Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Sold 6.75 Million 'Google Home' Devices In the Last 80 Days (techcrunch.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the things-that-cost-$29 dept.

An anonymous reader quotes TechCrunch: Google today announced that it sold "tens of millions of Google devices for the home" over the course of the last year and that it sold "more than one Google Home device every second since Google Home Mini started shipping in October," with roughly 6.75 million seconds since October 19 (the day the Home Mini officially went on sale)... The launch of the Google Home Mini, which you could easily buy for $29 (and occasionally for $19 with store credit) gave the company a low-price competitor to Amazon's Echo Dots, and even though it's doubtful that Google made a lot of money of these sales, the move clearly paid off.
The Verge adds: Google is thought to be losing money on every unit of the Home Mini; Reuters reported on one analysis that pegged the device's parts alone at $26, not including the cost of developing the entire thing, supporting it, advertising it, shipping it, and so on. Of course, Google is in this for the long game -- the Assistant is an attempt to make sure Google remains the way people get information, and Google has plenty of options to make money through ads or the data it collects in the future...

Amazon is also believed to be losing money on the Echo Dot, which was similarly cut to $29 during the holiday season. Amazon never gives out specific sales figures, but it did say that "tens of millions" of its own Alexa-enabled devices were sold over the holidays, with the Echo Dot being one of the top sellers... These super cheap prices are getting people to buy smart speakers and commit to an ecosystem. These companies are clearly happy to spend a few dollars gaining customers in the short term so that they have an enormous audience available to them down the road.

51 of 96 comments (clear)

  1. Proposition Bet by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    How long before we have the first death attributed to a hacked "smart home" device? I'm thinking the over/under is about August 1, 2018.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Proposition Bet by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      How? Causing a home fire? Freezing someone to death in August? The WiFi router picks up a gun and shoots someone?

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    2. Re:Proposition Bet by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Cancelling prescriptions?
      Causing epileptic attacks through blinking lights?
      Recording one partner having an affair, then playing it back later when the other partner is home?
      Calling 911 for a swat team?

    3. Re:Proposition Bet by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Cancelling prescriptions?

      So? You go to pick up your prescription epi-pen, needed to save your life in case of a bee sting. Oops, the prescription is canceled. So you wait 5 minutes to get it filled.

      How is that life threatening?

      Causing epileptic attacks through blinking lights?

      "home" automation doesn't apply to the car. So, what, they'll be flashing billions of lights in the hope that they can cause one epileptic person to fall in the shower? Not to mention that such an attack could have no effect on 99% of the population, so it's a pretty poor attack that would be found out long before there's an issue.

      Recording one partner having an affair, then playing it back later when the other partner is home?

      Recordings of infidelity don't kill people, guns kill people.

      Calling 911 for a swat team?

      You don't need home automation for that to happen, so that seems to be unrelated to home automation.

      There is no reasonable attack that could harm the average person. Maybe eventually there will be a real risk, but for any death to be cause by home automation in 2018 is a joke. 2028 at the earliest. Though I expect it will be attributed earlier. Maybe done idiot who has an unsafe power strip plugged into a "smart home" outlet. Sets his home on fire while he's not there. Swears it was turned off, blame hackers for the fire. That'll be the first report, but it was a lie for the man to cover up an attempt on his wife's life. 2021 at the earliest.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    4. Re:Proposition Bet by DCFusor · · Score: 1

      Not sure why you're defending this. It's only a matter of time before something stupid is wired in, and abused. Already, there's this idea of an amazon thing that lets delivery guys - and any decent hackers - into your house. Some idiot will do the moral equivalent of putting what should be internal sub-functions out in the cloud to save money - along the lines of (but no one will do this actual example of course) the pilot light and safety vs the main gas valve on your heater. Turn on the gas, then light the light - boom. See Dan Tentler about stupid things ALREADY on the internet, found by Shodan searches. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... This isn't made up. It's already here. My friends who do SCADA for small companies that do things like distill ethanol tell me their customers won't let them do it safely/securely (because what else, $$$), and right there you have a few train car loads of boiling alcohol. What could go wrong?

      --
      Why guess when you can know? Measure!
    5. Re:Proposition Bet by vux984 · · Score: 1

      With enough home automation and internet connected nonsense and some hacking we should be able to devise ways to start fires. Overload an electric car charging system, or remotely operate a stove or oven or furnace, or other system. Lots of these devices are designed to fail safely, but with internet connectivity and computer controls and not being designed to cope with malicious deliberate hacking attempts I'm sure there's stuff out there that you could reprogram to fail badly.

