Oh you’re still on the band wagon that avp is the next iPhone!
Btw how do you know I’m not and why aren’t you?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Report Earnings on May 2 Following Vision Pro Launch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Btw how do you know I’m not and why aren’t you?
Who wants to bet VP units will buried in ‘Other’ category so no one will ever know true sales figures? Ever.
Morning,
Best ever.
Incredible.
Users love.
Gorgeous.
Fastest.
No matter what is actually going on, we know the drill.
Best ever.
Incredible.
Users love.
Gorgeous.
Fastest.
No matter what is actually going on, we know the drill.
What an misguided comment. Many of us can buy one doesn’t mean it’s a good investment.
So now in your mind it’s the price not the product?
“Your problem is that you can’t afford a 30 foot inflatable peanut for the roof of your house. That’s why you don’t have one, isn’t it?”
Well, this is more than or less true for those who don't omit it they can't.👍
Someone saying "people called the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and Watch failures too" does not mean they are saying "AVP will be the next iPhone." It just means they are correctly pointing out that Apple products are often ridiculed when they are released as too limited, too expensive, and doomed to failure.
I think the AVP is the future of computing, and will be a success, but I don't think it will ever be at the same level as the iPhone (frankly, I don't think any device will in my lifetime). But it absolutely doesn't need to get to an iPhone level of success to be a success.
Does it need to get cheaper for mainstream acceptance? Yes.
Does it need to get lighter for mainstream acceptance? Also yes.
Does Apple know this? Of course they do.
I’m so glad I bought mine then. I use it everyday to make money and that it does. I’m more productive then ever and it makes working on the train easier than ever. I shut off my Mac Mini since I don’t use except for a time or two a week. Matter of fact I won’t be buying the M3 in either my mini or my iPad Pro.
While it doesn’t do all I want, it is a great start. I wear mine 6-8 hours a day and all it well. To me, it’s not heavy and it doesn’t make me feel claustrophobic. It’s actually the first apple product that has totally lived up to the hype.
I’m happy with my investment. It works great for me. What do you want apple to take out so it’s cheaper?
I use it 6-8 hours a day and it does not get heavy on my head. It’s very comfortable.
Hmmm, I only have one. It does mess up my hair, but who cares. For me, the AVP is my go to device to get MY work done. I’m sure not everyone can say that, but for me it has dropped my Mac usage down to a couple of hours a week if that.
Yes. Because, again, the mainstream doesn’t want to wear a computer on their faces. That is the single biggest barrier to wide spread adoption. Wearing a mask over your eyes is not generally socially acceptable. Secondary to that is the extreme isolation that Vision and other similar systems impose. It is not healthy to become increasingly disconnected from real people and real experiences. Humans are social animals. Vision goes against that basic aspect of humanity.
So no, this will NEVER be a “cash cow” for Apple. Not now or at any time in the future, because it will never become standard size glasses with clear lenses.
Most of the rest of humanity.
Good for you. You’re the exception. Be careful about universalizing your personal experience.
No one talks about Quest, yet millions of them have been sold. Not sure I used this as a meaningful metric.
Why should I be careful, nobody else says. Also, I didn’t realize that you had been in contact with with everybody in humanity.
But you did? Because it was you who tried to speak for everyone. I was just responding to that.
I am pretty sure I've made this same reply to you before, but the mainstream also didn't want a computer in their home, a phone in their pocket, and a smart watch on their wrist until they did. If you were around during the Apple Watch launch, tons of people were saying "it'll never take off because mainstream doesn't want a nerdy computer on their wrist" and "looking at your watch is considered rude, therefore it won't be socially acceptable to use the watch, and no one except die-hard apple fans will buy it." Look how that one turned out. Hell, I am sure some guy said "why would I need a pocket watch, I can hear my church's bells just fine" and his grandson was saying "why do I need a wrist watch, my pocket watch tells the time just fine."
