I see you're being downvoted into oblivion, but I absolutely agree with you - I'm unclear why anyone would want one of these devices in their home. The best use I have seen for them at my friend's homes is crappy lights control(which would annoy the hell out of me, just get up and flick the switch, instead of trying to shout over the music "hey google switch the living room lights on" - which doesn't work all the time). I'm just not interested in voice interfaces at all, I think they are genuinely the worst way to interact with a computer, period, possibly tied for 1st place with touch controls in cars. The only thing I'm worried about is that this unwillingness to put a microphone in my house will make me look like a Luddite in 10 years as everyone and their pet seem to be buying these en-masse.
That just reminds me of something someone told me when I complained that new phones don't have a headphone jack - "it's been decided already, get over it and stop complaining". I think there are legitimate concerns with the fact that these devices are getting so popular, and to stop raising those concerns is as to pretend that they don't exist.
So, you're saying, that I can't say that these devices are spying on me, by sending all the sounds in my home, into Amazon's servers.
Why? Because, so many people have already said it. And it adds nothing further to the conversation. And that if I don't want it, then I can just avoid using it.
I didn't say what I said, to prevent people that want to use Alexa, from using it. I just said, that I didn't see a point of the home speakers, when you have a smart phone with you at all times.
But then, the alternative, is that if nobody says anything, then this will give Amazon justification, that no one is opposed to Alexa.
I find it odd that Apple would market a high-fidelity speaker system as a monaural device (instead of matched pairs). There's a reason why good speakers are always sold in pairs. Even the MacBook Pro and iPad have true stereo. Why not HomePod?
I have been using Airplay to listen to music and watch videos for a long time. The receiving devices, Airport Express and Apple TV, both are capable of two-channel output to my stereo system. Why can't HomePod do the same thing? With a matched pair, one device could function as master and the other as slave. (If you know the reason, please just tell me. I'd rather not watch a 50-minute WWDC video to get an explanation. Thanks!)
Why not build the endpoint into one HomePod (the master) and run a wire to the other (the slave)? As a user, I would be perfectly happy running a cable between two stereo speakers.
Why a cable? If one pod is the master and the other one a slave nearby, it should be easy to send the audio data to the slave from the master via bluetooth or similar low power, short range radio protocol.
AFAIK it is only hard to sync two boxes with sound via a 'bulky and buffery' protocol like WiFi. Also, we humans can tolerate visual artefacts easily, but async, skipping sounds are a special kind torture.
I get the Apple lock in eco-system but if it supported bluetooth pairing it opens itself to a far larger market and then they can up sell if you want the extra features, HomePod app integration, stereo pairing etc buy a IPhone/IPad.
I'd be hesitant to read too much into this. When was the last time an Apple product had a slow start and then fizzled out. Those that start slow tend to pick up steam in due time, the latest being the Watch.
My wife and I bought a HomePod to use as a speaker. It turns out that is really all it does well. Siri can't entertain most of her requests. She asks Siri about the weather each morning and has it play her favorite music. Calendaring and reminders fails as does most of what Apple said it would do in the keynote.
20 comments
[ 1.5 ms ] story [ 54.9 ms ] threadExcept to have a creepy microphone spying on you 24/7, and uploading everything to the internet, for future voice recognition and sound analysis.
https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2017/09/27/groundhog-day-amazon...
Why? Because, so many people have already said it. And it adds nothing further to the conversation. And that if I don't want it, then I can just avoid using it.
I didn't say what I said, to prevent people that want to use Alexa, from using it. I just said, that I didn't see a point of the home speakers, when you have a smart phone with you at all times.
But then, the alternative, is that if nobody says anything, then this will give Amazon justification, that no one is opposed to Alexa.
You aren’t changing anything by telling us another 10 times.
I’m ok if you don’t want one. I don’t need an explanation. Hope you’re ok that I’m going to own half a dozen.
(I assume that's the challenge, because as little as 1ms delay can cause noticeable phasing.)
AFAIK it is only hard to sync two boxes with sound via a 'bulky and buffery' protocol like WiFi. Also, we humans can tolerate visual artefacts easily, but async, skipping sounds are a special kind torture.