speaker that can act as a Mesh WIFI repeater and competes with SONOS. Probably starting at $500.

Right now I would say Apple has left their left Flank unguarded.

 

[BuffaloTF]

how many of these devices are end to end encrypted? I'll take Home Kit with its requirement of hardware end to end encryption over anything else others have to offer.

My Homekit lighting system works perfectly. I walk up to my apartment and my lights come on. I tell SIRI to dim, turn on/off and it does. I walk away from my apartment and all my lights turn off - I think its a fantasitc system.

All of them?

For one, zigbee and z-wave are only set at a 1-to-1 relationship between device and hub. Those communications themselves are encrypted. Sure... you could use a sniffer to decipher the messages, I guess... but you can do that with your wifi solution (HomeKit, Google Home) as well...

And the Echo... yeah, it's definitely locked down.

And the best part, which I was driving towards... is that devices that HomeKit can control are ones that can also be controlled by a hub or Echo. The services themselves don't butt heads - HomeKit is little more than an API that hooks into Apple's GUI for control with certain triggers allowed. So... as I was saying, HomeKit needs to become Alexa compliant, not the other way around. Apple needs to figure out how to tap into the *totally open* API Amazon provides. Even Google has theirs locked down, which is why Amazon is running away with this crown without a fight.

About the only items that seem to be a perfect fit for HomeKit and Google, are door locks and garage doors. Approach and unlock/open. For everything else, the stationery Echo is all you'll ever need.

 

[5105973]

TBH, Alexa wins purely down to the better microphones which were designed to pick up sound from a large area. Siri barely understands me when the iPhone is on my bedside table. If Apple developed a stand-alone device, then it becomes more interesting.

The thing is, the mics on the iPhone are not bad at all. When I got my iPhone 7 Plus for Christmas, Siri was so bad on it that I thought the phone had defective mics. I'd been on Android for most of the early part of iOS 10's deployment, so my experience of Siri on my iPhone SE using iOS 9 was decent and I was unprepared for the absolute decline in quality of Siri I've experienced. I used to use Siri several times a day, most days.

It was absolutely rubbish on my iPhone 7 Plus and on two others I tested that belonged to family members. Then I used voice queries and commands on the same IPhone 7 Plus, but this time on Google Assistant via Allo. I made the same exact inquiries and commands using as close to the same volume and tone of voice as humanly possible as I did with Siri. My iPhone 7+ on Google Assistant processed my input just fine. Siri, on the other hand mangled my input badly, as if hard of hearing. Same phone, two different softwares and different implementations on the cloud.

So I'm thinking the problem is either in the software or how it's all working on the cloud.

Alexa usually hears me pretty well. Sometimes when I'm asking for definitions though, she has trouble distinguishing between similar sounding words like "indigence" and "indulgence". Alexa is not without her share of comical goofs, too. But Siri is really pushing it these days.

 

[ZapNZs]

Which one will talk the dirtiest to you on those travel nights?

 

[5105973]

I don't want any hotel room to have a device always on listening to everything I do, including confidential discussions with colleagues over the phone.

Unless it's an untapped land line, I didn't think if was possible to have confidential discussions over the phone anymore.

 

[BlandUsername]

Which one will talk the dirtiest to you on those travel nights?

Siri is a total prude :<, Apple is is California, Not the Bible Belt.

 

[WRChris]

After years of hoping we would see big improvements in SIRI, I've come to believe its just not going to happen.

SIRI is a voice. How do you come out with a model that's thinner? You can't and that's why IVE and Cook have no interest in SIRI and have let it languish.

Why do you think the SIRI/VIV guys were so desperate that they left Apple and went to Samsung. Because Apple really wasn't planning to do anything to substantially improve SIRI.

If Apple is going to release a ECHO competitor they have to go high-end. Think SIRI in a networked/wireless Speaker that can act as a Mesh WIFI repeater and competes with SONOS. Probably starting at $500.

Right now I would say Apple has left their left Flank unguarded.

If Siri was just a voice, which it's not, then they could apply that voice to anything and effectively make it smarter. It's much more than a voice, but still she's dumb and outdated. "this is what I found on the web for get me directions to...."

I would be a buyer of an echo competitor, in fact, I'm waiting on Apple before I think about purchasing an amazon product.

At this point Alexa has no advantage over using your smartphone to power HomeKit, in my situation.

