Well, cool tech is not a product, though many entrepreneurs mistake one for another.
For a company like Apple, it actually is: as products are the materialisation of hw/sw idea's and cornerstone of their ecosystem
Does it work outside of a lab. Are the cool things compensated enough by looking like an idiot, having to charge it every 2h or having blinding headaches after a an 1h. Are the social mores ready to accept this kind of constantly on camera (cause if its AR, there is obviously a manipulating of the live stream) and what are the consequences of that?
As Apple doesn't care (or either hasn't the faintest clue about social context/fashion) to put anyone on the street with a set of OralB sticking out of their heads.
What about usability? Cool tech is often used by "cool nerds" (sic), that means they often overestimate their willingness of the general public to tolerate complexity in the UI. Do people really want to use a whole Windows desktop in AR... Seems like the same mistake Microsoft did with their touch interface. They're to wedded to their desktop interface.
If all of that has been reflected on, you have to wonder what the market for this is? Large, small, demographics.
Apple doesn't hesitate to make a their most expensive cool tech mainstream (iPhone, MacBook Pro) and doesn't need Microsoft to replicate their interface everywhere.
TouchBar as a 4th interface element (that nobody asked for) is the demonstration of a nerdy idea that they started producing like crazy without wondering what the market was.
Currently, most MacBooks are sold without it.
Is this something they would buy often? How does it integrate with the rest of their life and other members of your current ecosystem.
No, people will probably buy TouchBar just once: after a week, they'll ignore it and after 2 years everybody will ignore it (OK, Phil will be playing his TouchBar in an ApplePark corner for some years and for heaven's sake, let him...)
How does a lightning port integrate with the rest of the eco-system/world using usb ?
How does a catalogue full of dongles conform to "integration" anyway ?
For a company like Apple, every product must increase the value of the overall ecosystem. What is the ultimate purpose of this new device? Bringing people into the ecosystem (Airpods) or a profit center (Iphone).
AirPods don't bring anyone into the ecosystem (= nobody would ever buy them if he's not already in the ecosystem)
Then you get into cost considerations, manufacturing capabilities needed, third party and Apple components needed, how does it integrate with the manufacturing and release dates of their existing products.
Apple doesn't hesitate to make silly decisions on a
mainstream/flagship iPhone X (that seriously impede production yield, lacking their own OLED screen tech, leading to outrageous dependability on its hardest competitor, with release dates in jeopardy, shortages, cost implications etc.)
Apple also always to create a tech moat, that's is in addition to the ecosystem moat. They don't get a product out unless it can be clearly differentiated and that difference is hard to bridge.
What moat is around the TouchBar that no other company wants to implement ?
What moat/differentation is around the HomePod that is in a product category others invented, where hardly anybody can differentiate products ?
Conclusion: Don't follow Cook's smalltalk. It's just excuses on why Apple failed to develop that pristine, elegant, intelligent and well-integrated Glass variant that everybody expected it to have by now. It's their domain, they have Angela running around for years as a role model promoting the largest spectacles on the planet.
Stop echoing all these ludicrous excuses - stop this nonsense.
It is mental inertia by the largest company on the planet, lethargia within their core domain. Just inexcusable.
