As of last week, Alexa cannot tell me how many inches per second is an atto parsec per micro fortnight.
Google can.
Alexa can tell me how many sides a hexagon has. But cannot tell me the name of a six sided polygon.
Google can.
Alexa can tell me how many sides a hexagon has. But cannot tell me the name of a six sided polygon.
I'm not interested in an always-on voice activated device so that I can ask it rarely asked complicated questions. I'm interested in how well it understands my voice, and how many day-to-day chores it can help with.
I have both and purchased the Echo when first launched. The Google Home amazes me every day.
So with Home you say play Madonna song Sean Penn movie and live to tell starts playing.
Echo has a command of "goes like this". Never used it. But everyday Google figures out something.
Our understanding of the world allow us to talk in a condensed form as humans can infer a lot.
Google is doing the same so more and more I talk to Google Home in condensed format.
It is so early with all of this but Google has a incredible foundation. The future is going to be incredible.
If she unclearly said, "Show me pictures of Absol", it would fail miserably. But if she says "Show me pictures of the pokemon Absol", it kicks butt.
So I would say it's more than a voice to text layer on top of the normal text search.
But do they have enough incentives ? A good business model to be willing to offer it for almost free for people ? The will to push it as hard as Amazon does ? It doesn't seem so.
Had fun with that last one during the Holidays at each of my conservative Christian families. I thought it was hilarious.
And when I said it, Google heard "how many inches per second is Sarah parcak fortnight"
Regardless, why do these anecdotes have to do with the article's argument that "Amazon is building the operating system of the home — its name is Alexa"?