Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s HomePod Isn’t a Hot Seller

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: Apple’s HomePod Isn’t a Hot Seller

#71

Post by r00fus »

kristianc wrote: post #21
aqzman wrote: post #6

As with all Apple products, I'm sure Apple will iterate on this and keep making a better product until it can rival Google Home and Amazon Echo. It seems quite often that Apple first generation of new products (huge exception for the original iPhone) can't really compete with competitors, but very quickly, in two or three generations, they end up with the best product on the market. Although what really surprised me…

> huge exception for the original iPhone There's quite a lot of revisionism (completely understandable) that takes place about the original iPhone, but the iPhone only really got going with the second gen. The iPhone is probably _the_ case study for not writing off Apple in the first gen of its product. Writing in 2006, many of the predictions why the iPhone would fail seemed perfectly reasonable (high cost, carrier…

Why revisionism? Even without 3G, the $20/mo unlimited 2G was a game-changer. Jailbroken Apps on the OG iPhone were a game changer (precursor of App Store). Maps (powered by Google) was a game changer. Movies watchable in mobile format was a game changer. The bloody screen (icons looked painted on) was a game changer.

I had a Palm 650 (which I loved) before that, the iPhone did almost everything better and cost less per month including data - and with iPhoneOS 2.0 had an immense upgrade.

It's revisionism to not see how impressive even the OG iPhone was.

Re: Apple’s HomePod Isn’t a Hot Seller

#73

Post by ariwilson »

candiodari wrote: post #55
natch wrote: post #52

If Apple Music was cheaper, maybe they would sell more. I mean sure, Apple Music is great, but I'm doing just fine without it. But I would consider it if the price was lower. Yes the price could be considered low by some people when you look at the value, but I have to look at all my different subscriptions, and it sticks out as higher than the others.

In that regard, does anyone know a way to get either the google speaker, alexa dot, or apple homepod something like that playing mp3 files ?

google home: bluetooth from your device or upload from your device to google play music and use that

Re: Apple’s HomePod Isn’t a Hot Seller

#74

Post by vosper »

Reviews that I've read of the HomePod consistently say that the sound is fantastic, possibly class-leading. But they all also consistently complain about the degree of lock-in to the Apple ecosystem. Most of them conclude that the lock-in is a crippling flaw that drastically limits the appeal of the speaker.

Re: Apple’s HomePod Isn’t a Hot Seller

#75

Post by berberous »

forkLding wrote: post #72

Why is Apple HomePod worth so much more than Amazon Echo? Is the technology fundamentally more advanced? Or is this just a marketing position to elevate the price point so that it can be seen as a luxury good?

HomePod is a _much_ better speaker than the Amazon Echo. For playing music, the Echo is terrible. The more appropriate comparisons would be to the Google Home Max ($400) or the Sonos line (Play:1 is $200, Play:3 is $250 and Play:5 is $500, with the HomePod probably somewhere in between the 3 and 5 in terms of sound quality).

All that said, Apple is foregoing a big opportunity by not making a cheaper equivalent of the HomePod like Echo Dot or Google Home Mini. Those devices sound terrible, but consumers are happy enough with them given the price point.

Re: Apple’s HomePod Isn’t a Hot Seller

#76

Post by gormz »

berberous wrote: post #75
forkLding wrote: post #72

Why is Apple HomePod worth so much more than Amazon Echo? Is the technology fundamentally more advanced? Or is this just a marketing position to elevate the price point so that it can be seen as a luxury good?

HomePod is a _much_ better speaker than the Amazon Echo. For playing music, the Echo is terrible. The more appropriate comparisons would be to the Google Home Max ($400) or the Sonos line (Play:1 is $200, Play:3 is $250 and Play:5 is $500, with the HomePod probably somewhere in between the 3 and 5 in terms of sound quality). All that said, Apple is foregoing a big opportunity by not making a cheaper equivalent of the…

consumers are happy because no one listens to music from an echo dot

Re: Apple’s HomePod Isn’t a Hot Seller

#78

Post by kgwgk »

jandrese wrote: post #66
votepaunchy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple was the #1 global watchmaker by revenue before Apple Watch 3. https://www.wareable.com/apple/watch-sales-rolex-tim-cook-55...

That statistic seem cherry picked. Their competitors either sell absolutely tiny numbers of luxury watches or are basically commodities and operate with relatively thin margins. Competition in this space with both volume and profit margin is what? Rolex? Apple is basically a corporate behemoth that moved in next to the Mom & Pop boutiques.

What would be the not-cherry-picked statistic then?

Re: Apple’s HomePod Isn’t a Hot Seller

#79

Post by kristianc »

jacksmith21006 wrote: post #60
kristianc wrote: post #35

> During the HomePod’s first 10 weeks of sales, it eked out 10 percent of the smart speaker market, compared with 73 percent for Amazon’s Echo devices and 14 percent for the Google Home, according to Slice Intelligence. Time and again, Apple has shown that they just don't really care about market share metrics. Apple cares about making money, and it is very good at it. It's self-evident that an expensive device that…

Estimate is 2 million in 2018 which would be a small fraction of the others. The question is why did Apple release a product that was clearly not ready? https://9to5mac.com/2018/04/13/kgi-homepod-sales-cheaper-mod... KGI: Apple could sell just 2 million HomePods across all of 2018, company 'mulls' low-cost model

If Apple sells 2.5m units across all of 2018, that will be well on the way to catching Sonos on 4m, which has been in the home audio business since forever. Amazon has 5m, despite its home speakers being substantially cheaper. If KGI's figures are correct, Apple is cleaning up in terms of profit.

Re: Apple’s HomePod Isn’t a Hot Seller

#80

Post by dragonwriter »

gormz wrote: post #76
berberous wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HomePod is a _much_ better speaker than the Amazon Echo. For playing music, the Echo is terrible. The more appropriate comparisons would be to the Google Home Max ($400) or the Sonos line (Play:1 is $200, Play:3 is $250 and Play:5 is $500, with the HomePod probably somewhere in between the 3 and 5 in terms of sound quality). All that said, Apple is foregoing a big opportunity by not making a cheaper equivalent of the…

consumers are happy because no one listens to music from an echo dot

I don't know about Echo Dot, but I definitely use my Home Mini for music.

It's nothing special in that role, but actually better than I would expect, and music isn't the main use (controlling content being cast to the TV is a lot bigger use than listening to music from the speaker.)

I guess I can understand getting one of the premium (Home Max, HomePod, etc.) smart speakers if direct music playback on the speaker is your main use case, though even people for whom that is the main use case often seem happy with the mid-range units like the regular Echo and Google Home.

Post reply on HN