Apple's new smart-home lineup is overpriced versus Amazon, Google, Nest and Ring, and uninspiring; it will sell on branding but won't meaningfully change revenue. Growth lies in services, not hardware; success isn't guaranteed and adoption is a big hurdle, but Apple's risks are low.

Hey guys, Apple launched some new products yesterday. It wasn't the big show they usually put on, but it was a notable expansion of the production lines. Rachel, okay, we have some new home security systems.

They didn't exactly call them security systems, but you know, surveillance cameras, doorbells, and indoor cameras. This is a very high price point compared to what we have seen in the past.

As you know, some of these things cost $300 instead of the less than $100 you can get from many of these services. The other thing is the "HomePod View," which is basically an iPad with a speaker for $300. Will you buy one of them?

I'm not necessarily in line to buy one. And I say this as someone who is completely immersed in the Apple ecosystem as a consumer. I'm a longtime Apple shareholder, so I'm not a hater, but I don't think this is the most revolutionary thing they've done.

Now, let's talk a little about what they released. They launched "Home Pod View". This is a smart home control center priced at $299. It features a 7-inch "Liquid Retina" display.

It contains an A18 chip, and a camera available in tabletop or wall-mounted versions. Apple then also introduced what it calls the "Apple Home Collection". It is essentially a curated store for premium accessories such as cameras, thermostats and locks, which they developed in collaboration with Schneider Electric and LG Electronics.

Now, what's interesting is "HomePod View"; you have a kind of typical multi-user facial recognition. They have tools that you can swap for up to six family members. This is a feature that the regular iPad still lacks.

It is designed to stay connected to the internet even if your Wi-Fi goes down. The ecosystem is limited, however, so HomePod View lacks a proper app store for streaming or gaming.

You must have an "iCloud Plus" plan to record video. This offer is currently also banned from EU markets due to Siri's intelligence restrictions, which are still being addressed.

But for me, considering this, the sensors are about $40, the cameras are about $200, and the locks could go up to $350. So, this is much more expensive than using Amazon Alexa or Google Home alternatives, or for example Nest or Ring devices.

Will consumers want to switch to that? I don't know.

What surprised me here is when you look at the product range for almost everything they announced. I mean, I mean, the "Home View" device is just an iPad connected to a speaker.

Oh, you know, home security tools are products that already exist. This seems like launching an iPhone, but in 2015 instead of 2007, when there is already a well-established market.

I mean, as you know, I have one of those systems where I have a few cameras around the house. We have internal sensors. There is no way I would trade what I have now or spend any amount close to this price, and it seems I keep coming back to this point with all these Apple products despite having a lot of Apple devices at home.

Okay, stop me if you've heard this before, but welcome to the age of gradualism, isn't it? Because that's what we're talking about here. Rachel is right, it is uninspiring. There is no longer a single "extra thing" of those new and crazy things that you didn't know you needed.

Now it's simply a matter of adding new layers or functions to your existing ecosystem. You're right, it's overpriced, but it also comes with the Apple branding. I think it will sell well.

They also have partnerships. Therefore, they do not bear the risks or the burdens of development in a real sense. I think this is an obvious decision, but it won't change the size of the revenues.

I think the most interesting part for me—and this may be our focus here—is the amount of talk about Siri's artificial intelligence at home being subject to usage limits. If you want to exceed those usage limits, you will have to pay them more money.

So, if there is a path here, I don't think it's in the hardware, but in the services, which will become more expensive. But first, you have to get everyone hooked on the products.

I own a smart home, and I have all these things. To be honest, it's all great, but I don't know if I would pay a single dollar for any of it. So I think they have a big hurdle to get to where they want to be, but I think the plan is: expand your established ecosystem, generate additional revenue from it, and look forward to a future where the home is truly smart, where you can raise the prices for some of these Siri services and other things.

We talked about this two years or two weeks ago, but this is the tenth anniversary of the launch of Vision Home, you know, the Home app. I'm still trying to use some of those tools, but they are very difficult to use.

This thing almost seems like the embodiment of what it should have been like back then.

Hmm. But it's Apple's usual way of putting everything together, and I have no doubt it will all work great. But asking people to spend thousands of dollars on devices they may already own and that are available at a much lower price.

Not to mention that we haven't even talked about the Apple TV device. I have three Apple TVs at home. I didn't spend anywhere near what one device would cost, let alone all of them, and I'm not sure what the real advantage of this product is.

So it seems to me that with everything they do, they are pricing their products into a super-premium category in the market, which is becoming increasingly challenging because they are no longer as premium as they once were.

That's the big question. I mean, I think it's fair to say that HomeKit failed a decade ago because they insisted on a closed system at a time when everything was new and everyone could communicate with each other.

They were the ones who said, "No, you must live within our ecosystem." I think they will argue that they were too early. They are not wrong. But as you say, now that everyone has these things, will the closed system work now?

Would you replace your current Ring phone with a more expensive Apple one just for the Siri features? Because again, I don't know your opinion about your devices, but I don't know what I want artificial intelligence to do here.

Good? I think it's an open question, but I also think it's a question they feel they can solve over time. We'll see. As I said, it has failed before. I don't think success is guaranteed this time, but again, I think the risks are very low for Apple, so why not try?