Long way of saying just because this version doesn't get there doesn't mean version 4 or 5 won't. It's already there for me, no reason to think it won't get better, there will be better use cases, and the stigma goes away.
I agree it is never going to be a standard size glasses with clear lenses - but I think if it gets light enough it doesn't need to. I know you disagree - we'll just see who is right in 10 years.
My first Mac was a Macintosh Plus.
The comparisons you’re making aren’t valid. None of those devices faced the number and height of hurdles that Vision faces.
And no, “it’ll get there in five or ten years” isn’t a legitimate argument. The device is here now. Apple promotes it as “a new era of computing is here.” Not “just wait until we really dial this in.” There’s no doubt that they will refine it, but the primary problem persists. The mainstream doesn’t want to wear a mask over their eyes. They don’t want to encounter the world as mitigated by screens. The social pressure against it is massive. You can deny that. You can imagine that somehow in a few years everyone will reject their evolutionary programming and suddenly want to be Boba Fett, living inside an Apple branded environment… but that is never going to happen.
So I continue to be confident in my assessment that Vision will NEVER be a mainstream product, will NEVER be a “cash cow” for Apple and is likely to be little more than a footnote within the decade.
Somebody forgets how 'poorly' the iPhone v1.0 sold.
Or somebody doesn't know that the AVP v1.0 had already sold basically the same number of units as the iPhone v1.0 did by the end of the first weekend, and at least 1/4 as many units over the first 8 weeks.
Or somebody doesn't understand how to project 5y sales based on sales of v1 tech demo products priced so high and of so little actual USE that only developers and wealthy enthusiasts will buy them (that applies to both the iPhone v1.0 and AVP v1.0 in case people don't remember how USELESS the iPhone v1.0 was).
In short. Somebody thinks, "I can't justify the cost/utility value equation of the [iPhone/AVP v1.0], and since that cost/utility value equation will never change, nobody will buy enough of them in 5 years."
Aside: This was said AD NAUSEUM in the months after the iPhone v1.0 was released. Ditto for the iPad v1.0 and Apple Watch 1.0, by the way.
Bonus: Somebody thinks that the incredibly specialized hardware and software engineers working on the AVP could just be magically 'diverted' to work on neural net projects.
And so certain of these paint-eating ideas!
Have you ever seen the Dunning-Krueger effect demonstrated so unironically perfectly?
I love that your response to the guy bringing up iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch v1.0 COMPLETELY ignores that they took a few years before they came close to being mainstream. They were products that were promoted as here, they were absolutely not dialled in. They were ALL relatively useless, very expensive tech demos bought only by developers and wealthy enthusiasts. Those devs eventually created uses and experiences that created a need, and the tech demos matured and found a lower price point in v3.0 or so to find a wider willing audience.
Dude, read your comment again. Every criticism you tried to counter with MAKES HIS POINT! They exactly apply to those products too. That's too funny.
I do also love how you hide your certainty behind "mainstream" and "cash cow". Let's forget the weasel-wordy ways those can be defined, and ask a more important question...
Why are those even being brought up? Why does a product have to hit "mainstream" or "cash cow" levels? Who is even having that argument with you? Who's claiming it will or even needs to?
Also, Mac Minis make up 1% of approximately 25 million Macs sold each year. Is the Mac Mini selling about 250k units a year a failure? Is it dead?
Why does the AVP v1.0 (mostly useless tech demo just like the other v1.0 products Apple put out) and its ~200k units sold in the first weekend spell failure when the well-established Mac Mini's ~250k a year do not?
More important question, do you really care about my questions above, or do you just want to be NEVERWRONG about your dogma that seems pretty much only to reduce to 'AVP bad, do not want, nobody ever want, ignore facts and direct comparisons that say otherwise'?
Last edited:
What a load of disingenuous nonsense. I’m not hiding anything. I’m responding to a specific post. One that made a SPECIFIC claim about the product going mainstream and becoming a cash cow for Apple. That’s how a discussion works. The wall of personal insults you just threw at me? That is not how a discussion works.
