300 dollars is a steep price. I like that there is an amplifier in it. I also think they are aiming for more of a luxury item. They kept stressing that the Nexus Q hooks up to the best hardware in the house. Apple TV and Roku have a lower price point. Google has to put in effort to differentiate Nexus Q from its competitors. Besides, the Q looks very slick. The design language reminds me of Sony.
It's an interesting iteration. The Q certainly looks much nicer than the Revue hardware. The cost does seem high for a device like this without both a remote, screen and a ton of storage.
And it doesn't do anything different than the existing Google TV or the Vizio Co-Star - well, those don't have a built-in amp, but why would you buy this if you don't already have a nice stereo system (which already includes its own amp in the first place)?
Were the people who designed this product just stupid? I mean, it looks cool, but really, the built-in amp is a complete waste.
And another thing - twist it to change the volume? Why should you even have to touch the thing at all? If you can't make it do anything else by touching the device itself, why would you increase the cost by adding a 'twist the top to control the volume' feature? You're going to be playing all your content from a remote device. You can control the volume from that remote device as well. Sure, I guess it's a cool feature and all, but utterly useless. come on...
If this is a audiophile-quality device that seamlessly supports streaming from almost any device, then it could be worth the $300 price tag.
Right now the only real high-quality solution for remote streaming is Apple's AirPlay, and it has its limitations. The biggest problem is that it's locked down to Apple products and software; except for Airfoil, which improves matters greatly. But you still need an Airport express or AppleTV to stream to that you can hook up to your stereo.
But if we have an open lossless streaming/device API, then that's a great advancement. Hopefully they've thought that far ahead, hopefully it's open, and hopefully we can see other devices and platforms interoperable with it. We need an open media streaming API, and I truly hope that's what this is.
Also given that it's got an integrated class-D amp, and it appears the speakers (https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_q_tri...) made by Triad should be excellent and (hopefully) efficient little monitors, though $300 is still a bit steep (Paradigm mini monitors at $199 would be a better set). The combination could sound quite good. If not that, then it has integrated optical out to throw into your own DAC or receiver.
I think there's an audiophile or two in Google and this is the product of that. Not a bad thing!
Right now the only real high-quality solution for remote streaming is Apple's AirPlay, and it has its limitations. The biggest problem is that it's locked down to Apple products and software; except for Airfoil, which improves matters greatly. But you still need an Airport express or AppleTV to stream to that you can hook up to your stereo.
Not true, there are a number of receivers that have integrated Airplay:
Did not know that... It's been a while since I've really read up on my electronics info. Right now I have the EMPTek E55Ti towers (50-200W recommended) and the Onkyo TX-NR818 (135W per channel).
AirPlay offends my delicate palate with the odor of closed pricey unnecessarily locked down technology. Use UPnP or DLNA for your interoperable "high-quality" streaming needs please.
DLNA MediaRenderer AV devices, aka televisions, have been pretty popular for a while. We're just seeing DLNA speakers showing up, now that AirPlay is on the scene.
There is one missing DLNA capability I think Airfoil might have, which is whole house synced audio.
I am so glad I didn't build this. Had a similar social/dj/playlist idea except obviously the hub would just be a phone plugged into speakers. I'm sure many people thought of the same thing.
I think it's worth the $300 tho. I don't really have time to always download fresh music so making a party playlist is like 4+ solid hours of work for me. Or I can let guests fight over the input jack and inevitably the girls' top 10 dance party garbage wins the war of attrition. This makes that whole "hey let me show you this awesome music video" thing a lot more group friendly.
I honestly don't see what makes this worth $300 over an Apple or Roku for $100. Aside from the amp and a couple very small features, it seems to do the same thing. They call it the first "social" media player, but what exactly makes it that? If it's the party/playlist mode, I have that on my first gen AppleTV. If it's the playing from mobile devices, Airplay does that. All in all it doesn't look like a bad product, just priced way out of whack with the competition.
Absolutely, as long as they're in the Apple ecosystem. iTunes DRMed music and movies will play wonderfully on an AppleTV over AirPlay. That DRM capability is Apple's justification for the cryptography present on the AirPlay protocol, and for requiring device manufacturers to be certified and pay them money to get the necessary keys.
It sounds like Google have the same concept going on, but with the Google Play ecosystem and at 3x the device cost.
Maybe, but is assembly labor really that large of a fraction of the total cost?
If us labor is 20x the expense of the alternative ($0.60 vs $12.00/hour) you'd have 16 hours of hand assembly to account for that price difference. That seems implausible to me. However, i've never manufactured stuff, so what do i know.
Surely the killer app for this would be to turn it into a capable games console?
Elsewhere in google IO they showed the nexus tablet running a few games such as an FPS etc. The only problem is that I really don't want to play an FPS on a tablet.
You could, but then you may as well just run the game on a tablet.
For playing games, especially action games you really want tactile feedback (so that it's easy to judge the angle you are holding the joystick at without looking at it etc). It also helps that good controllers fit well into your hands for long playing sessions.
TV is a better fit for same-room multiplayer. Could even do multi screen games like with the Wii U. Trouble is the GPU is a bit on the weak side, it's fine for the 4" Nexus but probably won't scale up to 1080p
So is the Galaxy Nexus (which this shares a SoC with), and it's considered weak on there. It's unlikely blowing the output up from 4.7" to 47" will be very pretty.
Onlive announced a google TV edition of their cloud gaming platform at CES 2012 that works with a console type gaming controller. Not sure if the playable version of that has shipped.
$300, and all it will play is media I bought from Google and YouTube? Seriously? I can get the tablet and an HDMI cable for $80 less and play everything.
