

Google Nexus Q: The social streaming media player - boh
https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_q

======
mdasen
I'm not quite sure why it's $300. Apple sells their Apple TV for $100 and it's
nearly the same device. The Nexus Q comes with a 25-watt amplifier with
traditional audio ports (rather than just optical) and a mute button, but that
seems to be the large difference. Oh, and it has color-shifting LEDs that
coordinate with the music. Apple TV even has a similar "let your guests vote
on the music at a party" app.

The direct connection for speakers is nice, but I guess I feel like it could
have been accomplished for under $200 - considering that I can order a
100-watt receiver for under $100.

Granted, Google has put in 1GB of RAM (vs 512MB in the Apple TV) and a dual-
core processor (vs. the single-core Apple TV), but does that translate into
anything? The Apple TV handles 1080p video (including high profile H.264).

I guess I'm just left wondering why it's costing so much - especially
considering that the Nexus 7 has a quad-core processor, 1GB of RAM, a battery,
and a screen for $100 less.

~~~
pwthornton
While the Apple TV has one processor, it has two GPUs and each GPU is more
powerful than the one Google chose (Apple TV uses the SGX543MP2). My guess is
that the chip in this and the Apple TV are very similar prices.

The amp has to be a bit of the price, but I don't really get that addition.
Like a lot of people, I have a receiver and speakers in my family room. Is
this device aimed at people in dorm rooms and studio apartments that don't
have dedicated sound systems? That's all I can think of.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this doesn't even support Netflix, MLB, NBA,
NHL, NFL, Hulu or other streaming services that $99 and less devices do
(although none support all of those).

For the price of this, a person could buy an iPhone 4S and an Apple TV.

~~~
sjwright
The integrated 25 watt Class D amplifier wouldn't account for more than $20 of
the parts cost. That's about how much it costs to buy one wholesale --
including a case and power supply.

------
sjwright
I don't get what the point of this product is. Why would I want to have my
"good speakers" only connected to one source device? Why would I want it to be
connected to a 12.5W/channel amplifier? [0]

It's too expensive as a source device (ala Apple TV), it's too expensive as
streaming audio device (ala third party AirPlay speakers) and I can't imagine
there'd be a lot of customers who'd want to use it as both.

\--

[0] I own a similar spec Tripath amp, and while 12.5W isn't nothing, it's not
party music.

------
runjake
It's a $299 market competitor to the $99 Apple TV.

It's round with several thick cables sticking out of the back with an array of
ports -- an odd industrial design to me. The LEDs are really, really cool
though.

~~~
sjwright
The biggest selling point of the Apple TV is what it looks like: almost
nothing. It's easy to disappear the thing behind your TV or above your cable
box.

The Nexus Q looks like a cable squid.

~~~
pwthornton
I have mine underneath my TV stand/media cabinet. It cannot be seen from the
couch or really anywhere in the living room.

The Apple TV's ability to just disappear really is it's biggest selling point.

~~~
sjwright
And its second-biggest selling point is its remote control. Best. Remote
control. Ever.

------
bretthopper
Good product. Terrible price. I think it would be successful at $99 but $299
just kills it.

------
adrr
Its made in the US with parts from US suppliers. Be interesting to see if US
consumers will pay premium for that over other devices like the AppleTV.

------
donohoe

      "Designed and Manufactured in the U.S.A."
    

Thats a first!?

------
jfoutz
It looks really cool. Pausing and resuming across devices is awesome. I
just... 300. $300 is a lot. The tablet has a display, and it's less expensive.

That amp must be really expensive.

~~~
freehunter
That's what I thought when I saw it. How does a tablet have a screen, a
battery, and more flash cost less than a 25w amp with some plugs on it?

------
cjoh
Can we appreciate for a moment that this is a product that is _manufactured in
the United States_. I hope this is a step forward in the manufacturing of our
consumer electronics, and by doing this, it makes it so doing manufacturing in
the United States becomes more of a possibility to more of our companies.

I'll happily shell out an extra $200 to buy a product that is built in any
country with halfway decent environmental and labor laws.

~~~
recoiledsnake
>I'll happily shell out an extra $200 to buy a product that is built in any
country with halfway decent environmental and labor laws.

Maybe for a laptop, $200 makes sense but three times the cost? That's way too
much. Anyway, I have a HTPC hooked up(a 6 year old Dell with Windows 8) so I
am not in the market for such a device. but a 200% price increase is just too
much for me.

------
suprgeek
$299 kills it dead. A complete flub in an otherwise great keynote event.

For that steep a price it had better hover in the air like a magic orb.

------
mieses
It has a built in amplifier so it eliminates the need for other audio
hardware. Apple TV looks too small to have an amp. As someone who hates audio
hi-fi hardware and all the related nonsense, I think I'm sold. For example, it
can power a small pair of bookshelf speakers. There's a pair of speakers in
the Google Play store.

~~~
sjwright
Or you could just buy one of the many AirPlay speakers on the market?

