A prominent tech pundit named M.G. Siegler recently wrote about how he believes the Apple TV should have become a smart-home hub: a combination Wi-Fi router, smart speaker, video streaming device, and game console all-in-one. While I can see the appeal, I also see problems that would keep it from becoming a hit product. Apple recently announced that they’re leaving the router business, I think it’s a wise decision.
I’ve owned an Apple AirPort Extreme 802.11n Wi-Fi router for many years now, and it’s been great. While it’s sad that Apple is leaving this market, it’s fully understandable. There are lots of excellent Wi-Fi routers available today, many of which are considerably more affordable than Apple’s past offerings. When it comes time for me to buy a new router (and judging from how cheap my current one sells on eBay — perhaps it’s time), I would likely choose a different brand anyhow.
If M.G. had his way, the next router I would want to buy would be this Wi-Fi router/speaker contraption. But in my home something like this has little appeal, especially considering how expensive it would be:
Other prominent tech folks like John Gruber have been saying Apple should have transformed the Apple TV into a smart-assistant speaker like the popular Amazon Echo. On a recent episode of the Talk Show podcast, Ben Thompson said the fact that they didn’t was a “lack of vision.”
The success of the smart-assistant speaker is the result of Amazon’s boldness, ingenuity, innovation, and vision. The fact that Apple isn’t a major player in this market I suppose could be a lack of vision. But a similar lack of vision is the reason why Microsoft is a non-factor in mobile.
I’m not trying to be a jerk here. I respect all of these people and I’m glad they share their thoughts, ideas, and opinions. This is just one of those instances where I completely disagree.
It’s easy to criticize Apple for not making Siri as ubiquitous as Alexa, but this argument can be read another way. In a sense they’re saying that the most important innovations and successes in tech should belong to Apple.
People are walking around their homes, seeing an Amazon Echo Dot in one room, and then seeing their Apple TV in their living rooms and thinking “Hey, the Apple TV is already a hockey puck. How come it isn’t a smart speaker too?”
One of the anchors of M.G.’s argument is that Amazon is rumored to be building a Fire TV streaming box with a speaker and Amazon Echo functionality built in. But the idea that Amazon is putting this into a TV streaming box isn’t proof that Apple blew it. Amazon is clearly putting Alexa into anything and everything. You can buy lamps with Alexa. Garmin has a dashboard camera with Alexa baked into it. It’s everywhere. Of course it’s going into the TV box.
Does M.G. think this Fire TV box with Alexa built-in is going to be a roaring success? I doubt it. But a $500 Apple version of it would. I assume he’d say the two products would be drastically different. The Amazon version would be missing all of the delight and nuance, plus those insanely great next-generation game controllers.
One of the problems with this argument is that it demands that Apple be a wholly different company organizationally. Instead of having their best and brightest people working on the iPhone, a decent chunk of them should have been working on this smart home hub. Or, is the solution that they should have hired more people, and had those people working in this?
What about the Mac? It sure seems like Apple hasn’t had enough talent resources to commit to the Mac in recent years. Should they have had even fewer people working on the Mac in order to make this hub device, or should they be a fundamentally different company from an organizational standpoint?
Another aspect that’s glossed over here is that the Apple TV itself isn’t that great. The Apple TV is pretty okay, but it isn’t dramatically better than other options. The remote is notoriously terrible. The interface, while superior to other platforms, still isn’t something to get excited about. To simply say, “Well, it should be a lot better, and have amazing video games, and be an amazing speaker, and Siri should be on it and be way better than Siri actually is…” is beyond lofty.
Other companies are making great Wi-Fi routers, and it’s okay. They’re great. Other companies are making great smart-speaker assistants, and they’re great too. One company is rumored to be making a smart-speaker TV streaming box. It doesn’t exist yet, but I’m willing to predict that it probably won’t be all that great. It’ll just be another Alexa product and another Fire TV product stuck together.
The HomePod is here, and it’s already expensive enough. It wouldn’t be better off if it cost $800 needed to be plugged into my TV. The smart-speaker revolution is primarily taking place in the kitchen, and my kitchen lacks a cable modem to plug into M.G.’s dream Apple home hub.
On the podcast I linked to earlier, John Gruber makes the point that Apple was innovating in this area in the past, but then stopped. His examples were the Apple Time Capsule and the AirPort Express, a small, hockey puck device that could act as a Wi-Fi router or an extender. The Time Capsule was a Wi-Fi router with built in storage, so your Mac computers could automatically back themselves up. The AirPort Express featured a 3.5mm audio output jack, which more technically-inclined people used to share music throughout their homes.
True, there was some useful innovation there, but to make the leap that Apple should have turned these products into the Amazon Echo Dot (which John explicitly says in that episode) is a leap too far. What makes the Echo great are all very un-Apple like things: always listening far-field microphones, a lightning-quick backend web service, etc. To say that Apple would have naturally arrived at the same type of product just seems entirely incorrect. Amazon deserves full credit for bringing about ambient computing.
I don’t think Apple squandered an opportunity here. They have an ungodly amount of capital and a limited amount of talented personnel. Anyone who makes the argument that Apple should have a completely different organizational structure is arguing that Apple should be a fundamentally different company.
I think focusing on the iPhone was the right decision. I want them to make an amazing new Mac Pro. I want the next MacBook Pro to have the most reliable and beloved keyboard in the industry. This expensive home hub just isn’t for me, and I’m glad Apple is focusing elsewhere.