I agree it's too much. It's got to be the amplifier that's pushing the price up so far right? I'm not sure what else it has that the other boxes don't.
I guess that must be it. I'd actually pay $100 for this without the amplifier and just an audio output I can plug into the speaker system I already have. Who is buying this product that doesn't already have an amp?
Wrong. It will play all of your music, and all of your friends' music, that's stored in Google Music, which is a free service for the first 20000 items.
Is this thing actually any different than an AppleTV + AirPlay[1]? It seems like essentially the same thing at 3x the cost. I'd love to know if there's anything I'm missing.
[1] I mean besides that this is for Android instead of iOS
This competes with Sonos, not Apple. Wifi connected audio units with powered amps, synchronized into playback groups, tablet-based controller, starting at a $300 price point? But with video, which Sonos doesn't have. Sonos does have audio input (so I can, say, connect my TV's audio output and broadcast it throughout the house) but otherwise, Sonos had better up their game.
It's really hard to think what is in there that could cost $299 - you can buy a pretty good full on tablet for that price and sit it permanently in your living room connected with HDMI to your TV / stereo, and with some simple apps it can stream content from other devices as well.
It has a 25 Watt amplifier and is made in the US[1]. At a guess, compared to the $100 Apple TV the amp adds $50 to the retail price, made in the US adds $75 and the rest is because of the lower volume.
This is a ubicomp play, pure and simple, and they kept it bare bones. A) Less chance of confusing people with "apps" or anything fancy. B) Locked down to the Play Googlesphere.
55 comments
[ 5.0 ms ] story [ 94.8 ms ] threadWere the people who designed this product just stupid? I mean, it looks cool, but really, the built-in amp is a complete waste.
And another thing - twist it to change the volume? Why should you even have to touch the thing at all? If you can't make it do anything else by touching the device itself, why would you increase the cost by adding a 'twist the top to control the volume' feature? You're going to be playing all your content from a remote device. You can control the volume from that remote device as well. Sure, I guess it's a cool feature and all, but utterly useless. come on...
Right now the only real high-quality solution for remote streaming is Apple's AirPlay, and it has its limitations. The biggest problem is that it's locked down to Apple products and software; except for Airfoil, which improves matters greatly. But you still need an Airport express or AppleTV to stream to that you can hook up to your stereo.
But if we have an open lossless streaming/device API, then that's a great advancement. Hopefully they've thought that far ahead, hopefully it's open, and hopefully we can see other devices and platforms interoperable with it. We need an open media streaming API, and I truly hope that's what this is.
Also given that it's got an integrated class-D amp, and it appears the speakers (https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_q_tri...) made by Triad should be excellent and (hopefully) efficient little monitors, though $300 is still a bit steep (Paradigm mini monitors at $199 would be a better set). The combination could sound quite good. If not that, then it has integrated optical out to throw into your own DAC or receiver.
I think there's an audiophile or two in Google and this is the product of that. Not a bad thing!
Not true, there are a number of receivers that have integrated Airplay:
http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Home/AV-Receivers/Air...
http://usa.denon.com/us/Airplayus/index.html
http://usa.yamaha.com/products/technology/airplay/
http://www.intl.onkyo.com/promotion/airplay/index.html
etc
Something like the Marantz PM5004 is 35W/channel[1] and it is over $400 just for the amplifier
[1]http://us.marantz.com/us/products/pages/productdetails.aspx?...
Fun fact: 95% of your music stays within 1W of your amplifier's capability at comfortable listening levels.
That's not true.
I have a Onkyo NR509 which supports DLNA (and internet radio, and Spotify and various other services).
Sonos also has their own proprietary streaming solution which gets pretty good reviews by those who like Hi-Fi audio, too.
DLNA MediaRenderer AV devices, aka televisions, have been pretty popular for a while. We're just seeing DLNA speakers showing up, now that AirPlay is on the scene.
There is one missing DLNA capability I think Airfoil might have, which is whole house synced audio.
I think it's worth the $300 tho. I don't really have time to always download fresh music so making a party playlist is like 4+ solid hours of work for me. Or I can let guests fight over the input jack and inevitably the girls' top 10 dance party garbage wins the war of attrition. This makes that whole "hey let me show you this awesome music video" thing a lot more group friendly.
It sounds like Google have the same concept going on, but with the Google Play ecosystem and at 3x the device cost.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/28/technology/google-and-othe...
If us labor is 20x the expense of the alternative ($0.60 vs $12.00/hour) you'd have 16 hours of hand assembly to account for that price difference. That seems implausible to me. However, i've never manufactured stuff, so what do i know.
Elsewhere in google IO they showed the nexus tablet running a few games such as an FPS etc. The only problem is that I really don't want to play an FPS on a tablet.
One of these with a decent controller however..
I wonder if instead of dedicated hardware controllers, the touch screens on phones could be used as a substitute.
For playing games, especially action games you really want tactile feedback (so that it's easy to judge the angle you are holding the joystick at without looking at it etc). It also helps that good controllers fit well into your hands for long playing sessions.
[1] I mean besides that this is for Android instead of iOS
What this thing is not any different than is MPD, Music Playing Daemon. Which, btw, is nine year old software.
Photo I took tonight of my 'social media streaming' output-only hardware: https://plus.google.com/113218107235105855584/posts/dgit2hfs...
[1] http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/06/one-reason-for-nexus-...
Anyone who has ever run a MPD server and turned on the Avahi advertisement has run a social streaming media server.
DLNA and AirPlay come close, except they don't have editable playlists (just, loadable ones).