Have you had a chance to hear the Audyssey Audio Dock Air? That thing kicks
some serious musical reproduction butt, and doesn't require any cables other
than for electricity.

~~~
mieses
thanks but i wouldn't go that route for several reasons. i like the idea of
simple, normal, default speakers. they are not tied to any standard like
airplay and they just do one thing well - make sound. a wireless audio signal
may suffer from interference in some situations. i don't like apple itunes at
all, but that is just my personal preference. i've always avoided itunes and
have used foobar2000, songbird, anything but itunes. i have a lot of classical
music in FLAC files and just don't want to deal with Apple and their rule of
the month.

------
kpozin
Here's what looks like the design inspiration for the Nexus Q (and for its
promo video): <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xgls9IwWUyU>

------
heifetz
this is google's answer to the $99 apple tv??

the problem is, even if it is a great steamer, how many of your friends would
have android phones or tablets?

~~~
jff
According to the market share figures from last November (the most recent I've
seen), the majority of them will have Android phones. Your point?

------
rplnt
"Sorry! Devices on Google Play is not available in your country yet."

Same will probably apply to most of the features for android/play introduced
today.

------
twog
I may be one of the few on HN, but I think this was a great move from Google.
If this device is open, you can write games for it (or pull existing games
from play) stream music, videos, and other content from your google drive. Its
a push to make other Google products more valuable.

I think the HN crowd quickly forgets that not everyone can build themselves an
entertainment PC.

------
old-gregg
Hearing all your groanings regarding price, is easy to understand why we
"can't have nice things". To make you happy, everything needs to be
disposable, lightweight, made in China using the cheapest components
available, wrapped in cheap squeaky plastic which smells like my dog's feet.
That, or supported by ads or a giant media/appstore sales like AppleTV or
Kindle.

~~~
pwthornton
It's the built in amp. It's a risky move to be sure. There will be a market
for this for sure, but $299 is a lot. It also has more wireless technology
than your average media streaming device. Being made in America is not adding
a lot to this price.

------
jiggy2011
I can play all the music from my google play account? What about my iTunes
account , spotify account or the random MP3s I have on my system?

Oh , so I can't play any music then?

~~~
mdasen
To be fair, Google will sync your (un-DRM'd) iTunes music (and whatever other
music). It takes a while to upload and there's a limit on the number of songs
(20,000?), but it does have that utility.

~~~
mayneack
20,000 is a ton. I synced my entire library into it and it was a couple
hundred gigs. It also takes higher quality than Apple I believe (320 kbps mp3)
and converts down FLAC, OGG, etc.

~~~
yardie
Aye now, 320kbps MP3 >! 256 kbps AAC. Aurally they are almost imperceptible.

~~~
mayneack
Interesting, I didn't realize that I can't downvote replies to my comments.
Not that I was going to here, but I did notice the lack of a down arrow.

~~~
yardie
It was taken away (I think a few months ago) because some users were using it
as retribution. The order of things was useful or inciteful comments should
rise to the top and everything will drift down. Now if they integrate a
threshold filter ala Slashdot that would be useful. But yeah, the lack of the
down arrow doesn't really do anything except to the root comments.

------
Alcedes
woah, first it's the learning machine, now cable squid, lemme guess they're
big fans of the Matrix movies :-D. Can't wait to see the exoskeletons...

------
drivebyacct2
Is this a DLNA playback device? If not, Google is really, really betting on
Play.

Also, why is no one asking the obvious question? How does this intersect
and/or overlap with Google TV? Is this a Google TV device? And if not, why
not?

~~~
roc
For the same reason no-one asks after Chrome OS much anymore: Google doesn't
seem to know why they're making it or where it fits. Until they figure that
out for themselves, they're not going to have any useful answers to give us.

~~~
drivebyacct2
I guess?! With the power and OS in the Q, it seems obvious that they would
simply make it a Google TV device. If it were cheaper, I could see it as a way
of pushing Google Play services, but honestly, I doubt there are enough people
heavily enough invested in Google Play services to warrant _investing_ in a
$300 standalone device.

I'm using a Raspberry PI now as a DLNA media receiver. I can use a phone or a
tablet to stream media from my server to my TV for an extremely tiny cost
compared to this.

I don't understand the value proposition. I know people like to act like
Google does things willy-nilly, and I don't normally agree, but I do _not_
understand the proposed positioning for this device.

~~~
roc
You already recognized the positioning: it's all about Google Play.

Google TV exists/existed because Google wants to be in the living room. But
they can't get TV makers on board. They can't get content owners on board.
They can't get ISPs on board. They got some OEMs on board and tried to let
developers 'solve' the content problem as it was solved for iOS and Android,
but that bombed spectacularly.

So now what? Now they've got a fledgling content service in want of players.
And now they're going to try to use _that_ to get consumers to put Google
devices in their living rooms and dorm rooms.

And maybe, just maybe, they'll flip GoogleTV back into the game as/if it picks
up steam an developers start begging for access. (the specs are certainly
overkill for a streaming set-top box)

But who really knows? If these things sell without Android apps, and Apple
doesn't push the issue by allowing apps on the Apple TV, why wouldn't they
carve direct deals that give them veto power as Apple has done?

------
stevejabs
Anyone else think it's stupid that they've released a supplemental piece of
hardware at $299 when the Nexus7 itself is selling at $199?