I figure that VIV went to Samsung because they offered more money...not out of desperation

 

[WRChris]

Right? If you'd told people just 20 years ago that everything they did and said would be monitored, there'd probably have been a revolt. Now, people just say "it needs to work better!".

I agree, to a certain degree. Don't like Siri? Turn her off. The spy programs are unjust but you shouldn't worry about them too much, they don't stop any criminals, so I doubt they are listening to any of what you or I would say.

 

[Uofmtiger]

The thing is, the mics on the iPhone are not bad at all. When I got my iPhone 7 Plus for Christmas, Siri was so bad on it that I thought the phone had defective mics. I'd been on Android for most of the early part of iOS 10's deployment, so my experience of Siri on my iPhone SE using iOS 9 was decent and I was unprepared for the absolute decline in quality of Siri I've experienced. I used to use Siri several times a day, most days.

It was absolutely rubbish on my iPhone 7 Plus and on two others I tested that belonged to family members. Then I used voice queries and commands on the same IPhone 7 Plus, but this time on Google Assistant via Allo. I made the same exact inquiries and commands using as close to the same volume and tone of voice as humanly possible as I did with Siri. My iPhone 7+ on Google Assistant processed my input just fine. Siri, on the other hand mangled my input badly, as if hard of hearing. Same phone, two different softwares and different implementations on the cloud.

So I'm thinking the problem is either in the software or how it's all working on the cloud.

Alexa usually hears me pretty well. Sometimes when I'm asking for definitions though, she has trouble distinguishing between similar sounding words like "indigence" and "indulgence". Alexa is not without her share of comical goofs, too. But Siri is really pushing it these days.

This is really bizarre because the version of Siri on my iPhone 7 plus can typically understand me. If I ask for a definition of "indulgence","indigence", or "indigenous" it gives me the correct definitions. Some of this reminds me of the Big Bang Theory episode:

I wonder if it has something to do with internet speed or something outside of just the mic?
[doublepost=1490324393][/doublepost]

After years of hoping we would see big improvements in SIRI, I've come to believe its just not going to happen.

SIRI is a voice. How do you come out with a model that's thinner? You can't and that's why IVE and Cook have no interest in SIRI and have let it languish.

Why do you think the SIRI/VIV guys were so desperate that they left Apple and went to Samsung. Because Apple really wasn't planning to do anything to substantially improve SIRI.

If Apple is going to release a ECHO competitor they have to go high-end. Think SIRI in a networked/wireless Speaker that can act as a Mesh WIFI repeater and competes with SONOS. Probably starting at $500.

Right now I would say Apple has left their left Flank unguarded.

There really isn't a Flank to be unguarded at this point. The Apple Watch sells more units in quarter than the Echo sold in its first two years and we don't even want to talk about the profit differential. In other words, if Apple seeks to come out with a $500 device, it will be in a market of its own (other than maybe the higher end Sonos speakers). If it comes in at a lower price point and works with the Apple ecosystem, it will have features that the Echo and Google Home don't have.

If Apple gets in this market, I hope it isn''t with some sort of $500 speaker that I don't need or want. I can hook up the Echo Dot to any speaker or system I already own for $50. That is the beauty of the Dot. I would prefer Apple to do something similar to Google Home, that has an okay speaker, but instead of working with Casting, it will have the ability to work with Airplay, Airplay Mirroring, and the AppleTV....also if it had a Bluetooth receiver and transmitter like the Dot, it would be even better.

Mark Gurman talked about something similar to what you described last year on BloombergTV..even talked about it having cameras to know who it was talking to..but I am hoping they ditched it for something with more mainstream pricing.

 

[Zandery]

SIRI has a few big advantages: 1. multi-language support 2. A screen to display information. 3. Video games 4. movies/TV. What will most people do? Turn on lights, play music, set alarms, ask for information about the town. Both can do that equally as well. If the kids want to play video games or watch a cartoon then SIRI wins.

You can get Alexa to turn on your TV and select channels/apps, it takes a bit of doing at first but then it's golden so I wouldn't say Siri has that advantage.

-----

Personally I prefer Alexa to Siri but then I use mine to order groceries, listen to news bulletins, play my Spotify playlists and control the lights/TV... Siri has failed to do anything like that cohesively which is a huge shame.