      And just think of the gas lighting you could do with this home automation stuff. You could have people thinking the home was completely haunted with a hacked system, or have them think they are crazy, or drive them crazy... with subtle malicious activity that isn't too overtly obvious.

    6. Re:Proposition Bet by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      How about, burning up advertising dollars because the cheapest product is aimed at the poorest people because that is all that they can afford. Advertising high end, at high cost, too people who can't afford it, for no sales, kind of doesn't make sense. Unless of course your advertising product is not targeted at consumers but at advertisers, convince them that it works and they will pay. So the only question for advertisers, do you have one in your home, why not and are the customers you are looking for more like you, or are they the working poor with little or no disposable capital.

      Who tends to do more to preserve their privacy, those with money or those without. Who is the most choosey and will do product research, read articles et at, those with money or those without. Who is the source of by far the majority of Google targeted marketing data, those with money or those without (services provided are super cheap, free in fact, even the homeless with a mobile connection can afford Google services but the advertising aimed at them, well, more to feed their imaginations rather than anything they will buy).

      Google advertising, first and foremost, targets advertisers not their potential customers. All that data manipulation is to create bullshit to baffle brains. Did they win the US election with all that power, nope, they had negligible sales impact (consumer to consumer contact, drove that US election).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    7. Re:Proposition Bet by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Not sure why you're defending this.

      I'm defending the truth. Home automation doesn't allow for any of that. It will be impossible by August 2018 to disable the pilot light to make if flame out. Currently, the home automation controls the thermostat and such as if you were home, and there's almost nothing you can do that isn't what you are restricted to in the regular controls. The IoT refrigerators keep inventory and allow for minor temperature changes. The IoT thermostats allow you to control a thermostat, not the furnace itself. There's no consumer IoT device that can do any of what you talk about. SCADA is different. SCADA was designed for hard-wired connections in secure on-site systems. SCADA allows settings that will break things. SCADA being ported onto the Internet has no relaltion to IoT.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    8. Re:Proposition Bet by DCFusor · · Score: 1

      And clearly all this stuff is made in countries that assiduously follow all US regulations, real or imaginary, and always default to the safer alternative in fully researched edge cases of every possible interaction. Yeah, right. For someone with a low ID#, you sure don't seem to have been around the block much.

      --
      Why guess when you can know? Measure!
    9. Re:Proposition Bet by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      US regulations? There are no US regulations. Do you know what you are talking about?

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    10. Re: Proposition Bet by vux984 · · Score: 1

      I know of a woman who did that. Her oven burned out. (didn't catch fire or anything, just killed itself.)

      More on point, if for example you could remotely turn ovens and burners on, you definitely will start fires *somewhere*... Lots of people leave flammable stuff on or near the stove / oven when its not in use; especially in really small kitchens... where it often doubles as 'counter space'. Or people will leave dirty / greasy pans in the oven, or pizza boxes.... just do a web search for pictures of messy kitchens, then imagine turning the stove on in each of them...

  2. Giving up privacy is becoming the norm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    People are now considering folks who don't have a facebook account as being weird. I actually got rejected for a job because I don't have a LinkedIN account (They said they do ALL of their recruiting on LinkedIN and didn't want my resume when I handed it to them.)

    And now this.

    Google is not a tech company. They are an advertising company - like facebook and Yahoo!. They can make all their money in advertising because they have all this data on us.

    The very nature of their business is evil.

    Every single company I mentioned and more make their obscene amounts of profits by spying on us. And all of those 10s of millions who got the device are all idiots. So are all those sheeple who bought Alexa.

    THe two-way TV are coming .... I love Big Brother.

    1. Re:Giving up privacy is becoming the norm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      THe two-way TV are coming

      I thik it's already here.

      On three separate occasions, youtube showed me an ad for something that my girlfriend an I were discussing a few minutes earlier. And this was for things that had never been searched for or viewed in anyway. The ad came completely out of left field.

      Eg, I was saying that I should get up on the roof and clean out the gutter (again,never discussed prior to this or searched for because it is something that doesn't take me long and I don't mind doing. I only thought of it because it was a nice sunny day). I was watching videos on car repair and the next video in the sequence started with an ad from a local roof cleaning company.

    2. Re:Giving up privacy is becoming the norm by DMelchisedecian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      " I actually got rejected for a job because I don't have a LinkedIN account (They said they do ALL of their recruiting on LinkedIN and didn't want my resume when I handed it to them.)"

      Maybe that is a good thing - you probably wouldn't want to be working with such a stupid thinking lot?

