If this thing was half the price it would be of much greater interest to me. But for 4 grand I can buy one helluva home theater setup which we are constantly told by the industry that this category of consumer electronics (AR/VR) is supposed to supplant.
I can see some use cases to it actually. BUT, as it's being marketed, there's no use cases.
Just throwing this out there...you realize you can make the environment as cluttered or distraction free as *you* choose right? Like you can literally use one of the Environments and a single window if that's your preferred workflow.
I think my opinion (that Apple is better at estimating this stuff than the non-experts in this group) is worth a lot more than the opinion of those non-experts on whether 800k units was a good estimate.
Yes, I understand. But if I reduce it to one screen...then why not just use the real screen in front of me now?
They should have swallowed their price and released it at $1999. At least they would have stimulated demand and stayed evergreen like Meta. Instead we have a pop and flop.
They did though, they're both headsets. It's like comparing an entry level PC laptop to a gaming laptop. They both belong to the laptop category.
Apple are fully capable to knowing and understanding their roadmap and market. Also knowledge of the capabilities of the software available and what can and may be possible, allows me to be confident on the AVP future, despite the opinions of those who look at the current hardware and situation at face value [as that is all they have].
No. It’s an investment into a new product category that will pay off handsomely in time. $1.5 billion+ in revenue is not too shabby for the first iteration that’s priced beyond the reach of regular consumers.
It’s amazing to me that a website that caters to Apple interested people still haven’t picked up the cadence of how Apple enters a new product category.
Why didn’t you include the part where the product is affordable to a broad swath of the population and matches the value that people can expect to get from the product. Maybe because that’s not the case here? The iPod and iPhone were priced as premium products, to be sure. They weren’t priced into the stratosphere and cost people the equivalent of a few mortgage/rent payments.
Number 3.
Number 3 as you’ve described it isn’t how it was for the iPod or iPhone. The economies of scale or BOM didn’t prevent Apple from offering the iPod or iPhone at sane, attainable-to-most pricing. Nor does it speak to the value proposition. The capabilities obtained in exchange for the price of the original iPhone far exceeds the value proposition of the AVP. Can we also remember that it’s being reported that Apple expects a YoY decline in AVP sales. Is that how it went for iPod or iPhone? That’s the exact opposite of the desired trajectory.
