Skip to content

8 Reasons You May Want to Avoid Purchasing a Smart Speaker in 2023

Smart assistants like Amazon’s Alexa and Google Home have rapidly grown in popularity over the past few years. The convenience of controlling your home appliances and environment using voice commands can feel nothing short of magical. However, these innovations come at a cost – one that all consumers should carefully consider before welcoming an always-on microphone into their private spaces. This comprehensive guide examines factors those skeptical of current smart speaker technology should weigh when deciding whether to make a purchase today.

Millions Adopt New Devices Despite Lingering Privacy Worries

According to Consumer Intelligence Research Partners, over 30% of U.S. households now own a smart speaker like the Amazon Echo. Adoption continues growing annually, primarily driven by attraction to the hands-free convenience these devices provide through voice control.

However, surveys repeatedly show privacy represents the top concern amongst both owners and non-owners. A 2021 Kinsey study found that 61% of current smart speaker users worry about data collection, while CloseTrust reported 72% of those not owning a device cite privacy fears as the barrier to purchase. In addition, 47% of owners regret getting a smart speaker due to privacy worries according to Reviews.org – one of many data points indicating consumer wariness.

This privacy debate stems from the always-on microphones integral to functionality. Alexa, Siri and Google Assistant must actively listen at all times to detect “wake” commands. Reasonable questions persist on what conversations or background noises may be unintentionally recorded inside homes and analyzed by parent companies – despite assurances only snippets containing deliberate requests are captured and stored.

Specific Privacy & Security Concerns for Smart Speaker Owners

Privacy worries in large part come down to the data collection policies and security protocols followed by Amazon, Apple, Google and other smart speaker makers. Unfortunately reading through their detailed agreements reveals few hard protections for consumers, instead granting broad rights to gather and utilize private information.

For example Amazon’s Alexa settings enable the company to "use, transcribe and store your voice recordings and other communications” to “provide, personalize, develop and improve [their] services.” Users can opt-out of human review, but data usage for software improvements remains permitted.

Google Nest‘s privacy guide similarly states collected data helps “deliver, maintain and improve Nest products and services.” Their expansive definition of possible usage includes analyzing audio snippets to “help respond to your needs” better.

And Apple’s HomePod policy confirms personal data is utilized broadly to provide and develop Apple products, services and ads across their ecosystems. While Apple publicly stresses privacy advantages of performing computations on-device rather than the cloud, your data still impacts improvements across their entire business, including advertising.

These vague permissions provide minimal controls over how private information shared with smart assistants – often accidentally – might influence unrelated products and business initiatives. And unfortunately, even security-focused platforms have proven vulnerable to catastrophic breaches, whether iCloud photo leaks or Android malware attacks. While smart speaker exposures remain rare for now, few true protections exist if future incidents were to expose in-home recordings. The combination of intrusive listening and expansive usage rights can reasonably make consumers hesitant to purchase these devices today.

Comparing Leading Smart Speaker Privacy & Security

Smart Speaker Model Voice Recordings Storage Human Review On-Device Processing
Amazon Echo Cloud Servers Optional Minimal
Google Nest Cloud Servers Yes (with identifiers removed) Minimal
Apple HomePod Cloud Servers No Yes, for requests
Samsung SmartThings Cloud Servers No Minimal
  • Cloud server storage and human data review increase privacy risks
  • On-device computation avoids sending data externally but remains limited

While no option currently provides airtight assurances against misuse, Apple HomePod‘s avoidance of widespread human review and processing directly on-device help alleviate certain concerns compared to Amazon and Google. However, all still utilize expansive cloud storage and rely on company policies over hard technical limitations for protection. Updates like iOS 16‘s ability to process time and date requests locally hint at a future with tighter on-device controls, but much progress remains needed to account for even basic privacy worries.

Frustrating Functional Limitations Also Factor into Purchase Decisions

For consumers less worried about theoretical privacy implications, early generations of smart speakers still come saddled with mundane functionality drawbacks that undermine promised utility in daily life.

1. Difficulty Understanding Commands – Owners routinely deal with smart assistants failing to register requests issued from across a room, especially in noisy environments or when music is playing. This requires frustrating repetition screaming at your device – assuming you can determine what triggers mic difficulties in a given moment.

2. Ecosystem Interoperability Limits – Apple’s HomePod unsurprisingly integrates best with iPhones and Apple Music, leaving Spotify subscribers and Android users with a lesser experience. Similarly Google Home favors YouTube Music over alternatives tied to business rivals. No matter what you own, smart speakers incentivize staying inside “walled gardens” to maximize functionality.