 

[shk718]

All of them?

For one, zigbee and z-wave are only set at a 1-to-1 relationship between device and hub. Those communications themselves are encrypted. Sure... you could use a sniffer to decipher the messages, I guess... but you can do that with your wifi solution (HomeKit, Google Home) as well...

And the Echo... yeah, it's definitely locked down.

And the best part, which I was driving towards... is that devices that HomeKit can control are ones that can also be controlled by a hub or Echo. The services themselves don't butt heads - HomeKit is little more than an API that hooks into Apple's GUI for control with certain triggers allowed. So... as I was saying, HomeKit needs to become Alexa compliant, not the other way around. Apple needs to figure out how to tap into the *totally open* API Amazon provides. Even Google has theirs locked down, which is why Amazon is running away with this crown without a fight.

About the only items that seem to be a perfect fit for HomeKit and Google, are door locks and garage doors. Approach and unlock/open. For everything else, the stationery Echo is all you'll ever need.

by what measure is "Amazon is running away with this crown without a fight"?
[doublepost=1490378717][/doublepost]

You can get Alexa to turn on your TV and select channels/apps, it takes a bit of doing at first but then it's golden so I wouldn't say Siri has that advantage.

-----

Personally I prefer Alexa to Siri but then I use mine to order groceries, listen to news bulletins, play my Spotify playlists and control the lights/TV... Siri has failed to do anything like that cohesively which is a huge shame.

i didn't mean - turn on the tv - i mean show resluts of a querry on a screen.

 

[kdarling]

I think when he/she referred to having it with you all the time, he/she was discussing the two services outside the context of the hotel...since most of the negative comments comparing the two don't have much (or anything) to do with how either would work in a hotel.

It depends on whether or not the purpose is to be able to discern a command from across a room (advantage: Echo).

And also whether the goal is to present visual or audio results (advantage: iPad).

There is no way they will put the open platform version of Echo in a hotel.

I did some more digging. Apparently both the Echo and iPads are off the shelf.

The Echo gets room specific skills, and the iPads use a per-hotel version of something called DigiValet.

And remember, this is not YOUR iPad. It's the one that sits in the room for all guests. So it asks for an initial voice training session.

You're right that in either case, you'd have to sign in with personal accounts if you wish to use your own music, etc.

I'm kind of thinking that the iPad has a big advantage because of its interactive display. See that DigiValet app above for examples of seeing visual food menus, touch ordering movies, etc.

 

[Uofmtiger]

It depends on whether or not the purpose is to be able to discern a command from across a room (advantage: Echo).

And also whether the goal is to present visual or audio results (advantage: iPad).



I did some more digging. Apparently both the Echo and iPads are off the shelf.

The Echo gets room specific skills, and the iPads use a per-hotel version of something called DigiValet.

And remember, this is not YOUR iPad. It's the one that sits in the room for all guests. So it asks for an initial voice training session.

You're right that in either case, you'd have to sign in with personal accounts if you wish to use your own music, etc.

I'm kind of thinking that the iPad has a big advantage because of its interactive display. See that DigiValet app above for examples of seeing visual food menus, touch ordering movies, etc.

In your digging, did you find out how they would strap it down so it doesn't get stolen?

There is no way I would put my personal information into a third party device that stays in the room. I would rather stick with manual stuff, my own iPad/iPhone when on the road if I can't just walk in and start using it.

If you get into other goals outside of Siri and Alexa, obviously, the screen is beneficial (it why an iPad costs a lot more than an Echo ). For just controlling lights and other automated stuff via voice (inside a room), I think an Echo-like device is better...which is why I have a iPads and Echos at home.

 

[Sill]

There is no way I would put my personal information into a third party device that stays in the room. I would rather stick with manual stuff, my own iPad/iPhone when on the road if I can't just walk in and start using it.

I think you're exposing a related concern, albeit tangentially. What of the data this thing gathers? Are these things joined to the hotel customer's iCloud account? Or are they permanently attached to the hotel chain's account. Perhaps thats part of what these chains are "partnering" with Apple about. There's no need for any kind of partnership, since the chains can simply negotiate a bulk purchase price, and Apple could get attaboys on their press releases for each chain they bring into the customer fold. So, what do they really need to "partner" with Apple on? They need Apple to construct special apps and/or back end software that can help them gather data on each customer. And I think its truly sinister that this "partnership" just might exist for them to be able to keep voice prints of us the way Google does on their users.

