According to Bloomberg, Amazon is developing a high-end Echo-like device which will feature a better speaker and a seven-inch touchscreen. The speaker is said to be larger and tilt upwards so the screen can be visible when on a shelf or counter and the user is standing. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year that Amazon’s Lab126 hardware unit was working on an Alexa-powered device featuring a tablet-like computer screen known internally as “Knight.” The device will be running a version of Fire OS.
The temptation of adding a screen
The people familiar with the product who talked to Bloomberg said the screen will make it easier to access content such as weather forecasts, calendar appointments, and news. It might just be me but I struggle to see this as a solid business driver. The great advantage of using Alexa for my morning briefing is that I can listen to it while I get breakfast ready or pack my daughter’s lunchbox. I would not have time to stop and read or even look at something. Also, Alexa’s voice travels so well across the room over the morning chaos, a screen would have me move close to it to be able to look at it.
I cannot help but think the main task a screen will help with, when it comes to Alexa, is shopping. If I am trying to buy furniture, clothes, gifts, being able to see them is a huge improvement vs. Alexa just calling out the description of the item.
Having a screen could, of course, also help with content and allow Amazon to enrich some of the experiences by adding a visual output to the voice. Music is a good example of this. But the question is whether Amazon needs to add that screen to Echo.
While a screen could add to the overall experience, I strongly believe it should not be an alternative input mechanism. Adding touch to voice would weaken Alexa in an environment where consumers feel very comfortable using their voice. As voice-first is not yet an entrenched behavior, giving an alternative would slow down adoption and negate the considerable progress Amazon has made in this area.
Leveraging Existing Screens vs. Adding a New One
There are plenty of screens we have in the home Alexa could leverage — some might even be “controlled” by Amazon, like a Fire TV or tablet. Others could be exploited by the Alexa app, like our phones. If our interactions with Alexia remain voice-first/only, the screen would be a simple display with no need to interact with it. This would make the Fire tv the perfect companion for Alexa.
The risk of adding touch is, even if Amazon does not intend it as an alternative input mechanism, consumers at this initial market adoption stage might easily revert to old habits. In a way, this reminds me of how people, at the beginning of the tablet market, bought a keyboard to use with their tablets so they could revert to a user experience they had experienced for so long with PCs and that felt familiar and safe.
Over time, as AI continues to develop, I could see a role for a device that intelligently understands what is appropriate to show on the screen and proactively does that by having Alexa suggest, “Do you want to visualize it?” or saying, “let me show you.” There are instances where displaying the content seems easier than an alternative solution. Recipes are often used as an example to illustrate how voice-only does not work. Yet, if you had an app that lets Alexa break down the steps so you could literally have her coach you through the recipe and check, “Ready?” or “Tell me when you are ready”, you would not need to visualize the steps.
The Risk of Turning Alexa from Leading Actress into a Supporting Role
Echo was successful because people bought it for what it was: a speaker with a digital assistant. Actually, a digital assistant in a speaker would be a better description of what consumers were buying. Users did not have other options but to talk to Alexa to get her to do anything. There was no old behavior to revert to.
Ironically, Alexa being trapped in the little cylinder allowed her to be free. Free of any limitations that being part of a more traditional device, such as a smartphone or a tablet, would have imposed on her. Trying to turn Echo into a glorified Fire tablet could demote Alexa to a mere feature vs. the genie in the bottle she is known for. For people who bought Echo, there was nothing else the device could do other than allowing them to interact with Alexa.
Amazon needs to penetrate our homes more as well as expand beyond them to grow engagement but this needs to be done in a way that leaves consumers deeply connected with Alexa so their reliance feeds their loyalty. Voice needs to remain the main input as this is ultimately how our assistant will become personal.
While competition in this space is growing, the battle will not be won by adding features that, while differentiating in looks, weaken the core experience. Accelerating Alexa integration with other devices, continuing to expand her skills, and improving her knowledge will help to stay ahead of the curve and keep users engaged and loyal.
I’m not sure forcing “voice only” down users’ throats is the vest way to move assistants forward, though it would indeed put the focus on voice.
What surprises me is the choice of a built-in tablet, that seem counter-ergonomic. If I had an AI speaker, I’d put it out of the way on a shelf or something, so either a removable tablet or a projector would fit better. Plus a speaker is a shared thing, a tablet is more individual… the two don’t mesh, except for single people, or if people around you don’t want to be Alexa’ed.
“I would not have time to stop and read or even look at something”
On the other hand, if you ask it something with a lengthy answer, do you have the time to listen to it drone out the response when you could glance at a screen to see it quickly? For instance, If you ask it for a recipe, a display is going to be far preferable to trying to remember all the details of an oral reply. Ditto a detailed weather report with forecasts for morning, afternoon, and evening, with feels like as well as actual temperatures. There’s lots of stuff that a strictly audio digital assistant is going to be useless for. Adding a screen so you can tell it to show you things makes it much more versatile and useful for a wider range of tasks.
Making the screen have touch input, on the other hand, seems to be losing sight of the proper scope of the device.
I agree adding a tilted screen to Alexa seems redundant. Why not use a phone screen and a companion app for displaying the recipes? Also, if Alexa is stationed in a living a room, a display on it won’t help much for the cooking.
“Why not use a phone screen and a companion app for displaying the recipes?”
If you go that route, what’s the point in having an alexa device at all, instead of an app on your phone? A standalone device that doesn’t depend on your phone for its usefulness makes a certain kind of sense for a certain set of jobs (ie, so that you can use it when you don’t have your phone handy, so children and other people who don’t own a phone can use it, etc). And if you put a screen on it, then the list of jobs it can perform in its niche becomes greater.
OTOH, adding a phone app to it turns it into something that’s fundamentally useless because why bother with a standalone device when you have your phone?
“If you go that route, what’s the point in having an alexa device at all, instead of an app on your phone?”
Three reasons at least:
1. Alexa is a shareable device by all members of household while a phone app is personal.
2. Due to its audio interface, the speaker can be operated from a far end of the room (remote operation) without needing to glance at it constantly and occupy a visual and touch senses.
3. Emotional information which is vital to to decoding a context is easily deduced from the voice as opposed to the text.