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

Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 871 posts

Re: Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

#151

Post by robertlagrant »

paxys wrote: post #86

The core issue is that Amazon envisioned Alexa as a product that would help it increase sales. Smart home features were always an afterthought. How convenient would it be if people could shout "Alexa order me Tide Pods" from wherever they were in their home and the order got magically processed? That demo definitely got applause from a boardroom full of execs. The problem is that consumers don't behave like that. Thi…

It would be better if Alexa could have shopping lists. "Alexa how much is a box of tide pods? .... Okay, order me the large box with free shipping please." That would be pretty useful. And any subscription good you've already signed up for would be pretty helpful as it would be nice to manage them with a voice interface. But I don't know if it generates billions in revenue.

Re: Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

#152

Post by philodelta »

S0y wrote: post #113

>Customers actually used Echo mostly for free apps such as setting alarms and checking the weather. “We worried we’ve hired 10,000 people and we’ve built a smart timer,” said a former senior employee. That's actually really funny to read. Just last night I was watching my brother cook and he asked Alexa to set a timer (It's pretty much the only thing he uses it for...) I jokingly said "You know, that's a really expen…

don't get me wrong, it is silly, but also being able to set a timer without touching anything with your gross cooking hands is unironically a wonderful feature.

Re: Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

#153

Post by Minor49er »

anandlovelin wrote: post #139

I was really pissed when Alexa tried to sell me "Despicable me" movie as the first thing when I announced good morning. Never tried that again.

What were you expecting it to do instead?

Edit: Why the downvotes? This is a legitimate question

Re: Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

#154

Post by JoeAltmaier »

paxys wrote: post #86

The core issue is that Amazon envisioned Alexa as a product that would help it increase sales. Smart home features were always an afterthought. How convenient would it be if people could shout "Alexa order me Tide Pods" from wherever they were in their home and the order got magically processed? That demo definitely got applause from a boardroom full of execs. The problem is that consumers don't behave like that. Thi…

I run my fire tv with it. Context-free search - even if I'm in a video I can just ask "Alexa show me that new movie with Michael Baldwin" or whatever and it goes to the search screen with results. No fooling with a remote, at all.

So for that I appreciate Alexa.

Re: Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

#156

Post by sethhochberg »

philodelta wrote: post #152
S0y wrote: post #113

>Customers actually used Echo mostly for free apps such as setting alarms and checking the weather. “We worried we’ve hired 10,000 people and we’ve built a smart timer,” said a former senior employee. That's actually really funny to read. Just last night I was watching my brother cook and he asked Alexa to set a timer (It's pretty much the only thing he uses it for...) I jokingly said "You know, that's a really expen…

don't get me wrong, it is silly, but also being able to set a timer without touching anything with your gross cooking hands is unironically a wonderful feature.

I like my Apple Watch for other reasons, but do have to admit that raising it to my face to set a timer or do a quick unit conversion while cooking is by far the most common "active" way I use it. I also use voice control a lot for music when I'm wearing gloves while working with greasy bicycle parts or when gardening.

An entire product segment for when your hands are dirty...

Re: Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

#157

Post by ljf »

philodelta wrote: post #152
S0y wrote: post #113

>Customers actually used Echo mostly for free apps such as setting alarms and checking the weather. “We worried we’ve hired 10,000 people and we’ve built a smart timer,” said a former senior employee. That's actually really funny to read. Just last night I was watching my brother cook and he asked Alexa to set a timer (It's pretty much the only thing he uses it for...) I jokingly said "You know, that's a really expen…

don't get me wrong, it is silly, but also being able to set a timer without touching anything with your gross cooking hands is unironically a wonderful feature.

We are a 'Google home mini' house - it's the same for us - timers/alarms, Spotify, radio, occasional weather checks, and even more rarely asking it to answer a question like 'how far away is the moon' - while we are eating dinner together.

For all these purposes it is great not to get a phone out, and the speaker is far better than my phone speaker for sound.

Re: Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

#158

Post by graton »

francisofascii wrote: post #96

We pay $179 a year for Amazon music. We use Alexa all the time to play music. How is that not a huge revenue success? It sounds like they are not properly factoring that in as a downstream impact.

For $168/year you could get YouTube Premium, which comes with YouTube music and ad-free YouTube (not counting ads inside the videos done by the content creator).

Re: Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

#159

Post by jeffh »

paxys wrote: post #86

The core issue is that Amazon envisioned Alexa as a product that would help it increase sales. Smart home features were always an afterthought. How convenient would it be if people could shout "Alexa order me Tide Pods" from wherever they were in their home and the order got magically processed? That demo definitely got applause from a boardroom full of execs. The problem is that consumers don't behave like that. Thi…

> If they want to salvage Alexa, they need to forget shopping and start doubling down on the smart home and assistant experience [...] and I wouldn't mind paying a subscription fee for it

Why do you say that (both parts)? Alexa has done a good job to integrate with lots of other devices. I can control many aspects of my house through Alexa - lights, blinds, AC, sound, etc. I value that, but I don't think I value it enough to ever want to pay a subscription for it. That's as silly as whoever though selling heated seats in your BMW would fly. I made sure that in each home component I chose a solution that works locally (only AC I had to compromise for lack of options).

And with all that value it provides as a hub? My alexa can't be used to buy anything, call anyone, etc. None of that is configured or permitted as much as I can shut it down. I don't personally see the value there.

I for one am curious where Amazon chooses to draw the line. I don't want to pay a subscription to shout out local hub control commands, but they could be draconian to extra value.

Re: Alexa is in millions of households and Amazon is losing billions

#160

Post by hibikir »

paxys wrote: post #86

The core issue is that Amazon envisioned Alexa as a product that would help it increase sales. Smart home features were always an afterthought. How convenient would it be if people could shout "Alexa order me Tide Pods" from wherever they were in their home and the order got magically processed? That demo definitely got applause from a boardroom full of execs. The problem is that consumers don't behave like that. Thi…

I'd be happy ordering with a voice assistant if it's at least as good as I am at deciding good alternatives. Imagine I want to, say, purchase garbage bags, because I am out. It's not exactly a complicated product, and yet I might care about whether it has any smell reduction agents, whether the bag is tough enough, the size, and possible alternatives that are either a bit better, or quite a bit cheaper. Either the agent understands my preferences, or I am not going to trust it.

And as we look at Amazon's webpage, we first have straight out ads, then a few items it hopes I might buy that are typically related to what other people buy, and maybe a mention of what I bought before, but no understanding of why I bought that one. It's not a very easy task, and one where it's easy to lose trust

Post reply on HN