 

[BuffaloTF]

by what measure is "Amazon is running away with this crown without a fight"?

Sales. Support adoption by IoT devices and manufacturers. Adoption outside it's direct sales targets. Enterprise adoption. Available skills. Adaptation of its fully open API in other use-cases (like Ford) in much the same way Android came out of nowhere with its open platform.

So, basically, every conceivable measure?

 

[Uofmtiger]

Sales. Support adoption by IoT devices and manufacturers. Adoption outside it's direct sales targets. Enterprise adoption. Available skills. Adaptation of its fully open API in other use-cases (like Ford) in much the same way Android came out of nowhere with its open platform.

So, basically, every conceivable measure?

Siri is built into the OS of the iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple Watch, which outsell anything Amazon has brought to market by a wide margin. It is already compatible with the many Apple services and a multitude of internet devices. CarPlay is already on the market.

As for skills, I think that is fine for people that want to set them up and see how they work. Many of them are wonky at best. Apple will most likely have a much more streamlined approach, but we really don't know until they get into the stand alone device market. That market is small and immature, so the idea that they are somehow losing a fight is a bit ridiculous to call when the bell hasn't even rung for the first round yet.

 

[BuffaloTF]

Siri is built into the OS of the iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple Watch, which outsell anything Amazon has brought to market by a wide margin. It is already compatible with the many Apple services and a multitude of internet devices. CarPlay is already on the market.

As for skills, I think that is fine for people that want to set them up and see how they work. Many of them are wonky at best. Apple will most likely have a much more streamlined approach, but we really don't know until they get into the stand alone device market. That market is small and immature, so the idea that they are somehow losing a fight is a bit ridiculous to call when the bell hasn't even rung for the first round yet.

This means zero for smart homes and IoT devices... of which very few support HomeKit - maybe 100 if we're generous; Apple's website returns a total of 40 compatible devices, so I'm building in quite a large margin of error here and almost all of them also work with Alexa save for the doorlocks (for obvious reasons)... as opposed to the thousands of devices that HomeKit doesn't support but is through Alexa with zigbee, z-wave and wifi direct control. It means even less in cars, since the goal here is to keep eyes on the road and limit your scope -- and that's a market manufacturers would love nothing more than choking both Google and Apple out of.

Not only has the bell for the first round rung... it was a first round knockout, and it wasn't close, it was Tyson vs Marvis Frazier.

 

[Uofmtiger]

This means zero for smart homes and IoT devices... of which very few support HomeKit - maybe 100 if we're generous; Apple's website returns a total of 40 compatible devices, so I'm building in quite a large margin of error here and almost all of them also work with Alexa save for the doorlocks (for obvious reasons)... as opposed to the thousands of devices that HomeKit doesn't support but is through Alexa with zigbee, z-wave and wifi direct control. It means even less in cars, since the goal here is to keep eyes on the road and limit your scope -- and that's a market manufacturers would love nothing more than choking both Google and Apple out of.

Not only has the bell for the first round rung... it was a first round knockout, and it wasn't close, it was Tyson vs Marvis Frazier.

Not at all. When people go to buy these products, chances are that they want them to work with the HUGE ecosystem of iOS devices that Apple sells if they own any of the very popular iOS devices. For the miniscule number of Echo users, like myself, that also use iOS, we just makes sure the devices we buy work in both systems, if possible.

As I already mentioned, the Echo is in a ridiculously small number of homes compared to Siri/iOS. The Echo sold about 5 million devices in its first two years. By comparison, Apple sold 6 million Apple Watches in the 4th quarter last year. Apple sold 78 million Phones in the quarter. Guess what, they all have Siri built into their operating systems.

I don't hate the Echo, I have two of them. They are nice to have around. However, what happens if Apple brings out a device that can interact with the hundreds of millions of compatible iPhones on the market, works with the built in calendar, reminders, messages app, email, Apple Music, etc. That is when we can start talking about a fight. Right now, Siri and Echo are in two different worlds. When Apple encroaches on the Echo world, the real fight will begin. I suspect Amazon will still own the cheap-o market, since Apple actually cares about making money on hardware, but my suspicion is Apple would own most of the profits in the market like they do with the iPhone.