    3. Re:Giving up privacy is becoming the norm by sound+vision · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For a lot of people - about a third to a half of the US population, and the vast majority worldwide - it's less about "where do I want to work" and more about "where I am able/allowed to work". Many of the available options are stacked with stupids from top to bottom - you might be waiting until you starve to find a place without stupid people somewhere... either in HR, in management, in the trenches, or all three. And you can't discern the full extent of the stupid before you're on the inside.

    4. Re:Giving up privacy is becoming the norm by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The solution is create a LinkedIN resume, a fake account to make you look good and nothing more, watch out for existing employers, a LinkedIN account should be considered a sign of intending to quit, ie why did you not deactivate you LinkedIN account, your fired before you can steal our ideas and quit. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    5. Re:Giving up privacy is becoming the norm by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Maybe that is a good thing - you probably wouldn't want to be working with such a stupid thinking lot?

      Depends on who is doing the stupid thinking. Quite often there are plenty of wonderful places to work at with some of the dumbest mouth breathing droolers in existence working in the HR front line. I personally have had fights with our HR department about how they have handled positions opened in my team and how they cut their candidate pool. In one case a former acquaintance who was an absolute genius / guru was disqualified by some automatic form because they system didn't understand that not every degree in the world is equivalent.

    6. Re:Giving up privacy is becoming the norm by mrwireless · · Score: 1

      A common misperception is that money from profiling is mostly made form advertising. An FCC report from 2015 points out that most money is made from 'risk management'. So the bigger picture is that your data is used to create detailed profiles about you which are bought by your bank, insurers, employers and politicians. https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-87...

  3. Ya, plenty by Excelcia · · Score: 1

    Google is thought to be losing money on every unit ...[but]... Google has plenty of options to make money through ... the data it collects ...

    Yes, Google has plenty of options. Selling it to the government is a great one. Julian Assange made a credible argument that Google is likely essentially a government department or so much in the back pocket of the US government that it might as well be. While I don't find Mr. Assange to be the most wholy credible person alive, the arguments were cogent and well reasoned.

    Why are all these devices sending all that voice data to Google servers for "analysis"? It is not reasonable to believe that even the massive data centers that Google has can dedicate more CPU time to processing the audio from each of these millions of devices than can be cheaply incorporated into each individual device itself. The centralization of voice analysis can only have one purpose. Yes, that's just what I want to have in my bedroom.

    It is frightening how many of these things are blithely being put into millions of homes.

    1. Re:Ya, plenty by mikael · · Score: 1

      It was explained two decades ago; governments aren't allowed to collect and hold data on people due to fears of Big Brother - it would be political suicide for any party to try and implement any national databases in this way.

      However, if the private sector does this under the guise of advertising analytics, they can then offer supply contracts to the government to provide the exact same information with the added benefit of subsidizing the collection of this data through commercial services.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  4. Google sold 6.75 Million 'Google Home' devices by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google found 6.75 Million dumbasses who paid money for a spying device and brought it inside their own home.

    FTFY

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:Google sold 6.75 Million 'Google Home' devices by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Mod OP up.

    2. Re:Google sold 6.75 Million 'Google Home' devices by Jason1729 · · Score: 1

      I got 3 free with Nest products, didn't give google a cent for them and I'm sure not going to use them, so I gifted them. They must have given away millions of the devices on that promo.

  5. It's a trap by lucasnate1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    nt

    --
    Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
  6. Who is fooling who? by bogaboga · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "more than one Google Home device every second since Google Home Mini started shipping in October," with roughly 6.75 million seconds since October 19 (the day the Home Mini officially went on sale)...

    With my grade 4 math, it doesn't appear to me that 6.75 million should be read as "...tens of millions..." or does it?

    Slashdot editors: I have noted you've been "slacking off" lately. Please step up your [Editorial] game.

    1. Re:Who is fooling who? by Solandri · · Score: 1
      The bit quoted in the summary (quoted from TechCrunch so don't blame slashdot editors for once) is written terribly. But:
      • The Google Home Mini went on sale on October 19.
      • Since October 19 (6.75 million seconds), Google has sold more than one Google Home device (Mini or not) per second.
      • The original Google Home went on sale in November 2016.
      • Sum total of Google Home devices sold in 2017 (Google Home since January, Google Home Mini since October) is tens of millions (which likely just means over 10 million).
    2. Re:Who is fooling who? by houghi · · Score: 1

      Slashdot editors: I have noted you've been "slacking off" lately. Please step up your [Editorial] game.

