As adamesque wrote, it's going to be more like the Watch or even CarPlay. And I think this is probably the right approach, market-wise: Apple ran with the idea that every device needs its own standalone app ecosystem, to the point where they even tried putting an app store in iMessage, and it didn't really work out. Apps on the Apple TV that aren't effectively "channels" (i.e., streaming services) have mostly fizzled, and I bet most readers even on Hacker News forgot that the Watch even had a standalone app store for a while. The HomeView absolutely seems like the kind of device that's going to do better with "companion apps": install them on your phone and let them install a little mini-app or widget on the HomeView. I don't need to manage a whole new set of apps on my smart home gadget---I just need to be able to futz with lights and the thermostat, listen to music and podcasts with the music and podcast app of my choice, and get to my recipe app if I'm going to be one of those monsters who puts one in the kitchen.

As for the battery, this doesn't look like a kind of device that's intended to travel with you room to room---but I agree it would have been smart for them to give people the option.

From the product website:

"Additional apps. HomeView supports compatible third-party audio and video apps from your iPhone for a familiar experience across devices."

If I had to guess this would be kind of similar to the way CarPlay supports apps, but it's admittedly possible this just means "you can use AirPlay yaaaay".

I agree that a battery would have been nice. My first thought was that I would like to move this around in my kitchen while I'm doing this and that.

That said, since it's USB-C, it's possible to put a battery pack on it. Cue the third-party ecosystem making a specially shaped battery that can attach to the base (or compatible stand mount with battery for the wall-mounted version).

Apps sucks. The phone is the only one people use apps for and even then. When was the las time you wanted to install an app?

Hacker news isn't just programmers nowadays.

If this didn't have apps, but did have beautifully designed physical inputs, a color e-ink, and cost 1/3 as much I'd still be very excited for it.

It's just a bit derivative and isn't priced to take over the market (like the mac mini in 2025 was).

Installing apps on a phone isn't hacking. An actual hacker would find ways to make this run Marble Blast Gold.

Me too, it’s much cheaper and more convenient than you have to have a dedicated phone that for everyone could use at home.

It's crazy that the LG doorbell camera, which is basically a video sensor with a button, i.e. way, WAY less of a hardware, is $249.

Where do they get that pricing from?

>The Apple TV is the same price

This is a funny framing. For those who don't know, the Apple TV 4K debuted at $129 USD. Apple then slightly improved the remote and bumped the price up to $199 USD.

Now today they announced a marginal upgrade -- they added a microphone in the base unit and not just on-demanded toggled on the remote, such that it will always be listening, along with a slightly improved CPU -- and they pumped the price to $299 USD.

So sure, the Apple TV is the "same price", to basically universal derision because they took a successful product and decided to turn it into a shakedown.

And to the root post about how great of a success this will be, virtually an identical top-ranked comment happened in the Vision Pro release. I mean, every flopped product has someone doing the "wow I guess it's going to be a huge success" when people question the point.

If I could hack/root these somehow, even just sideload an app of my choice it would be massive for my personal life.

I have a lot of sensors, and always build variations of "a dashboard with a touchscreen" to play with them.

Insta-buy for me :).

I bet the local thrift stores are going to love all the gifted HomeViews they are going to receive in 2027.

Exactly. Perfect gift

$299 is not cheap, is more than what the phone that the average person has costs (that is not an iPhone). And with a smartphone you surely can do much more things than that object. With $299 you can also buy a tablet, even a decent one, where you can install whatever app you want.

But even if it did cost $10, it would still be a waste of money because you spend $10 on an useless product, you would be better to spend them to eat a pizza, it would be more useful.

What do you use it for? This reminds me of the digital photo frames that everyone had back in the days and that were almost finished in a drawer after 1 month of usage.

A useless device that sits on a table with the sole purpose to waste electricity, that for what it costs these days, better to use it for something more useful.

Cynicism about selling new devices aside, if they really want Siri intelligence on these, old iPads can't do it, and Apple won't (if they can avoid it) sell a "product" with varying features.

My parents have been using an Alexa screen for years for this, but then started buying cheap Android-based picture frames because they somewhat want out of the Alexa ecosystem (and also couldn't resist "cheap" for larger form factor picture displays). I could definitely see recommending this as an option to consolidate their ecosystems somewhat.

Every human on earth was cynical about that thing, but it was mainly price driven by my recollection. This thing is relatively cheap.

The teen is just like my son ... but unlike the dad I don't allow him to be a jerky meanypants. What a pushover dad.

Hah, I just watched it on your recommendation. I think they were going for the vibe of a cynical sitcom... but they forgot to put any decent jokes in, and they didn't do what successful sitcoms do and paper over the nastiness with charisma and some moments of warmth. So it's just 3 minutes or so of stress-inducing bleakness.

This is just what technologists think families are like

I don't know about hate, but it is funny to see their take on the modern family (no pun intended).