 

[BuffaloTF]

Not at all. When people go to buy these products, chances are that they want them to work with the HUGE ecosystem of iOS devices that Apple sells if they own any of the very popular iOS devices. For the miniscule number of Echo users, like myself, that also use iOS, we just makes sure the devices we buy work in both systems, if possible.

As I already mentioned, the Echo is in a ridiculously small number of homes compared to Siri/iOS. The Echo sold about 5 million devices in its first two years. By comparison, Apple sold 6 million Apple Watches in the 4th quarter last year. Apple sold 78 million Phones in the quarter. Guess what, they all have Siri built into their operating systems.

I don't hate the Echo, I have two of them. They are nice to have around. However, what happens if Apple brings out a device that can interact with the hundreds of millions of compatible iPhones on the market, works with the built in calendar, reminders, messages app, email, Apple Music, etc. That is when we can start talking about a fight. Right now, Siri and Echo are in two different worlds. When Apple encroaches on the Echo world, the real fight will begin. I suspect Amazon will still own the cheap-o market, since Apple actually cares about making money on hardware, but my suspicion is Apple would own most of the profits in the market like they do with the iPhone.

Yes, it sold 5 million in 2 years up to December... then 9 million more this past holiday season alone.

And smart home devices have existed longer than it has. They have their own hubs and schedulers, which the Echo communicates with over voice controls that HomeKit does not.

And again, the beauty of the Echo, is it works with all the same devices HomeKit does, save for doorlocks - which happen to be proximity sensors and the echo is stationery, so it kinda makes sense.

The Echo interfaces with existing established standards, and new ones. HomeKit does not, and is incredibly hamstrung by that. HomeKit wants to be the hub device that sets scenes and controls all... Echo merely wants to talk to that hub, which is required, and does so through existing mediums such as SmartThings and Wink... and specific ones that control lights in the absence of a hub.

It does everything, HomeKit does very little... and HomeKit further requires an Apple TV or iPad sitting at home to act as your hub should you want control outside of it... both of these happen to be more expensive solutions than a traditional hub, with far less support.

 

[Uofmtiger]

Yes, it sold 5 million in 2 years up to December... then 9 million more this past holiday season alone.

And smart home devices have existed longer than it has. They have their own hubs and schedulers, which the Echo communicates with over voice controls that HomeKit does not.

And again, the beauty of the Echo, is it works with all the same devices HomeKit does, save for doorlocks - which happen to be proximity sensors and the echo is stationery, so it kinda makes sense.

The Echo interfaces with existing established standards, and new ones. HomeKit does not, and is incredibly hamstrung by that. HomeKit wants to be the hub device that sets scenes and controls all... Echo merely wants to talk to that hub, which is required, and does so through existing mediums such as SmartThings and Wink... and specific ones that control lights in the absence of a hub.

It does everything, HomeKit does very little... and HomeKit further requires an Apple TV or iPad sitting at home to act as your hub should you want control outside of it... both of these happen to be more expensive solutions than a traditional hub, with far less support.

Let's assume your 9 million # is correct. That means they have 14 million on the market. That is a miniscule compared to iOS devices that have Siri.

That market is practically invisible by Apple standards. My guess is that most of the 9 million sold were $50 Dots. I just don't think Apple cares about that market at all.

What you are focused on is the numerous devices that the Echo interacts with. That is wonderful, but it can't move seamlessly from my house to my car and to work like an iPhone and Apple Watch. The Echo doesn't work with Apple services and Siri can. That is the big differentiator and it gives Apple the ability to work with hundreds of millions of iOS devices while the Echo works with Z-wave or whatever. What you are discounting is Apple's ecosystem in preference for devices that have very limited appeal to the vast majority of people.

Personally, I don't see them as competitors right now, but if I did, the fact that Siri is in hundred of millions (or a billion) devices and the Echo is no where close to that is the main issue. The other is the fact that the Echo doesn't do anything for me away from home without opening an app and holding down a button. It doesn't work with the Apple Watch. Those are all major problems for the Echo if Apple gets in the stand alone market. Being able to move from home to anywhere I am is a big advantage for Siri.