      You must be new here.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  7. Are people using these? by backslashdot · · Score: 1

    It feels like 96% (non geeks, non disabled) of people would use these type of devices for about a week ot two at most and then it will sit idle. If homes were fully automated then some people may use it routinely if they could make it past the hump of getting used to it.

    1. Re:Are people using these? by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I notice how my hostility to Google increased in the last months and years, I haven't even bothered to find out what exactly Google home is, I have already decided I don't want it, I don't want Google in my house beyond the necessary minimum. This is different from how I looked at Google 5+ years ago.

      I wonder how many geeks and non geeks have a similar reaction.

    2. Re:Are people using these? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I haven't even bothered to find out what exactly Google home is, I have already decided...
      snip...
      I wonder how many geeks and non geeks have a similar reaction.

      More and more. Over are the days of using our brains. We now live in a world of headlines and soundbites. There's no more grey, no more thinking, just black and white, or red and blue. Since it's trendy to hate Google because of their size every single thing they have and do must therefore be bad.

      *Note this post is not a reflection of what I think of Google Home. That shit can go to hell. But rather this is a reflection of the world we now live in.

    3. Re:Are people using these? by rtkluttz · · Score: 1

      I can't believe anyone wants ANY cloud connected device in their homes. Why would I ask an outside company for permission to change a setting on a thermostat, or light, or alarm system or camera? That is exactly like buying a home and the real estate agent keeping the key and letting you inside only when they are satisifed... while also saying how you can arrange your furniture.. and periodically repainting without even asking you what you wanted. Also usually with the added "benefit" of locking rooms of the house off in the house you paid for so they can sell that room access back to you as an added feature.

      --
      Digital is, by definition, imperfect. Analog is the way to go.
    4. Re:Are people using these? by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Your instincts are good, perhaps bolstered by other related news articles. Even if Google isn't outright using these as surveillance devices in people's homes, it's been proven by security researchers that they can be easily leveraged into being surveillance devices, listening (and watching, in the case of those with cameras) 24/7.

      Several years ago I used to pose a theoretical scenario to people where they'd have cameras and microphones watching and listening in on them in their homes. "Why would anyone do that?" some with say. Others would regurgitate the same tired-out line: "I have nothing to hide so I have nothing to fear". I was, of course, dismissed as the 'tinfoil hat' crowd. Now it's 2018 and guess what? People are carrying around a GPS-enabled tracking device capable of audio and video recording (smartphones). They're voluntarily filling their homes with audio/video surveillance devices that are always on (so-called "digital assistants" like Google Home, Amazon Echo, etc). In a 1984-esque twist, televisions with a camera and microphone ('smart' TVs). People's cars are filled with cameras and microphones. There are cameras and microphones all over in public, at intersections, in stores and shopping malls. Everywhere. So I'm a 'tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist'? I think not. I think most people are painfully DUMB, and worse, they still don't see it, even when it's right in front of their faces.

      Am I right?

    5. Re:Are people using these? by Mascot · · Score: 1

      Why would I ask an outside company for permission to change a setting on a thermostat, or light, or alarm system or camera?

      While that is how some connected devices work (well, sort of, "ask for permission" is hyperbolic phrasing), it's not by any means all of them. Case in point, my Philips Hue lights work just fine without an internet connection. I can't use Google Home to control them while offline, and I obviously can't use the app outside my LAN in such a case, but while at home both switches and app work fine.

      In other words, I dispute your claim of it being exactly like buying a home and having to ask for the real estate agent to let you in. It's more like how you might have your alarm company keep a spare set of keys to offer you the convenience of helping you out if you should lose yours. At the expense of the added risk of there being an extra set of keys outside of your control.

    6. Re:Are people using these? by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

      I got one for Christmas. I use it to play music, and thats about it. So far I can't see myself using it for anything else yet. The big one I wanted it to do it can't do without using a 3rd party app which is to send messages. If I was able to "ok google, send message to X" on it that would be excellent.

    7. Re:Are people using these? by mrwireless · · Score: 1

      There was some research about that on slashdot recently:

      "Nearly 40% of those who participated in the survey said they were concerned about connected-home devices tracking their usage. More than 40% said they were worried that such gadgets would expose too much about their daily lives. Meanwhile, the vast majority of consumers think gadget makers weren't doing a good job of telling them about security risks. Fewer than 20% of survey respondents said they were very well informed about such risks and almost 40% said they weren't informed at all."

      https://yro.slashdot.org/story...