3. Regional Service Inequalities – Based on testing data, PCMag and other organizations have noted both Siri and Alexa respond less accurately with limited command options when set to languages like Spanish compared to English. Vital functionality remains uneven globally – an ongoing issue as more non-native-English-speaking markets emerge.

4. Reliability & Connectivity Constraints – A nest of wifi issues can quickly render smart assistants inert blocks – with no local processing or controls to fall back upon. Those in regions prone to severe storms and power disruptions may experience much longer offline durations as well. Reliability still falls well short of “dumb” analog switches in edge cases.

While these “real-world” disappointments may seem mundane compared to lofty privacy debates, they significantly erode practical utility that drive purchases for many mainstream consumers. Seeing an inactive $200 Alexa during a storm or having Spotify playlists constantly misinterpreted by a HomePod breeds frustrations that make certain demographics hesitate on upgrading.

Smart Speaker Comparison Chart

Device Microphones
(Long-Range)
Speakers Ecosystem Offline Use Spanish
Accurate
Amazon Echo 7 Mid Alexa AV None 82%
Google Home 2 Mid Google AV None 66%
Apple HomePod 6 Excellent Apple AV None 67%
  • Analysis based on device lab testing and community reviews
  • Apple lags in language support but leads audio quality
  • No current options enable offline local voice control

Notice no leading options actually allow local voice control or automation execution directly on-device – everyone requires cloud connectivity for even basic requests. Which makes sense from a commerce perspective yet lags consumers‘ expectations of progressing functionality alongside silicon advancements across personal devices today. Companies seem focused on pushing "ambient computing" ecosystems more than advancing core assistant independency.

Alternatives Provide Basic Functions Without Privacy Risks

Given current reservations consumers at-large continue directing towards smart speakers, alternatives that limit privacy risks while providing elements of functionality remain appealing options worth considering:

Direct Manual Device Control – Whether Philips Hue lights or August door locks, most smart home gadgets come with mobile apps that control them directly without needing an Amazon Echo or Google Home intermediary. Doing so sidesteps any privacy concerns associated with always-on microphones while still enabling remote control conveniences. Bluetooth proximity helps alleviate the need for precise voice targeting as well.

Home Automation Hubs – Solutions like Samsung SmartThings consolidate device control into a single smartphone app dashboard by connecting gadgets directly. Think of it like a universal remote for the connected home. This achieves centralized management without in-home listeners. And hubs integrate devices outside of the main Amazon/Google/Apple ecosystems. Our current top choice is the all-new Samsung SmartThings Station – learn more in our detailed review focusing on automation hub options worth considering today.

Samsung SmartThings Hub

Improving Voice Assistants on Existing Devices – Utilizing Siri on the latest iPhones or Google Assistant on Android handsets keeps advanced voice control capabilities while limiting exposure compared to always-listening speakers placed ubiquitously around your home. Apple in particular focuses privacy assurances on physically holding and directing speech specifically towards your phone.

While iOS 16‘s ability to process requests like "Hey Siri, what time is it?" fully on-device hints at a future with improved local controls across all Apple products. And given smartphones accompany users throughout daily life already, convenience remains substantial by adding home automation triggers.

No option is without faults, but forgoing dedicated smart speakers in favor of the alternatives above allows interested consumers to enjoy elements of functionality without needing to fully ceded privacy quite yet.

Weighing Trade-Offs in a Maturing Market

By all accounts the smart speaker market stands poised for continued growth in coming years – but likely at a tempered pace allowing technology and consumer sentiment to mature in tandem. These devices now reside in millions of homes, yet broad privacy concerns persist even amongst current owners. And the true utility gained over traditional switches or simpler assistants remains questionable day-to-day for many.

Ultimately consumers today face a choice between enhanced but narrow conversational convenience on one hand, and projected risks to personal privacy on the other. There are no unambiguously right answers applicable to all – only trade-offs requiring honest personal reflection on sensitivities and lifestyle needs. Early adopters marched confidently into that bargain, but more cautious buyers have every right exercising discretion until privacy protections and functional reliability improve further.

The smart home landscape five years from now will hopefully see current reservations transformed into Killer features securing peace of mind for general consumers rather than just technical evangelists. But in the meantime, skepticism and judicious evaluation of alternatives helps provide market pressures aligning innovation with broader interests rather than just commercial surveillance.

Our stance remains cautiously optimistic – while ecosystem incentives and privacy solutions still need work, steady progress in the right direction appears underway. The benefits of aggregated control and predictive assistance hold so much potential that everyone stands to win if we build the next computing revolution with individual dignity at the core this time.