As has been mentioned, Apple may only shoot for a $500 speaker, and if that happens, I will just stick with my iPhone and the Echo depending on where I am and what I want to do. However, I am not concerned at all that Apple is getting into the stand-alone-device game late. They got in the smart phone market late and you can ask Blackberry and the Treo how that worked out for them. In this case, the device would not be starting from scratch either. It would be starting at a point where there is a huge, well developed ecosystem of devices and services to take advantage of.

 

[kdarling]

Let's assume your 9 million # is correct. That means they have 14 million on the market. That is a miniscule compared to iOS devices that have Siri.

It's miniscule compared to the huge number of Android devices as well. I wonder how many are switching from Alexa to the Google home device.

I think you're exposing a related concern, albeit tangentially. What of the data this thing gathers? Are these things joined to the hotel customer's iCloud account? Or are they permanently attached to the hotel chain's account.

It's up to you if you want to sign into the hotel iPad using your iTunes account, so you can ask that iPad to play music over your own iOS devices. Thus there seems to be no reason to do so, unless of course you forgot your own iOS devices for some reason.

As for "gathering data", one would presume that they would "collect" the same kind of info that any good hotel would... such as remembering your breakfast and movie preferences, for the next time you stay at one of their chain places.

And I think its truly sinister that this "partnership" just might exist for them to be able to keep voice prints of us the way Google does on their users.

Oh for goodness' sake. How would they get "voice prints" from either an iPad or Echo?

 

[Uofmtiger]

It's miniscule compared to the huge number of Android devices as well. I wonder how many are switching from Alexa to the Google home device.

That would be interesting to know, but one of the issues is the price point of the Google Home and the fact that many people choose Android by default since it is the cheap option. Not sure that part of their market will want to pay the $129 for this type of device. The $35 Chromecast device hits their main market better. I think they should put out a Dot competitor that has a digital and optical output (like the Chromecast Audio) at a similar price point and it would probably sell pretty well.

The advantage for Apple is that they have a market that has shown that it is more willing to pay higher prices for their tech (on average). It is why apps like Lightroom mobile debuted on iOS rather than Android. In the same vein, the Verge speculates that Apple has 80 percent of the smart watch market. That is a power in the market that only Apple has, so I still think they have a lot of promise if they introduce a stand-alone Siri device, even if it is priced higher than the Google Home and the Echo. The question is really what they will put out and whether they think this market is worth their time at this point.

I think it would be a great way to attract more Apple Music customers and help them give their ecosystem even more stickiness (to use a phrase from the Oracle) even if it doesn't make them huge profits.

 

[kdarling]

That would be interesting to know, but one of the issues is the price point of the Google Home and the fact that many people choose Android by default since it is the cheap option.

You lost me already with that claim.

The people I know with Android devices tend to be just as wealthy (or poor, in the case of many kid owners) and educated as the iOS owners.

Now, if you wanted to say that Apple device owners tend to continue to buy higher priced Apple devices because it's easier (less options, less customization, supposedly "just works" together with other Apple devices), then I'd agree.

 

[Uofmtiger]

You lost me already with that claim.

The people I know with Android devices tend to be just as wealthy (or poor, in the case of many kid owners) and educated as the iOS owners.

Now, if you wanted to say that Apple device owners tend to continue to buy higher priced Apple devices because it's easier (less options, less customization, supposedly "just works" together with other Apple devices), then I'd agree.

You don't know a large percentage of the world. If you are someone that puts low price over other features, you essentially end up with Android by default.

Unlocked phones under 50 dollars (20 out of 23 are Android):

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_nr_p_36_0?fst=asff&rh=n:2335752011,n:7072561011,n:2407749011,k:cheap+smartphones,p_36:14674872011&keywords=cheap+smartphones&ie=UTF8&qid=1490734394&rnid=14674871011

If you expand that to $100, the numbers show pretty much the same thing. About 60 out of 69 smartphones are Android.

Personally, I am glad there are cheap options for people that want them. However, we can't really look at the entire Android market and see how the Google Home sells as any guide to determine the success of a new Apple product in the same general market. The tablet and watch market are perfect examples of how the size of the Android phone market did not lead to reaching the same type of success as Apple in these markets. It is the Apple ecosystem and overall consumer satisfaction that keeps a lot of people in the system, but you can assign their success to whatever you want (privacy is also a major concern and a differentiating decision maker for many...which I am sure affects the Google Home). Anyway, my main point is that whenever Apple wishes to get into this game, they will become a big player in the market.