
Beachheads and Obstacles - hvass
https://stratechery.com/2019/beachheads-and-obstacles/
======
Despegar
This article is written as if we don't already know if Alexa (and its
competitors) are the next big computing platform. We already know it isn't.

Alexa first came out in 2014. If it was the world changing product that people
said it was going to be it would have spawned multiple billion dollar
companies by now. Much like smartphones led to Uber.

Amazon can keep pooping out Alexa into 15 new products every year. Google will
copy them because they don't actually know what a good product is but they're
the internet company version of Samsung, a fast follower, so they'll do it
because they're competitor focused and _just in case_ it takes off.

None of that will change that this product category isn't going anywhere.

~~~
thisisananth
In a website or an app, there are specific affordances i.e buttons, dropdowns,
gps and text boxes that bound the input and steer the user input to help the
user achieve the task.

For the speakers like Alexa and Google Home, voice being the only input allows
user to say whatever they want hence making the task space infinite. But the
voice recognition and NLP is not in a place where it can recognize everything
the user has said. This creates a less than stellar experience with the user
having to repeat, rephrase or even worse abandon the task. I think this
platform will blow up when NLP/AI is able to detect user intent with near
perfect accuracy and is able to make the interaction with the user as fluid as
with a well designed app. It doesn't hurt for Amazon to have a large installed
base ready to use the platform if/when intent recognition becomes par.

Of course it will never replace phone/desktop as there will be things which we
cannot say over voice (secrets) and where it is not possible (loud places) or
just not courteous behavior.

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _This creates a less than stellar experience with the user having to repeat,
> rephrase or even worse abandon the task._

Not to mention: constant wondering whether the task can even be accomplished.
When a voice assistant rejects your query, in many cases you can't be sure
whether it's because it couldn't understand you, or because it can't possibly
accept what you said as a valid input in the context it's in. In regular
interfaces, visible constraints matter as much as affordances.

~~~
barbecue_sauce
Norman would refer to these constraints as "signifiers", indicators of
possible affordances. It's interesting how weak voice assistants are at
signifying what you can actually do with them.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Thanks for introducing me to the term. Damn, I need to finally read that book.

------
artfulhippo
A few months ago, I was debating with a friend about the next major computing
interface.

Is it Voice or Spacial Computing (AR/VR/xR)?

It's clearly voice, for many reasons. To cut the argument short, realize that
language is what separates humans from other animals, and recognize that voice
is the natural form of language, not writing. The advancement of AI requires
major advancement in understanding human emotions, which are conveyed through
subtleties in voice, and not picked up in text.

But it doesn't need to be either/or. Why not both Voice and xR?

Over time, voice and xR will converge, as voice interfaces get integrated into
more consumer services, and xR gets more productive applications (right now
it's all games and porn). But by then, Amazon will be well-positioned to get
into the fun, but Facebook will not be taken seriously.

Unless Facebook can disrupt the global monetary system, pushing Libra by
providing a discount for all purchases made within Oculus.

~~~
the_watcher
I know the Portal wasn't exactly a huge hit in terms of sales (though the
reviews of the product functionality alone were fairly positive IIRC), but
it's pretty clear evidence that Facebook _is not_ ignoring voice as a piece of
its xR portfolio. Oculus is pretty clearly the leader in consumer VR at the
moment, and Portal sits within Boz's AR/VR org. I wouldn't count them out
based on their ability to ship products quite yet. So unless you think people
will avoid anything made by Facebook as a rule (possible, though I don't think
there's much evidence of it at the moment), I still think they're in about as
good position as they could hope for re: being the xR platform.

~~~
artfulhippo
That Oculus is the leader in consumer VR (games and porn) does little to spark
confidence in Facebook as a hard product design firm. Oculus was an
acquisition, and we know Facebook is good at acquiring amazing companies.

But can Facebook create innovative products that people want? This is still an
open question. After all, Facebook's success comes from out-executing on the
ideas of others.

I haven't used a Portal, but isn't it video-focused? And doesn't it integrate
Alexa?

I'm sure Facebook is aggressively trying to build a competing voice interface,
but it's far behind Google, Amazon, and Apple. It will be harder to out-
execute Amazon than Snapchat. And Facebook will need to improve its branding
to even have a chance.

~~~
the_watcher
Oculus was acquired long enough ago to attribute the product success of pretty
much all of the consumer success to Facebook's ability to ship. The Quest was
designed and shipped entirely under Boz, for example. They didn't buy Oculus
and simply stop working.

~~~
artfulhippo
Facebook deserves credit for iterating on solid foundations.

If they make VR useful outside of games and porn, then they will deserve
credit for meaningful innovation.

To clarify why FB cannot be satisfied with the games and porn market is that
theres a big gender imbalance in those markets, and it runs against the
demographics of Facebooks other apps, which have equal or even female-majority
user-bases.

Given its PR and branding issues, Facebook does not want to be a games and
porn company (techbro) company.