My points about the product absolutely stand. I notice that you very pointedly ignored every single one of them. And no, my post doesn’t prove the other member’s point. That’s empty posturing on your part.
Oh, I'm sorry, so I'm putting words in your mouth?
Moments before...
Wait, what. So you ARE using those (weaselly) words, and ARE confident in them?
And your response to my "who is even having that argument with you?" is that you were merely replying to a guy (while standing by your assessment)? A guy who really only asked "how can you be sure?" to another guy who making your same bizarro claim?
Do you care to take another stab at the question?
Who is even arguing that it has to be mainstream or a cash cow? And to be what... a success? A sign it will fail? Explain how it's relevant (if you can without defining those weasel words).
Or what about my questions about whether you consider the Mac Mini's meager sales to indicate it is not mainstream or a cash cow?
In short... What's your point?
Is it just that you don't see it being sold in the same numbers and used like the iphone? Who's saying it will?
Who's arguing that with you? Why are you wasting that breath? Are you waiting for that to be acknowledged?
I agree with that, we all agree with that.
Literally nobody in this thread disagrees with that point.
Just that point though. The critical-thinking component are questioning the leap in logic you're making that this point of non-iphone-level success (non-"mainstream" non-"cash cow" however those are defined) somehow means it will fail, die, become a footnote, no longer exist in 5 years, or other such leap to unsupported conclusion.
Do you realize that all the people you've quoted here are merely pointing out that certain arguments you and others are using against the AVP apply exactly to the wildly successful products Apple has released?
NONE of us are saying it will be as wildly ubiquitous as the iPhone. We're saying that certain of your points do not make the point you think you're making, because they apply to the very things you're bizarrely comparing them to and saying they won't be.
Last edited:
Okay, I think you meant for a different word, when your reach came up with this one, because the definition of rationalization doesn't apply.
The other guy said essentially that the sales and featureset of the AVP v1.0 indicate it will fail soon.
It literally boiled down to that CAUSE A will lead to EFFECT B.
Then I gave detailed descriptions of how that EXACT argument, those exact same CAUSE As also applied to products that certainly did not fail, did not suffer EFFECT B.
You'll have to explain to me how my rebuttal of that bizarre leap of logic is not appropriate or tries to justify my behaviour or actions or statements (the meaning of "rationalization"). Or are you just using that term to wave away my arguments instead of trying to rebut them?
Once again, nobody's saying it WILL be as successful as the iphone/ipad/apple-watch, only that the REASONS given why it will fail apply EXACTLY to those products that didn't fail.
--
See the problem is that you are having a discussion predicting the future of the AVP.
And we're just having a discussion of logic, pointing out that the arguments you're making for that discussion do not logically follow to your main point. That your CAUSES don't follow to your asserted EFFECTS.
Here's an example:
I'm not sure you can read that. I'm not sure you can understand that he's not saying it WILL get there in v4 or v5. Only that the fact it's NOT there in v1 CANNOT be used to argue that it WON'T be there in v4 or v5. Is that clear?
Because so far you are reading our frankly simple and obvious rebuttals of your faulty logic, mistaking those for us disagreeing with your main point.
There's literally nobody arguing against your main point (that AVP will not exist, be merely be a footnote in 5 years). We're only saying that your main point is entirely unsupported by your arguments, or indeed any evidence we have to date.
I can't speak for the others quoting yours and his posts, but I can say I'm eager to hear a cogent argument that might support your main point.
If you've got one.
Last edited:
Also, we’ve had clear displays before. They too were not widely adopted, accepted, or accoladed. Someone tried glasses, and someone else tried the single eye-piece HUD.
Maybe some day we’ll all wear ridiculous face-covering hardware, but probably not in my lifetime- I have some familiarity with ridiculous face-covering hardware- I was goth in high school.