For content like that to be a first-class citizen on iOS/tvOS, the providers (Spotify, etc) would need to expose the relevant metadata, APIs, etc to Apple.
I know that on Apple TV, there were a lot of providers who balked at providing that information, preventing Apple from fully implementing relevantly simple features like system-wide content search.
I certainly don't blame the providers, because they wanted to maintain more branding and autonomy rather than being a faceless Yet Another Source of Content on AppleTV, because at that point they'd be essentially faceless interchangeable.
Seems to me that Apple could pretty easily let any app opt in to Siri integration too. All they'd really have to do is pass commands saying "play song/album/artist named X" to the app, and let the app handle it from there. Add a setting somewhere to let the user choose which music app they want to use for Siri, or make them specify it as part of the command, and off you go.
If Apple offered this and apps like Spotify refused to participate, then maybe we could talk about this going both ways.
Edit: Nevermind, looks like Music apps are explicitly not allowed.
At least Prime video has been announced to be coming to the ATV, although I'm not sure what the hold up is.
So to me Apple Homepod is just another way to try and sell customers into the Apple Music Services Revenue, bound and pulled by the iPhone halo effect.
This is as of early last year : https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/apple-music-is-now-in...
And as far as I can google, Spotify still isn't available anywhere in Africa officially as of September 2017.
Spotify being a majority of the streaming market numerically doesn't matter too much if its market reach is limited.
Surely their having achieved this with limited market reach is positive for them, and not for Apple?
[0]: https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/31/16070982/spotify-60-milli...
Spotify, despite being in less countries, has managed to go deep into the countries it does support.
Yes, a very simple Google search for "music streaming market share".
Something like Harmony uses native API's on Alexa, but third party API's on GHome. So on Alexa I can say "Alexa, turn the TV on" while GHome I have to say "Ok Google, tell Harmony to turn on the TV. Google Home will then reply "Ok, here's Harmony", pass the query to the Harmony "app", and Harmony will spit back "Ok, turning on the TV".
It's great for when I've lost the remote, but a terrible UX. What I don't understand is why can't I as a user determine what skills/intents get promoted. I understand the "Tell X to Y" for security measures, but if I could have a whitelist instead of a bunch of 1st/2nd party "power skills" it would make the entire experience more intuitive. I personally do not use skills just because of how clunky they are.
That's a little like saying "some websites are rubbish" though. IME skills don't have to have cumbersome conversational UI - I use mine (in conjunction with a Logitech Harmony Hub) as a sometime replacement for a universal remote: say "Alexa, turn on Sky/Netflix/xbox" and on come three devices, all switched to the right inputs. And in the case of Netflix, it launches my TV's Netflix app too. The phrase feels natural to me.
† https://developer.amazon.com/docs/device-apis/alexa-powercon...
https://www.mydish.com/support/products/hopper/how-to/alexa-...
I have an Alexa and this is literally all I do with it - music, smart home stuff, and maybe the occasional timer - except for sending messages, which it can't do.
I briefly tried some of the "skills" but they're awkward as hell. You have to say something along the lines of "Tell <app name> to <command>". Yikes.
So I'm pretty excited about the HomePod. Improved audio quality for music playback is genuinely enough to convince me. The assistant parts are just software, Apple can improve that in the future.