    8. Re:Are people using these? by houghi · · Score: 1

      With me it started when they raped DejaNews.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    9. Re:Are people using these? by conquistadorst · · Score: 1

      More and more. Over are the days of using our brains. We now live in a world of headlines and soundbites. There's no more grey, no more thinking, just black and white, or red and blue. Since it's trendy to hate Google because of their size every single thing they have and do must therefore be bad.

      *Note this post is not a reflection of what I think of Google Home. That shit can go to hell. But rather this is a reflection of the world we now live in.

      I don't buy into your alarmism because intellectuals have been singing this same song for thousands of years now. I think we sometimes fail to realize most of humanity never engaged in any critical thinking beyond headlines and sound bites to begin with. Homo sapiens living or contemplating the lives Aristotle, Newton, Einstein, Hawking, or the like have always been in the extreme minority.

      That being said, these things just like every other technology, they're nothing more than tools. Even the cost of being spied on is nothing new, internet and credit cards anyone? How you use these tools is what has always mattered. I enjoy my Alexa because of all the home automation and app integration it brings to the table, where it really excels. It pales at understanding simple questions however, something Google's is better at. So I for one am happy to see Google's product seeing greater adoption. I hope this will spur Google for greater integration in the home automation and integration arena finally. I'd be happy to see a product that handles both really well

    10. Re:Are people using these? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I think we sometimes fail to realize most of humanity never engaged in any critical thinking beyond headlines and sound bites to begin with.

      And I will continue to call them out for doing so as an attempt to not aim for mediocrity.

    11. Re:Are people using these? by eliphalet · · Score: 1

      I got a freebie Home Mini with my new phone. I told it to play "KUSC" but it insists on playing "KUNC" -- different kind of music. It's easier just to cast to it from my phone than to make it understand my voice.

    12. Re:Are people using these? by conquistadorst · · Score: 1

      Words of encouragement are always a beautiful thing!!! I just had to call out the overuse of the cliche regarding "things used to be better" theme. I couldn't help it, it's become a trigger for me. But just because I think things have never been better certainly doesn't mean I think things couldn't be better. Go, continue doing God's work!

  8. Spies by drewsup · · Score: 2

    Get your free in home spies here, oh wait, did we say free, actually that will 80 bucks for your in home spy, yes ma'am, the queue starts over there.

  9. 84,375 suckers... by HalAtWork · · Score: 2

    ...born every day

    --
    Twinstiq, game news
    1. Re:84,375 suckers... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      # We can be like they are ...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  10. Monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is a clear example of using their dominance in other markets to gain an unfair advantage, ability to lose to money to drive the competition out, to gain market share.

  11. Ecosystems by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

    Well, I got both as a present, so at least I won't be trapped in only one ecosystem.

    --
    bickerdyke
  12. Remind me of Apple by fubarrr · · Score: 1

    It seems that they use the same trick Apple used to report their stupidly high sales after the release day. Apple simply account their sales all directly after release week to make an impression that batches with lead times as far away as 6 month look to be sold immediately following the release.

    THOSE ARE NOT retail sales. They try to pretend to be bigger than they are, just like Apple did to hype their image

  13. Free Gift by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

    I got one free when I bought a Nest E thermostat last week. Two podcasts I listen to have advertisements for products that also would be incentivized with a free Google Home. I suspect tons of these "sold" numbers are free promotional bundles.

  14. How many will see use? by Jason1729 · · Score: 1

    In early December my 3 carbon monoxide detectors expired. I have a Nest thermostat so I decided to get 3 Nest CO alarms. There was a promo, buy any Nest product get a free Home Mini. I have no interest in the product, so I gave all 3 as Christmas gifts.

    So far, one is up and running and I'm not sure if the other two will ever actually be connected.

  15. Re:Size isn't why by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    I don't have the same "might be spying on me" concerns about Apple's products.

    Then you are just another headline and soundbite grabbing unthinking idiot.

  16. Chromecast by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    I'm 99% sure "Google devices for the home" include the heavily discounted, old-gen Chromecast or the Chromecast Audio, which don't have the smart features everyone reading these headlines will immediately relate "devices for the home" to. You simply can't use a Chromecast as an assistant, or at least not as the same type of assistant the Echo or Google Home Mini.

    And Chromecasts have added funcitonality (Video/High-quality Audio Streaming support) that most, or even all of the assistant devices DO NOT have, at least not embedded on the 29USD package.

  17. How do Pixel 2 sales figure into that? by ScienceofSpock · · Score: 1

    When I purchased my Pixel 2 XL, I was given a free Google Home Mini. Are these free Home Mini's counted in these figures? How many were free as opposed to actually sold?